I have two general questions regarding "in-sample fitting vs. out-of-sample backtesting" kind of analyses. Is there any relationship between the length of the data collected for in-sample fitting ($a$) and the length of the data reserved for out-of-sample performance ($b$)?

Should $a$ be longer than $b$? If yes by how much (in absolute or relative terms)? Or is it okay to have a longer $b$ than $a$? Is the 50:50 rule discussed in the following link justified? Is it used in academia or by practicioners? What is the ideal ratio of in-sample length to out-of-sample length?

Let's now assume you somehow determined that $b$ is too long for $a$. Would you extend $a$ and reduce $b$ keeping $a+b$ unchanged? Or just reduce $b$, and thus reducing the length of the testing period?


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.