@penrose-moore Thank you for the idea. For the Bitcoin Futures contest we are indeed patching the Bitcoin Futures data with the BTC spot price to build a meaningful time series. For the other Futures contracts, for the moment we will keep the futures histories only, but add spot prices + patching with spot prices to increase the length of the time series to our to-do list.

Hi @support, everything is all right now. Thank you!

@support Ok, I see, thanks

@support
Cool, thanks very much! 👍

@support ok, thank you!

@auxiliary-snail Hi,

unfortunately, this is not allowed and in accordance with the rules. Using hard-coded time periods in which trading algorithm will work differently, is not a quantitative method (just like manual asset selection, e.g. "trade only Apple or Microsoft"). We still haven't implemented a mechanism for automatic recognition of such behaviors in trading strategies, and even though a strategy could be successfully submitted, it will not be eligible for prize winning.
What we are searching for, is well performing strategy over entire in_sample period (SR>0.7), robust to all market movements 2006-2025, so we can expect it will perform well in future, too.

@multi_byte-wildebeest Hi, these limitations refer to the processing time per point in time, not for the full strategy.

If it takes 10 minutes per historical day, and the simulation has to take into account 250 days for let us say 10 years, the multi-pass simulation would process 6 days per hour, 144 days per real day, that means 2 weeks of processing time for the full submission, it is a lot of time.

@support Thank you!

@support Thx for ur reply

@magenta-grimer Hello, we updated the documentation.

Now there are 78 futures contracts. Yes, we allow allocating to only 1 asset. If you trade more assets, then you can go long on some of them and short others.

Using more assets helps in increasing the Sharpe ratio, as the mean return grows linearly with the number of assets, and the volatility in the denominator with the square root of the number of assets if there are no correlation terms.

Using uncorrelated assets would then lead to a scaling of the Sharpe ratio with the square root of the number of assets. In practice, however, correlation terms are decreasing this growth.

Stated more simply, it is a good idea to avoid putting all your eggs in the same basket...

@captain-nidoran hi, all your strategies which will take part to the contest should be under the "In Contest" tab in the "Competition" section.

The migration "Candidates" -> "In Contest" was not immediate as we released minor improvements to the front-end side once the submission phase was over.

Thanks !

Thanks for the answer!

I still think something is wrong with this correlation checker. I even used this function to randomize the weights a few times, and I got the same correlation error:

def add_random_noise(weights, noise_level=0.01): noise = np.random.uniform(-noise_level, noise_level, size=weights.shape) return weights + noise

I am pretty sure it's impossible to have 90% correlation in this case.

@svyable Hi,
sorry for late answer, no we don't provide that option, but we will think about adding it in future.

@commanderangle Dear commanderangle,

Your strategies are processed in a correct manner, but the reason why you see 0 out-of-sample score is due to the fact that your strategies generate zero weights for all assets for out-of-sample time period. You can check your weights for any strategy by downloading them. There is a download button in the submission logs section.

Regards

@support Hello,

got it, thanks for the reply,

@multi_byte-wildebeest Hello.

How to get the Sharpe Ratio is in the Quick Start template.
https://github.com/quantiacs/strategy-q20-nasdaq100-quick-start/blob/master/strategy.ipynb

import qnt.stats as qnstats def get_sharpe(market_data, weights): rr = qnstats.calc_relative_return(market_data, weights) sharpe = qnstats.calc_sharpe_ratio_annualized(rr).values[-1] return sharpe sharpe = get_sharpe(data, weights) # weights.sel(time=slice("2006-01-01",None))

or

import qnt.output as qnout qnout.check(weights, data, "stocks_nasdaq100")

or

stat = qnstats.calc_stat(data, weights) display(stat.to_pandas().tail())

or

import qnt.graph as qngraph statistics = qnstats.calc_stat(data, weights) display(statistics.to_pandas().tail()) performance = statistics.to_pandas()["equity"] qngraph.make_plot_filled(performance.index, performance, name="PnL (Equity)", type="log") display(statistics[-1:].sel(field=["sharpe_ratio"]).transpose().to_pandas()) qnstats.print_correlation(weights, data)

Please look at this post
https://quantiacs.com/community/topic/515/what-is-forward-looking-and-why-it-s-effective-badly-to-strategy/6?_=1711712434795

@support Thanks. Works fine now.

@support Thank you for your advise, it's ok

@support Thank you for your feedback. I also hope Quantiacs updates new strategy examples on how to use technical analysis (besides sma, trix_ema, atr_lwma,...), and strategies on using ML/DL models effectively (not an example that strategy forward-looking),...

Hopefully in the future Quantiacs will release new data sets such as news, sentiment, macro, options,... Create new contests that allow merging strategies to build portfolios,...

Hopefully, Quantiacs will continue to grow. Sincere thanks to Quantiacs for creating extremely high-quality contests.