IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v216y2022ics0165176522001720.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No pain, no gain: You should always incorporate trading costs for a bias-free evaluation of trading rule overperformance

Author

Listed:
  • Anghel, Dan Gabriel

Abstract

In their search for better-performing trading rules (forecasting models), traders and researchers always engage in some form of data snooping. In the current context of extensive data snooping efforts, we show that accounting for both transaction fees and liquidity costs is crucial for controlling data snooping bias. Specifically, we document that even state-of-the-art, conservative multiple testing procedures (MTPs) have significant size distortions when either is missing from the loss function that describes trading (over)performance. This result is not obvious as, in theory, MTP results should not depend on how the loss function is specified. However, empirical realities differ from theory in a way that requires traders and researchers to directly consider trading costs when looking to adequately control false discoveries.

Suggested Citation

  • Anghel, Dan Gabriel, 2022. "No pain, no gain: You should always incorporate trading costs for a bias-free evaluation of trading rule overperformance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:216:y:2022:i:c:s0165176522001720
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2022.110584
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176522001720
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2022.110584?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bajgrowicz, Pierre & Scaillet, Olivier, 2012. "Technical trading revisited: False discoveries, persistence tests, and transaction costs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(3), pages 473-491.
    2. Joseph P. Romano & Michael Wolf, 2005. "Stepwise Multiple Testing as Formalized Data Snooping," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1237-1282, July.
    3. Hansen, Peter Reinhard, 2005. "A Test for Superior Predictive Ability," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 365-380, October.
    4. Ryan Sullivan & Allan Timmermann & Halbert White, 1999. "Data‐Snooping, Technical Trading Rule Performance, and the Bootstrap," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(5), pages 1647-1691, October.
    5. Laurent Barras & Olivier Scaillet & Russ Wermers, 2010. "False Discoveries in Mutual Fund Performance: Measuring Luck in Estimated Alphas," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(1), pages 179-216, February.
    6. Anghel, Dan Gabriel, 2021. "Data Snooping Bias in Tests of the Relative Performance of Multiple Forecasting Models," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    7. Coakley, Jerry & Marzano, Michele & Nankervis, John, 2016. "How profitable are FX technical trading rules?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 273-282.
    8. Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Hsu, Yu-Chin & Kuan, Chung-Ming, 2010. "Testing the predictive ability of technical analysis using a new stepwise test without data snooping bias," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 471-484, June.
    9. Corbet, Shaen & Eraslan, Veysel & Lucey, Brian & Sensoy, Ahmet, 2019. "The effectiveness of technical trading rules in cryptocurrency markets," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 32-37.
    10. Kian‐Ping Lim & Robert Brooks, 2011. "The Evolution Of Stock Market Efficiency Over Time: A Survey Of The Empirical Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 69-108, February.
    11. Halbert White, 2000. "A Reality Check for Data Snooping," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1097-1126, September.
    12. Brock, William & Lakonishok, Josef & LeBaron, Blake, 1992. "Simple Technical Trading Rules and the Stochastic Properties of Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(5), pages 1731-1764, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Deprez, Niek & Frömmel, Michael, 2024. "Are simple technical trading rules profitable in bitcoin markets?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 93(PB), pages 858-874.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anghel, Dan Gabriel, 2021. "Data Snooping Bias in Tests of the Relative Performance of Multiple Forecasting Models," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Zarrabi, Nima & Snaith, Stuart & Coakley, Jerry, 2017. "FX technical trading rules can be profitable sometimes!," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 113-127.
    3. Yang, Junmin & Cao, Zhiguang & Han, Qiheng & Wang, Qiyu, 2019. "Tactical asset allocation on technical trading rules and data snooping," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    4. Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Han, Qiheng & Wu, Wensheng & Cao, Zhiguang, 2018. "Asset allocation strategies, data snooping, and the 1 / N rule," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 257-269.
    5. Jin, Xiaoye, 2022. "Performance of intraday technical trading in China’s gold market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    6. Psaradellis, Ioannis & Laws, Jason & Pantelous, Athanasios A. & Sermpinis, Georgios, 2023. "Technical analysis, spread trading, and data snooping control," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 178-191.
    7. Dan Anghel, 2013. "How Reliable is the Moving Average Crossover Rule for an Investor on the Romanian Stock Market?," The Review of Finance and Banking, Academia de Studii Economice din Bucuresti, Romania / Facultatea de Finante, Asigurari, Banci si Burse de Valori / Catedra de Finante, vol. 5(2), pages 089-115, December.
    8. Dichtl, Hubert & Drobetz, Wolfgang & Neuhierl, Andreas & Wendt, Viktoria-Sophie, 2021. "Data snooping in equity premium prediction," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 72-94.
    9. Isakov, Dusan & Marti, Didier, 2011. "Technical Analysis with a Long-Term Perspective: Trading Strategies and Market Timing Ability," FSES Working Papers 421, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    10. Shynkevich, Andrei, 2012. "Short-term predictability of equity returns along two style dimensions," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 675-685.
    11. Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Taylor, Mark P. & Wang, Zigan & Li, Yan, 2024. "The out-of-sample performance of carry trades," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    12. Stephen A. Gorman & Frank J. Fabozzi, 2021. "The ABC’s of the alternative risk premium: academic roots," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(6), pages 405-436, October.
    13. Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Taylor, Mark P. & Wang, Zigan, 2016. "Technical trading: Is it still beating the foreign exchange market?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 188-208.
    14. Bajgrowicz, Pierre & Scaillet, Olivier, 2012. "Technical trading revisited: False discoveries, persistence tests, and transaction costs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(3), pages 473-491.
    15. Taylor, Mark & Hsu, Po-Hsuan, 2014. "Forty Years, Thirty Currencies and 21,000 Trading Rules: A Large-scale, Data-Snooping Robust Analysis of Technical Trading in t," CEPR Discussion Papers 10018, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Georgios Sermpinis & Arman Hassanniakalager & Charalampos Stasinakis & Ioannis Psaradellis, 2018. "Technical Analysis and Discrete False Discovery Rate: Evidence from MSCI Indices," Papers 1811.06766, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2019.
    17. Xiaoye Jin, 2022. "Evaluating the predictive power of intraday technical trading in China's crude oil market," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(7), pages 1416-1432, November.
    18. Hassanniakalager, Arman & Sermpinis, Georgios & Stasinakis, Charalampos, 2021. "Trading the foreign exchange market with technical analysis and Bayesian Statistics," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 230-251.
    19. Flavio Ivo Riedlinger & João Nicolau, 2020. "The Profitability in the FTSE 100 Index: A New Markov Chain Approach," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 27(1), pages 61-81, March.
    20. Zongwu Cai & Jiancheng Jiang & Jingshuang Zhang & Xibin Zhang, 2015. "A new semiparametric test for superior predictive ability," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 389-405, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trading rules; Forecasting models; Trading costs; Data snooping; Multiple testing procedures; False discoveries;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:216:y:2022:i:c:s0165176522001720. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.