Work
Individual ResearchSystematic Investing · Backtesting · Robustness

Systematic Equity Factor Research

An attractive 28-stock backtest weakened when the universe broadened and concentration fell. Fresh data was still positive, but not statistically conclusive.

Central findingStronger methodology lowered the headline return and showed that positive holdout performance was not enough to establish reliable alpha.

Evidence

The result in context

Original concentrated CAGR
32.41%
Broad-development CAGR
17.46%
Frozen-confirmation CAGR
22.73%
Holdout alpha
3.25%
HAC t-statistic 0.47; statistically inconclusive.

Question

What happens to an attractive concentrated momentum backtest when breadth, concentration, costs and genuinely unseen data are challenged?

A concentrated momentum result rebuilt with broader coverage, transaction costs, concentration diagnostics and a frozen confirmation period.

A robust rerun of the original universe holds only six names on average and concentrates 84.23% in the top five; the broad development portfolio reduces top-five weight to 6.01%.

Original result

A strong return with hidden concentration

The original fixed 28-stock, momentum-weighted strategy produced 32.41% CAGR, a 1.33 Sharpe ratio and a −31.35% maximum drawdown. Sharpe relates excess return to volatility; maximum drawdown is the deepest peak-to-trough loss.

A robust rerun reproduced 32.41% CAGR with a lower 1.24 Sharpe, six average holdings and 84.23% in the top five. Those concentration diagnostics are not presented as the identical archived 1.33-Sharpe run.

Broad development

More breadth, costs and harder benchmarks

Across 2015–2024, the broader strategy produced 17.46% CAGR and 0.91 Sharpe with 92.8 average holdings. At 20 basis points of cost, CAGR fell to 16.36%.

Development alpha versus SPY was 4.04%, but its HAC t-statistic was 1.50 and the confidence interval included zero.

Robustness explorer

The headline falls as the test improves

Lower return is not weaker research when it comes from broader, harder evidence.

CAGR
32.41%
Sharpe
1.24
Maximum drawdown
−31.36%
Holdings
6.0 average
Concentration
84.23% top five
Benchmark context
Fixed 28-stock universe

The strongest headline, and the weakest breadth.

Transaction costs reduce the development result; at 20 basis points, CAGR falls to 16.36% and Sharpe to 0.86.

Frozen confirmation

Positive performance, inconclusive evidence

From 2 January 2025 to 24 August 2026, the frozen strategy produced 22.73% CAGR and 1.11 Sharpe. It beat SPY and broad equal weight on return, but not broad equal weight on Sharpe or drawdown.

Holdout alpha was 3.25% with a HAC t-statistic of 0.47. The right conclusion is positive but inconclusive.

Confirmation return is positive, but broad equal weight retains the stronger Sharpe ratio and shallower drawdown.

Limitations

What this evidence does not establish

  • The development universe is survivorship-biased because a 2024 S&P 500 snapshot was applied backwards.
  • The frozen confirmation period is short and cannot establish a stable long-run premium.

Source and reproducibility

Trace the evidence

Source code, evaluation outputs and supporting material are available in the repository.

View repository
  1. Concentration analysisoutputs/concentration.pngCommit / evidence ID: 2be4951c073fd8cafa7f20d59b6741f410f85d34
  2. Frozen confirmationoutputs/confirmation_benchmark_relative_performance.pngCommit / evidence ID: 2be4951c073fd8cafa7f20d59b6741f410f85d34