Kevin,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from Jerry030:
created with different DVs (Dependent Variables) for the same IV (Independent Variable) or goal functions, say percent of change over the next 5 bars.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You have the concepts of "independent variable" and "dependent
variable" backwards. Your "goal function" is your dependent
variable, not your independent variable.
*****
Oops, yes correct. I should sync my typing, thinking, and proofing to the same baud rate to avoid errors.
*****
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from Jerry030:
However I'm usually able to meet my performance goal of an 80% Win Loss ratio.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At that rate you will soon be joining Stevie Cohen and Jim Simons
at the top of the heap! Somehow I doubt that "80% win ratio" is
actual, rather than paper, trading.
******
Sorry but I don't know who these guys are. Also I trade only futures, where trading characteristics may be different than stocks, I don't know.
No, actual. I discard any system in the development stage with a lower rate. The actual percent in real trading varies but ends up averaging around 80%.
What is your target Win/Loss percent for a trading system?
It sounds like a bit less.
High profitability isnât impossible just extremely difficult. Have you heard the story of The Prediction Company? In brief, a bunch of physics grad students from UC Santa Clara started playing the markets with chaos theory, complex systems theory, NNs and the like in a small living room in Santa Few, NM. In 2005, UBS bought them out for $500,000,000. Their Win/Loss ratio was never made public, but to get half a billion dollars from the likes of UBS, I suspect most of us would find it was rather good.
*******
And as far as I can tell, you still haven't explained how or why
your system requires 1gb of executable code.
******
My approach is different than typical rule or even algo systems. These often have close to a 60/40 Win/Loss ratio with folks hoping to make a profit by "let profits run, cut losses short" or some other strategy. Many of these may depend on a small number of rules agreeing to get a signal. They also may trade every few dozen bars or less.
Now consider an alternative where instead of say 20 rules there are say hundreds, except they are separate models, with both different designs but predicting the same outcome and the same design predicting different outcomes. Then roll that to the next layer where there are variations in say window length: 2 bars into the future, 3 bars, 4 bars .....x bars.
You now have a parliament of models, with a large number having to be in significant agreement instead of 6 rules out of 10 to trigger a signal. There is more to it but this simple explanation should give an idea how it can generate a lot of executable code.
Additionally my app wraps the model output in an execution architecture so at least half the code is I/O housekeeping.
Granted, for a decision tree or rule based system this amount of code would be excessive.
What approach do you use in terms of a methodology: rule based, decision tree, NN, RBM, etc.?
Jerry