walk-forward-oos
Skill82 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Run and read a NexusTrade walk-forward out-of-sample study — the certification engine behind the Public Portfolio Challenge. Use when certifying a fixed portfolio (backtest_only) or re-optimizing one (sweep), when setting fold_count / anchored / validation / embargo params, when monitoring a run_walk_forward_study to completion, when reading per-fold OOS returns/Sortino/drawdown, or when a variant's fold calendar needs calendar-alignment against a base control. Invoke with the NexusTrade MCP connected.
In this repository23 other files it gives its agents.
- skills/alt-data-indicators/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/breadth-audit/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/bug-protocol/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/deploy-gate/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/engine-sanity/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/lockbox-holdout/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/options-structure-rules/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/portfolio-certification/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/run-episode/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/strategy-bakeoff/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/sweep-reoptimization/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/walk-forward-oos/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- alt-data-indicatorsSkill
- breadth-auditSkill
- bug-protocolSkill
- deploy-gateSkill
- engine-sanitySkill
- lockbox-holdoutSkill
- options-structure-rulesSkill
- portfolio-certificationSkill
- run-episodeSkill
- strategy-bakeoffSkill
- sweep-reoptimizationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 61
Convexity-cap footgun: if multiple "always" take-profit closes exist (e.g.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Walk-Forward OOS Certification
The deterministic out-of-sample engine. Walk-forward, validation mode, anchored, 5 folds, 2022→today — the OOS folds are the verdict, not a single backtest.
The study call
mcp__nexustrade__run_walk_forward_study (tools are deferred — load via ToolSearch). Always run
preview_only: true FIRST to see the fold calendar + cost, confirm it spans 2022→today (must include
both the 2022 bear and the April-2025 selloff — this book's deepest drawdown is an April-2025
event, so the folds have to span it), then flip to false and record the study_id.
{
"portfolio_id": "<SUBJECT or a clean clone>",
"global_start_date": "2022-01-01",
"global_end_date": "<TODAY>",
"fold_count": 5,
"walk_forward_mode": "anchored",
"mode": "validation", // per-fold independent OOS
"oos_width_days": 252,
"embargo_days": 14,
"interval": "Day",
"inner_mode": "backtest_only", // certify the FIXED book — no per-fold optimizer
"preview_only": true // flip to false to actually run
}- Certify a fixed book:
inner_mode: "backtest_only"(engine_kind ga/default — a sweep is rejected for a fixed-config cert). - Re-optimize (only on FAIL or a structural change):
engine_kind: "sweep",inner_mode: "optimize",certification: true, plusgene_intents. GA overfits and is rejected for deploy certification — sweep is the certified path. See sweep-reoptimization. certification: trueapplies the activity-floor +percentChange ≥ 0+sortino ≥ 0.5policy and defaultsvalidation_percentto 50.
Pre-flight before certifying a live book
get_portfolio— capture the strategy set,conditionFieldAudit, and the exit ladder.- Strip the LaunchAgent. A LaunchAgent strategy can't run historically — it fires once and logs
thousands of
cooldownSkipevents, contaminating folds. Certify a LaunchAgent-free clone (rebalance + close rules only) and say you did so. - Spread-shape check the live structures (see options-structure-rules). A long-dated vertical spread is a hard violation → the book cannot certify as-is; go straight to re-opt.
- Convexity-cap footgun: if multiple "always" take-profit closes exist (e.g. P/L ≥ 20% / 50% / 200%), the lowest binds first and caps every winner at ~+20%, defeating the outright-call rationale. Flag it — it's the most likely reason returns trail a let-winners-run book.
Monitor the study
Poll list_walk_forward_studies / get_walk_forward_study_results <study_id> until terminal
(COMPLETE / ERROR / CANCELLED). Parse with jq — payloads are large, don't dump them. Watch
for known failure modes and surface them (don't paper over — that's a bug-protocol trigger):
- Silent-fail / ERROR — no fold stats / empty
validationAggregate. Report it; don't invent a verdict. - Wrong window — fold calendar not starting 2022-01-01 / skipping the bear.
- Backtest contamination — LaunchAgent firing in folds (should have been stripped in pre-flight).
- Zero-trade / NaN folds — upstream position-marking corruption; report which folds, never average over NaNs.
- A study genuinely hung past its estimated cost/time → stop, summarize, wait for the human (the engine may be under repair in another tab).
The mandatory per-fold checks (these ARE the verdict)
- Per-fold OOS table — for each fold: train window, OOS window, OOS return, OOS maxDD, OOS
Sortino, median deployment, distinct underlyings, participation. Plus the
validationAggregate. - Independent re-backtest spot-check —
backtest_portfolio($25k) on the full cycle (2022-01-01→today), the 2022 bear (2022-01-01→2023-01-01), and the last 12 months;audit_backtest_posturethe full-cycle run. Study folds must agree with a fresh standalone backtest. Baseline ≠ SPY for an options book — use a material underlying or equal-weight universe B&H, and note it. - Degradation — train vs OOS per fold. Large train→OOS collapse = overfit, even if the full-cycle backtest looks great.
- Drawdown honesty — OOS maxDD next to OOS return per fold; lead with risk. At this leverage a fold can post a huge return and a 50–77% drawdown.
- Breadth gate at FIXED $25k (breadth-audit).
- Reproducibility / field audit —
conditionFieldAuditmatches intended knobs;compare_backtests {tolerance_bps: 0}on a re-run. Verify by field, never display name. - Spread-shape compliance (options-structure-rules) — hard reject on violation.
Calendar alignment (variant vs base)
The walk-forward engine clips the fold calendar to the indicator's / data's coverage, so a
variant's study can silently get different folds than the base's. Always run a base CONTROL with the
same global_end_date as the variant's clipped calendar and compare fold-for-fold. Report
per-fold signal coverage next to per-fold OOS. A variant that only wins where the signal exists is a
finding, not a cheat — but say it.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

