Backtesting & Simulation (2024)

Refresher Reading

In this reading, we have discussed how to perform rolling window backtesting—awidely used technique in the investment industry. Next, we described how to use scenarioanalysis and simulation along with sensitivity analysis to supplement backtesting,so investors can better account for the randomness in data that may not be fully capturedby backtesting.

• The main objective of backtesting is to understand the risk–return trade-off of an investment strategy, by approximating the real-life investment process.

• The basic steps in a rolling window backtesting include specifying the investment hypothesis and goals, determining the rules and processes behind an investment strategy, forming an investment portfolio according to the rules, rebalancing the portfolio periodically, and computing the performance and risk profiles of the strategy.

• In the rolling window backtesting methodology, researchers use a rolling window (or walk-forward) framework, fit/calibrate factors or trade signals based on the rolling window, rebalance the portfolio periodically, and then track the performance over time. Thus, rolling window backtesting is a proxy for actual investing.

• There are two commonly used approaches in backtesting—long/short hedged portfolio and Spearman rank IC. The two approaches often give similar results, but results can be quite different at times. Choosing the right approach depends on the model building and portfolio construction process.

• In assessing backtesting results, in addition to traditional performance measurements (e.g., Sharpe ratio, maximum drawdown), analysts need to take into account data coverage, return distribution, factor efficacy, factor turnover, and decay.

• There are several behavioral issues in backtesting to which analysts need to pay particular attention, including survivorship bias and look-ahead bias.

• Risk parity is a popular portfolio construction technique that takes into account the volatility of each factor (or asset) and the correlations of returns between all factors (or assets) to be combined in the portfolio. The objective is for each factor (or asset) to make an equal (hence “parity”) risk contribution to the overall or targeted risk of the portfolio.

• Asset (and factor) returns are often negatively skewed and exhibit excess kurtosis (fat tails) and tail dependence compared with normal distribution. As a result, standard rolling window backtesting may not be able to fully account for the randomness in asset returns, particularly on downside risk.

• Financial data often face structural breaks. Scenario analysis can help investors understand the performance of an investment strategy in different structural regimes.

• Historical simulation is relatively straightforward to perform but shares pros and cons similar to those of rolling window backtesting. For example, a key assumption these methods share is that the distribution pattern from the historical data is sufficient to represent the uncertainty in the future. Bootstrapping (or random draws with replacement) is often used in historical simulation.

• Monte Carlo simulation is a more sophisticated technique than historical simulation is. In Monte Carlo simulation, the most important decision is the choice of functional form of the statistical distribution of decision variables/return drivers. Multivariate normal distribution is often used in investment research, owing to its simplicity. However, a multivariate normal distribution cannot account for negative skewness and fat tails observed in factor and asset returns.

• The Monte Carlo simulation technique makes use of the inverse transformation method—the process of converting a randomly generated uniformly distributed number into a simulated value of a random variable of a desired distribution.

• Sensitivity analysis, a technique for exploring how a target variable and risk profiles are affected by changes in input variables, can further help investors understand the limitations of conventional Monte Carlo simulation (which typically assumes a multivariate normal distribution as a starting point). A multivariate skewed t-distribution takes into account skewness and kurtosis but requires estimation of more parameters and thus is more likely to suffer from larger estimation errors.