Just glancing at your risk report, compared to mine, you're running slightly more risk but as you say with a lot more positions.
Total 5.8 (lower than yours but not by much)
Sum of abs(notional exposure % capital) 75.4 (much lower)
Sum of abs(annualised risk % capital) 13.8 (about half)
Net sum of annualised risk % capital 5.8
Basically you have a hedged book with lots of longs and shorts and a fair amount of leverage, balancing out to not much risk, whilst I have more of an outright bet on, albeit not a very big one.
This might be a consequence of your instrument choice. To take an example, suppose someone invested just in equities and currently overall equity signals were weak; with some markets short and some long. Their book and risk would look very much like yours. Whereas, take someone with a spread of asset classes, but where only one or two asset classes had a strong signal. Their book would look like mine.
It also looks like you might have fewer problems with discretization than me, eithier because you have fewer markets or more capital, or more markets with small tick size.
Rob
Makes sense.
I was looking at your strategy reports while I was debugging this, and found some interesting things so will mention here. Your forecasts for gold and silver are both decently negative (actually, subsystem position for gold is -52!) but all DO did with that is short just 2 micro gold contracts. I would have expected overall more short exposure to metals from that.
Also, I'm sure I'm misreading this, but your strategy reports are saying iron has small negative forecast and subsystem position for the last few days, but risk report says you're long. If I recall correctly, that shouldn't be possible in the DO land.
Next thing you know, you wake up and your strategic exposure to March 2025 Eurodollars is all GME stock now.
):