<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Build Better Strategies, Part 6: Evaluation	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/</link>
	<description>A new view on algorithmic trading</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:11:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: jcl		</title>
		<link>https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/#comment-135104</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jcl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 08:11:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://financial-hacker.com/?p=4901#comment-135104</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/#comment-135102&quot;&gt;Matt&lt;/a&gt;.

The default slippage is 5 seconds, meaning the trade is filled at the price 5 seconds after sending the order. This can be adapted to the broker.

Rather than Close[1], we normally use price(0), which is the average of all ticks of the recent bar. This also minimizes the gap between backtest and live.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/#comment-135102">Matt</a>.</p>
<p>The default slippage is 5 seconds, meaning the trade is filled at the price 5 seconds after sending the order. This can be adapted to the broker.</p>
<p>Rather than Close[1], we normally use price(0), which is the average of all ticks of the recent bar. This also minimizes the gap between backtest and live.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Matt		</title>
		<link>https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/#comment-135102</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 07:56:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://financial-hacker.com/?p=4901#comment-135102</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Great walk-forward breakdown. The gap between theoretical backtest metrics and
post-deployment performance almost always traces back to repainting or look-ahead
bias in signals that slipped through evaluation.

One rule I&#039;ve started enforcing across all my testing workflows: close[1] only
for every entry and exit signal, no current bar references at all. Brutally
simple but it collapses the gap between backtest and live reliably. A strategy
that needs the current close to decide is essentially cheating on history.

On your 4h FX and index CFD system, what&#039;s your slippage assumption for Asian
session and weekend gaps? I&#039;ve watched otherwise positive-expectancy setups go
flat once realistic gap slippage gets modeled in the evaluation.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great walk-forward breakdown. The gap between theoretical backtest metrics and<br />
post-deployment performance almost always traces back to repainting or look-ahead<br />
bias in signals that slipped through evaluation.</p>
<p>One rule I&#8217;ve started enforcing across all my testing workflows: close[1] only<br />
for every entry and exit signal, no current bar references at all. Brutally<br />
simple but it collapses the gap between backtest and live reliably. A strategy<br />
that needs the current close to decide is essentially cheating on history.</p>
<p>On your 4h FX and index CFD system, what&#8217;s your slippage assumption for Asian<br />
session and weekend gaps? I&#8217;ve watched otherwise positive-expectancy setups go<br />
flat once realistic gap slippage gets modeled in the evaluation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Recent Quant Links from Quantocracy as of 02/08/2026 - Quantocracy		</title>
		<link>https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/#comment-132498</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Recent Quant Links from Quantocracy as of 02/08/2026 - Quantocracy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2026 06:30:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://financial-hacker.com/?p=4901#comment-132498</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] Build Better Strategies, Part 6: Evaluation [Financial Hacker] [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Build Better Strategies, Part 6: Evaluation [Financial Hacker] [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Albert		</title>
		<link>https://financial-hacker.com/build-better-strategies-part-6-evaluation/#comment-132469</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Albert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2026 06:14:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://financial-hacker.com/?p=4901#comment-132469</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[a jcl post? it must be new year!

All jokes aside, this is good stuff as usual. This series is what actually made it click for me, aside from your book. Thank you, truly.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>a jcl post? it must be new year!</p>
<p>All jokes aside, this is good stuff as usual. This series is what actually made it click for me, aside from your book. Thank you, truly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
