Again BS. I have done so many backtests and not found any wrong results. Also on the Amibroker yahoo list there are so many experienced people (more experienced than you will ever be) having done dozens of tests. Until now not one serious problem of the backtester has been mentioned there. Amibroker is known for being one of the fastest and most reliable backtesters around. And as seen here your whole claims have been put to dust by visual proof. On top of that I don't take anyone serious who calls five small simple lines of code "being complicated". Laughable. You have something to hide and that's fishy.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who uses Metastock?
- Thread starter gregory115
- Start date
Again BS. I have done so many backtests and not found any wrong results. Also on the Amibroker yahoo list there are so many experienced people (more experienced than you will ever be) having done dozens of tests. Until now not one serious problem of the backtester has been mentioned there. Amibroker is known for being one of the fastest and most reliable backtesters around. And as seen here your whole claims have been put to dust by visual proof. On top of that I don't take anyone serious who calls five small simple lines of code "being complicated". Laughable. You have something to hide and that's fishy.
Quote from funnyguy:
Again BS. I have done so many backtest and not found any wrong results. Your whole claims have been put to dust by visual proof. On top of that I don't take anyone serious who calls five small simple lines of code "being complicated". Laughable. You have something to hide and that's fishy.
I said, I have no time for taking screnshots now and doing long posts. You have to wait. You will see. Nothing fishy from me. You will see somehting fishy from the software soon. You have to have patience. It is a human quality you lack.
Quote from intradaybill:
I said, I have no time for taking screnshots now and doing long posts. You have to wait. You will see. Nothing fishy from me. You will see somehting fishy from the software soon. You have to be patient. It is a human quality you luck.
Then also provide your badly coded script. Not just manipulated screen shots. Do the same that you demand from others
Quote from intradaybill:
I said, I have no time for taking screnshots now and doing long posts.
What a pathetic excuse. It takes me a few seconds to do a screenshot and max 5 minutes to make a video. Posting the code is just another seconds. Sooo ridiculous.
Quote from funnyguy:
Then also provide your badly coded script. Not just manipulated screen shots
What a pathetic excuse. It takes me a few seconds to do a screenshot and max 5 minutes to make a video. Posting the code is just another seconds. Sooo ridiculous.
Code:
SetBacktestMode( backtestRegularRawMulti );
Buy = 1;
Sell = Short = Cover = 0;
StopLevel = Param("N-bars", 1, 1, 100, 1 );
ApplyStop( stopTypeNBar, stopModeBars, StopLevel, 1, False, 0 );
BuyPrice = C;
SellPrice = O;
SetOption("InitialEquity", 100000);
SetOption("FuturesMode", False );
SetOption("UsePrevBarEquityForPosSizing", True);
SetOption("ActivateStopsImmediately", False);
SetOption("Allowsamebarexit", True);
SetOption("AllowPositionShrinking", True);
SetOption("MaxOpenPositions", 1);
SetPositionSize( 1, spsShares );
//Reports
SetOption("PortfolioReportMode", 0);// 0-Trade list, 1- Detailed Log, 2- Summary, 3- No output
SetOption("GenerateReport", 1); // force generation of full report
RoundLotSize = 1;You are too nervous and impatient. Just add the option
SetBacktestMode( backtestRegularRawMulti );
on top of your code. This is the option I had in the past and it should not have affected the entries and exits because the system does not generate overllaping signal anyway. But when that option is present, the backtest is screwed up as I showed in my screenshot before.
Therefore, the option/function interferes with the backtest in an unpredictable way.
Satisfied now? You took my time from other important things.
This is from year 2010 in regards to backtest raw modes and ApplyStop n-bar in comparison to SetBacktestMode( backtestRegular ) and ApplyStop n-bar http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/149665
from the previous link
As for different backtest modes (default backtest mode is backtestregular)
http://www.amibroker.com/guide/h_portfolio.html
Hello,
It is nothing strange or unusual if you actually think about it. Once you actually think it over, you will find out that it is the only way to go.
In RAW modes stops are implemented IN SECOND backtest phase, not in the first phase as in regular backtest.
The reason for that is that you don't know in phase one when actual ENTRY occurs, so you don't know when n-bar stop will occur. In RAW modes actual ENTRY bar is only known in second phase (because you may not enter on first signal but on ANY later bar as long as buy array is true, so n-bar stop (as well as other stops) need to be evaluated in phase 2 too. So there are NO known-in-advance "signals" for stops as in regular modes.
In regular (non-raw) modes, exact entry points are known at the first phase so it is possible to know the stops at phase 1 too.
More about phase 1 and 2 here:
http://www.amibroker.com/docs/Houston2.pdf
Best regards,
Tomasz Janeczko
amibroker.com
As for different backtest modes (default backtest mode is backtestregular)
http://www.amibroker.com/guide/h_portfolio.html
I don't care what he says. The fact of the matter is that leaving a seemingly unrelated function there messes up the backtest. I hope you and he do not expect every user of Amibroker to hung around in newsgroups.
How do I know that other functions do not also create conflicts? This is the problem. Do you think I will spend time to find out? No, I will not. I have written by own backtesting program I am sure what it does.
Edit: by the way I appreciate the work Tomasz has done and his program is much better as compared to other sh*ty ones that sell at 10X the cost. He is a good guy and a good software developer. But I think he must go ahead and do a function compatibility test. This is lacking from the manual. I think this discussion was maybe of more value to him.
How do I know that other functions do not also create conflicts? This is the problem. Do you think I will spend time to find out? No, I will not. I have written by own backtesting program I am sure what it does.
Edit: by the way I appreciate the work Tomasz has done and his program is much better as compared to other sh*ty ones that sell at 10X the cost. He is a good guy and a good software developer. But I think he must go ahead and do a function compatibility test. This is lacking from the manual. I think this discussion was maybe of more value to him.
Quote from intradaybill:
You made a lot of noise of something that was discussed in private. I am sure that the Amibroker developer does not need your defense. You have been asked to provide the code of your backtest so everyone else in here can verify it. You have
not done so. No verification, no value. Until you provide the code of an otherwise losing system of no edge as you said, everything else you say is irreleveant. Like Metastock that had a backtester problem in the past that was then fixed, it may have been the case that also Amibroker had a small problem that was also fixed. Nothing to scream, attack people, insult like you did like a psychomaniac and even accusing other people I do not ecen know of being sockpuppets. Shame on you.
Until you post the two or three line code you used for your results like they do in all serious forums, nothing that you posted carries any significance. Nothing. If you post the code and it verifies, then you will be praised, including me. I will do it first because I am not a psycho like you. So post the code. Failure of doing so means something is fishy.
I won't worry too much about what funnyguy says. He knows a few buzzwords and like to throw them around to impress people. He thinks 64 bit software should be faster than a 32 bit software. He thinks his backtest is the road to the holy grail. He must be waiting for people to beg him for his code.
Quote from WD40:
I won't worry too much about what funnyguy says. He knows a few buzzwords and like to throw them around to impress people. He thinks 64 bit software should be faster than a 32 bit software. He thinks his backtest is the road to the holy grail. He must be waiting for people to beg him for his code.
Oh sbokov over there, I didn't say that 64-bit software should be faster. I wrote that there are softwares that run faster than their 32-bit version of same vendors.
And FYI, I've already posted the code. So better buy some glasses.
My backtest? It's not my backtest. Bill wanted me to do the job since he wasn't able to provide one himself.
Troll somewhere else because here you failed badly.