LEARN · EN · easyquanttrading.com
How to read a backtest report
Backtest reports are laid out for visual appeal, not for decision-making. Net profit goes at the top in large type, while the numbers that would change your mind sit in a small table further down. This is a reading order that puts the decision-relevant figures first.
- Net profit is the least informative number on the page
- Trade count determines whether anything else is interpretable
- Drawdown decides usability; return only decides desirability
- Every number is conditional on cost and fill assumptions
Start with the trade count
Before anything else, find how many trades the strategy took. This single number determines whether the rest of the report can be read at all. Thirty trades is an anecdote. A hundred is a hint. Several hundred, spread across different market conditions, is a sample.
The reason is purely statistical. With a small number of trades, the difference between a genuine edge and a lucky sequence is larger than the edge itself. A strategy with a 60% win rate over thirty trades and one with a 45% win rate over thirty trades are not reliably distinguishable.
Then find the drawdown, and read the duration next to it
Maximum drawdown is the number that decides whether you can actually run the strategy. Read it before the return, because a 90% return with a 60% drawdown is a strategy almost nobody can hold through, and therefore almost nobody will realise that 90%.
Then look for the drawdown duration if the report provides it. A 15% drawdown that lasted two months and a 15% drawdown that lasted two years are very different propositions. Many reports omit duration; when they do, the equity curve chart will tell you.
Then the profit factor, with its trade count
Profit factor is gross profit divided by gross loss. It is a useful summary because it captures both the win rate and the payoff ratio in one number, and because it has an intuitive reading: 1.0 is break-even before costs are considered twice.
The trap is that profit factor is extremely sensitive to a small number of large wins. A profit factor of 3.0 built on two outlier trades is not the same evidence as a profit factor of 1.3 built on four hundred. Always read it with the trade count in mind, and if the report shows the largest win and largest loss, compare them.
Now the assumptions, which are usually buried
Somewhere in the settings, or not at all, the report encodes what it assumed about costs and fills. These assumptions frequently matter more than any parameter in the strategy.
| Assumption | What to check | Why it changes the verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Spread | Fixed or variable? Which value? | Fixed spreads understate cost in fast markets |
| Commission | Included at all? | Small per-trade costs compound at frequency |
| Execution price | Signal bar close, or next bar open? | Close-of-bar fills are usually unobtainable |
| Slippage | Any modelled? | Zero slippage flatters breakout strategies most |
| Symbol history | Which broker, which years? | Different feeds produce different results |
Five assumptions that routinely decide whether a strategy is profitable. Most reports let you change all of them; few show them prominently.
The numbers that are easy to misread
- Win rate: meaningless without the average win and average loss. A 70% win rate with a payoff ratio of 0.4 loses money.
- Sharpe ratio: sensitive to the return period assumed and to the risk-free rate. Two reports can disagree while both being arithmetically correct.
- Expected payoff: usually quoted per trade in account currency, which hides how it scales with position size.
- Recovery factor: net profit divided by drawdown — useful, but inflated by the same outliers that inflate profit factor.
- Annualised return: often extrapolated from a short test, which turns noise into a confident-looking percentage.
A reading order you can apply in two minutes
Trade count first. Drawdown second. Profit factor third, alongside the largest win and loss. Cost and fill assumptions fourth. Net profit last, and only as a sanity check that the other numbers are consistent with it.
If a report makes this difficult — if the trade count is hidden, or the cost assumptions are unstated — treat that as information about the report rather than about the strategy. The figures that matter are not secret, and a source that omits them is usually omitting them for a reason.
FAQ
- What is a good profit factor?
- Anything above 1.0 is profitable before considering whether the assumptions were realistic. In practice, strategies that survive live trading typically sit well above 1.0 because costs erode a portion of the paper edge. A profit factor between 1.0 and 1.1 is fragile: it can be erased by a modest change in spread.
- Should I trust an annualised return?
- Treat it with suspicion when it comes from a short test. Annualising a three-month result multiplies whatever noise was in that quarter by four. An annualised figure is only meaningful when the underlying test spans enough time to contain a variety of conditions.
- Why do two backtests of the same strategy give different numbers?
- Almost always the data. Different brokers supply different historical feeds, with different spreads and different bar construction. If two reports disagree, compare the symbol history and the cost assumptions before concluding anything about the strategy.
More guides
- How EasyQuant validates strategies — evidence you can filter
- Honest backtesting, not pretty curves
- Gold strategy research that stays honest
- Overfitting detection: catch it before you deploy
- System Forge: design, then prove
- Walk-forward analysis: the only backtest that fights overfitting
- MT5 export without custody
- Glass box, not black box AI signals
Not investment advice. Historical results do not guarantee future performance. EasyQuant is a research factory — you execute on accounts you control.