adelorenzo/stable
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge pull request #3235 from freqtrade/xmatthias-patch-1

Browse Source 
Be clear on evaluation logic during backtesting
This commit is contained in:
hroff-1902 2020-04-29 12:08:41 +03:00 committed by GitHub
commit fb0dfee3eb
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 2 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

3
docs/backtesting.md
View File

@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ Since backtesting lacks some detailed information about what happens within a ca
- Buys happen at open-price
- Sell signal sells happen at open-price of the following candle
- Low happens before high for stoploss, protecting capital first.
- Low happens before high for stoploss, protecting capital first
- ROI
- sells are compared to high - but the ROI value is used (e.g. ROI = 2%, high=5% - so the sell will be at 2%)
- sells are never "below the candle", so a ROI of 2% may result in a sell at 2.4% if low was at 2.4% profit
@ -212,6 +212,7 @@ Since backtesting lacks some detailed information about what happens within a ca
- High happens first - adjusting stoploss
- Low uses the adjusted stoploss (so sells with large high-low difference are backtested correctly)
- Sell-reason does not explain if a trade was positive or negative, just what triggered the sell (this can look odd if negative ROI values are used)
- Stoploss (and trailing stoploss) is evaluated before ROI within one candle. So you can often see more trades with the `stoploss` and/or `trailing_stop` sell reason comparing to the results obtained with the same strategy in the Dry Run/Live Trade modes.
Taking these assumptions, backtesting tries to mirror real trading as closely as possible. However, backtesting will **never** replace running a strategy in dry-run mode.
Also, keep in mind that past results don't guarantee future success.