A Backtesting Protocol in the Era of Machine Learning

Machine learning offers a set of powerful tools that holds considerable promise for investment management. As with most quantitative applications in finance, the danger of misapplying these techniques can lead to disappointment. One crucial limitation involves data availability. Many of machine learning’s early successes originated in the physical and biological sciences, in which truly vast amounts of data are available. Machine learning applications often require far more data than are available in finance, which is of particular concern in longer-horizon investing. Hence, choosing the right applications before applying the tools is important. In addition, capital markets reflect the actions of people, which may be influenced by others’ actions and by the findings of past research. In many ways, the challenges that affect machine learning are merely a continuation of the long-standing issues researchers have always faced in quantitative finance. While investors need to be cautious—indeed, more cautious than in past applications of quantitative methods—these new tools offer many potential applications in finance. In this article, the authors develop a research protocol that pertains both to the application of machine learning techniques and to quantitative finance in general.

[1]  M. L. Prado The 10 Reasons Most Machine Learning Funds Fail , 2018 .

[2]  Campbell R. Harvey,et al.  Presidential Address: The Scientific Outlook in Financial Economics , 2017 .

[3]  A. Lo,et al.  Data-Snooping Biases in Tests of Financial Asset Pricing Models , 1989 .

[4]  Charles A. Ingene,et al.  Specification Searches: Ad Hoc Inference with Nonexperimental Data , 1980 .

[5]  Tarun Chordia,et al.  p-Hacking: Evidence from Two Million Trading Strategies , 2017 .

[6]  H. Markowitz,et al.  Data Mining Corrections , 1994 .

[7]  Lu Zhang,et al.  Replicating Anomalies , 2020, The Review of Financial Studies.

[8]  Clifford S. Asness,et al.  The Devil in HML’s Details , 2013, The Journal of Portfolio Management.

[9]  Jeffrey Pontiff,et al.  Does Academic Research Destroy Stock Return Predictability? , 2015 .

[10]  Yan Liu,et al.  False (and Missed) Discoveries in Financial Economics , 2020, The Journal of Finance.

[11]  The Cms Collaboration Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC , 2012, 1207.7235.

[12]  Yan Liu,et al.  Evaluating Trading Strategies , 2014, The Journal of Portfolio Management.

[13]  Frank J. Fabozzi,et al.  Being Honest in Backtest Reporting: A Template for Disclosing Multiple Tests , 2018, The Journal of Portfolio Management.

[14]  R. Wiggins Does Academic Research Destroy Stock Return Predictability , 2016 .

[15]  Davis Rn The Checklist Manifesto. How to get things right , 2010 .

[16]  Cynthia Rudin,et al.  A Bayesian Framework for Learning Rule Sets for Interpretable Classification , 2017, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[17]  Vitali Kalesnik,et al.  Timing 'Smart Beta' Strategies? Of Course! Buy Low, Sell High! , 2016 .

[18]  D. Bem Feeling the future: experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. , 2011, Journal of personality and social psychology.