Before I start learning python, can you test time exits in backtesting.py and get results in BPS?

[Tall Mike]

Beginner here looking to start with python because manual backtesting like I have been doing is just simply too inefficient.

I wanted to construct some basic parameters to test something like buy when the OHLC of the bar is completely below a lower Keltner Channel. Exit after 1 day, 2 day, 5 days, 10 days and 20 days.

Would it be possible to construct these type of strategies in python and view the results in returns of BPS?

Sorry if this is way to simple, I just want to make sure before I put in this time to learn python I can get what I am looking for.

Any other suggestions on easier ways to do this I would appreciate it.

Thanks!

 

[NorgateData]

Yes this is quite possible with Python and backtesting packages such as backtesting.py, Backtrader, pybacktest, Zipline etc.

If you currently have few skills with Python you might find dedicated backtesting software such as RealTest, WealthLab and AmiBroker will be easier to code and incorporate data, especially with regards to testing across a universe of symbols and testing multiple trading strategies for a portfolio.

 

[PPC]

Beginner here looking to start with python because manual backtesting like I have been doing is just simply too inefficient.

I wanted to construct some basic parameters to test something like buy when the OHLC of the bar is completely below a lower Keltner Channel. Exit after 1 day, 2 day, 5 days, 10 days and 20 days.

Would it be possible to construct these type of strategies in python and view the results in returns of BPS?

Sorry if this is way to simple, I just want to make sure before I put in this time to learn python I can get what I am looking for.

Any other suggestions on easier ways to do this I would appreciate it.

Thanks!

One could argue that:

A) computer tested methods will down the road result in inefficient use of trading capital vs learning to trade and manual backtests (you have to pick your poison)


B) Using Python is inefficient when for few hundred bucks you can buy Amibroker as suggested by @NorgateData


I’m not a fan of computer testing, but I do have Amibroker since 2006 and every few years I update my license to the new version because its versatility (in addition to backtesting) is simply amazing.

 

[Tall Mike]

One could argue that:

A) computer tested methods will down the road result in inefficient use of trading capital vs learning to trade and manual backtests (you have to pick your poison)


B) Using Python is inefficient when for few hundred bucks you can buy Amibroker as suggested by @NorgateData


I’m not a fan of computer testing, but I do have Amibroker since 2006 and every few years I update my license to the new version because its versatility (in addition to backtesting) is simply amazing.

thanks for the comment.

What exactly do you mean by this?

To give you context, I was trying to backtest some visual patterns manually going bar by bar with no data leakage, but to get a sufficient sample size, it was just way to long to do.

Are you saying there is still value to this approach?

 

[Tall Mike]

Yes this is quite possible with Python and backtesting packages such as backtesting.py, Backtrader, pybacktest, Zipline etc.

If you currently have few skills with Python you might find dedicated backtesting software such as RealTest, WealthLab and AmiBroker will be easier to code and incorporate data, especially with regards to testing across a universe of symbols and testing multiple trading strategies for a portfolio.

Thanks for the comment.

yeah, I have no interest in programming, and I heard Amibroker was pretty good. I might go that route.