Hi all folks at Quantopian,
I have two questions related to Contest hacking (or cheating rather):
Are all contest entries running with the same amount if capital in the live sim market, regardless of how much capital was used in the >2 year backtest that was used to submit the algo? I've noticed how different amount of capital deployed in the backtest can significantly affect the sharpe ratio (mostly returns and not so much volatility I believe - it's easier to get 100% fills and less slippage with less capital), so unless all entries are running with the same amount of capital in the contest, it's not really a level playing field in my view.
If that's the case, in my opinion at least, an additional contest requirement should be that the >2 year backtest need to be run with a certain amount of minimum capital (e.g. 10 Mil.).
Since the volatility portion of the score is based on the past rolling 63 days, it would be fairly easy to find what the lowest volatile long/short portfolio in the past 63 days is that also meets the contest criteria/constraints. One could then just schedule the algo to hold those stocks in the past 63 days (in a manner that is similar to how the real algo behaves) in order to minimise the volatility of the algo and potentially spike the score from day 1. The effect would depreciate over time of course as the 'real' volatility would catch up, but still...
So my question then is, do you have anything in place to check for entries with statistically significantly higher volatility from day 1 in the contest, compared to the most recent 63 days (or the full backtest for that matter). In short, something to check for volatility spoofing? What's the consequence for anyone caught doing this? If nothing, aren't you indirectly encouraging and incentivising this type of algo design?
Lastly, thanks for a great site and platform. I love Quantopian!
Joakim