You have not presented enough evidence to support your conclusion. You really need some idea of tail stats for the distribution of results of repeated 277-trade samples drawn from the 1586 population. Building a bootstrap distribution would be appropriate but not trivial due to multiple entries, serial correlation amoung overlapping trades, heteroscedasticity (high vol periods mean more quickly completed trades so less autocorrelation), etc. A simple one-sided Chi^2 (Fisher Exact), which would overstate Harris's case, 65% vs 61%, 277 in the sample, fails to reject the null of "could have been obtained by chance" by a wide margin.Quote from goodgoing:
Trading all bars equally gives 60.72% win rate and pf = 1.41, 1586 trades
- But Harris and APS outperform that with win rate = 64.59% and pf = 1.71, 257 trades (multiple entries).
Thus I conclude that the APS pattern performance could NOT be obtained by chance
I would love to see a properly constructed block bootstrap p-value estimate from you or Code7.
I have come to the conclusion that intradaybill - although a backtesting idiot - was nevertheless correct and in that time period APS patterns performed very well. 