Who Here Backtests Manual Strategies ?

[dbphoenix]

That may be so, but if you google "backtest" the overwhelming majority of definitions refer to testing systematic strategies. So I stand by my statement that "In most peoples language a back test is for systems only."

And if you google "technical analysis" you get references to indicators and patterns and predicting the future. That doesn't necessarily make the definition true (most of this stuff is written by people who think trading didn't begin until 1998).

But one can call it glommitch if he so chooses. The point for a discretionary trader is to engage in the activity that will yield the results that will most beneficial to him. The usual computerized backtest will not.

 

[Turveyd]

That may be so, but if you google "backtest" the overwhelming majority of definitions refer to testing systematic strategies. So I stand by my statement that "In most peoples language a back test is for systems only."

Definition is merely " A test done on history ", just because most are doing it with automated systems doesn't make manual back testing any less valid.

 

[dbphoenix]

Hm, sorry I thought he meant backtest as in playback, not automation?

That's what I thought as well, but I may have misunderstood.

You "liked" this, so I'll repost it here. Whether it is pertinent to the OP's request or not is up to the OP.

Put one way, backtesting is the process of determining what might work out, or what seems to work out. It can't be much more than that because the charts are static. Forwardtesting is the process of determining what does work out, if one is using replay. Simtrading is primarily a confirmation. However, not everyone forwardtests "live" charts, and if the charts used are static, or if replay charts were accelerated, the simtrading results can be quite different. Some people push on anyway to RT trading with unexpected consequences, then complain about how useless simtrading is.