Finding a high-quality data source is crucial for quantitative trading strategies. Also, having a long history is beneficial. Fama & French, for example, offer free historical data for stocks and a variety of factors. However, it is very hard to get good-quality and free data for other asset classes. For this reason, we have already examined how to extend historical daily bond data to 100 years.

For any event-driven analysis or to perform stress tests of various historical situations, long-enough data can only help. Whether one wants to analyze past market patterns, or simply examine the risk of their portfolio under different historical scenarios, the use case for long data is pretty straightforward.

Following the theme of our previous article, we decided to extend historical data of another asset class, commodities. This article explains our commodity data methodology and introduces data sources, which helped us extend historical daily commodities data to 100 years.

Equity Value strategies have suffered hardly during years 2018, 2019 and also 2020. Due to the poor performance of Value during this period, many investors have abandoned the strategy, often expressing view that “Value strategy is not working anymore”. Nevertheless, equity Value strategies have managed a strong comeback recently, turning attention of investors and traders back to them. In our blog today, we will take a close look at many different equity Value strategies, their performance and how they behave. 

Finding a good data source with quality data and long history is one of the greatest challenges in quantitative trading. There definitely are some data sources with very long histories. However, they tend to be on the more expensive side. On the other hand, cheap or free data usually lacks quality and/or has shorter time frames.

This article explains how to combine multiple data sources to create a 100-year daily data history for US 10-year bonds. Having a 100-year history of daily data can be very beneficial to understanding the market patterns and analyzing history and extending backtests to arrive at a new source of out-of-sample data.

Furthermore, suppose you want to examine how your portfolio would have performed during various historical events or to backtest a strategy during multiple market phases. In that case, the long history provides more opportunities. Besides, investors are always on the run to better understand the market. So, having substantial knowledge of history is crucial.

Socially responsible investing, also known as ESG investing, is a recent trend in the world of portfolio management. More and more investors have started to look into the Environmental, Social, and Governance scores of the companies they invest in. However, one major problem with ESG scoring is that there is not one universal scoring system. Many companies sell ESG data, but the scores are not comparable, and additionally, the ESG data providers are not very transparent about how they create the ratings. These problems with ESG data mean we need to have a method to grade and merge the information from multiple providers.

How often do you think about the weights of the assets in your portfolio? Do you weigh your assets equally, or do you prefer value-weighting? The researchers behind a recent research paper analyzed various weighting schemes and examined their effect on factor strategy return. They studied five weighting schemes that ignore prices: equal weighting, rank weighting, z-score weighting, inverse volatility weighting, and fundamental weighting, and three price-based weighting schemes: Rank x mcap (rank-times-mcap), Z-score x mcap (z-score-times-mcap), and Integrated core.

They found that schemes that are not based on price can inflate turnover and costs. However, the weighting schemes based on price are the most practical to target multiple premiums, provide robust risk control, and decrease turnover and expenses.