Methodology

Research & Methodology

Data & External Inputs

Ticker Inputs: Ticker inputs are entered as individual rows. Each row represents one ticker in the portfolio, benchmark, or custom factor set. Leveraged exposure can be specified with custom-ticker notation, such as "SPY?L=2".

Weight Inputs: When optimization is enabled, the selected model determines portfolio weights, subject to exposure limits.

Cash-flow Inputs: Positive cash flows are recurring contributions, negative flows are withdrawals, and the frequency dropdown schedules them.

Inflation adjustment: Inflation-adjusted views convert portfolio values into real purchasing power terms.

Factor sources: Fama-French Factor data is sourced from the Kenneth French Data Library; Q-factor data is sourced from the Hou-Xue-Zhang Global-Q library, and updated monthly.

Custom factor tickers: User-selected factors allow for any ticker to be added to the selected factor model or to be used to construct a custom factor model. This lets any ticker serve as a factor.

Uploaded return series: Uploaded daily return series can be saved as custom tickers and used anywhere a ticker input is accepted.

Ticker mapping: Some funds have limited historical data. The following table is a mapping catalog to provide viable proxies or simulated data/tickers for some of the most widely recognized funds, indexes, and asset classes. Long-history simulated tickers splice histories with live ETF/fund returns when available.

  • BNDSIMVBMFX + 0.12% p.a. (1986-2007)BND (2007-present)
  • BTCSIM / BTCTRBitcoin price at 4:00 pm ET from FirstRate Data (2010-2024)IBIT + 0.25% p.a. (2024-present)
  • CAOSSIMAVOLX (2013-2023)CAOS (2023-present)
  • CASHX / TBILLShiller 10Y rate - 1% (1885-1926)Fama-French Rf (1926-1954)FRED 3-month T-Bill rate DTB3 (1954-present)Future observations refresh from FRED DTB3 on a daily cadence
  • DBMFSIM / DBMFXSG CTA Index + 2.50% p.a. - 0.85% p.a. (2000-2019)DBMF (2019-present)Pre-2019 is a rough CTA proxy, not a one-to-one live DBMF replication
  • EFASIM / EAFSIMMSCI EAFE Total Return Index NR (1970-2001)EFA + 0.32% p.a. (2001-present)
  • EFFRXShiller 10Y rate - 1% (1885-1926)Fama-French Rf (1926-1954)FRED Effective Federal Funds Rate DFF (1954-present)Future observations refresh from FRED DFF on a daily cadence
  • EFVSIMDFIVX (1995-2005)EFV (2005-present)
  • ETHSIM / ETHTREthereum price at 4:00 pm ET from FirstRate Data (2016-2024)ETHA + 0.25% p.a. (2024-present)
  • FNGUSIMFNGA (2018-2025)FNGU (2025-present)
  • GDESIM90% SPYSIM + 90% GLDSIM - 80% CASHX; quarterly rebalance, 5% band, 0.20% annual expenses (1968-2022)GDE (2022-present)
  • GLDSIM / GOLDXLBMA Gold Price at 3PM (1968-2004)GLD + 0.40% p.a. (2004-present)
  • GSGSIM / GSGTRS&P GSCI TR Index - 0.75% p.a. (1979-2006)GSG (2006-present)
  • IEFSIM / IEFTR10Y Treasury rate DGS10 (1962-2002)IEF (2002-present)
  • IEISIM / IEITR5Y Treasury rate DGS5 (1962-2007)IEI (2007-present)
  • IJRSIMS&P 600 Total Return Index (1994-2000)IJR + 0.06% p.a. (2000-present)
  • IWCSIMFama-French US Micro Cap (1926-2005)IWC + 0.60% p.a. (2005-present)
  • IWMSIMRussell 2000 Total Return Index (1978-2000)IWM + 0.19% p.a. (2000-present)
  • KMLMSIM / KMLMXKFA MLM Index - 0.90% p.a. (1988-2020)KMLM (2020-present)
  • LTPZSIMSimulated LTPZ using DFII20 and DFII30 with 0.20% expense ratio (2003-2009)LTPZ (2009-present)
  • MCISIMMCI from fund disclosures (1980-1985)MCI (1985-present)
  • MDYSIMS&P 400 Total Return Index (1991-1995)MDY + 0.24% p.a. (1995-present)
  • MTUMSIMMSCI USA Momentum Total Return Index - 0.15% p.a. (1994-2013)MTUM (2013-present)
  • INFLATIONShiller CPI (1885-1913)FRED unadjusted CPI-U CPIAUCNS (1913-present)Monthly CPI values are pinned to month-end and daily values are linearly interpolatedFuture observations refresh from FRED CPIAUCNS on a monthly cadence
  • NTSDSIM90% SPYSIM + 60% EFASIM - 50% CASHX; quarterly rebalance, 5% band, 0.35% annual expenses (1969-2026)NTSD (2026-present)
  • NTSISIMSynthetic NTSI allocation proxy (1969-2021)NTSI (2021-present)
  • NTSXSIMSynthetic NTSX allocation proxy (1962-2018)NTSX (2018-present)
  • OEFSIMS&P 100 Total Return Index (1989-2000)OEF + 0.20% p.a. (2000-present)
  • QQQSIM / QQQTRNasdaq 100 Index (1986-1994)RYOCX + 1.12% p.a. (1994-1999)QQQ (1999-present)1986-1994 index leg excludes dividends; assumed dividend yield roughly offsets QQQ expense ratio
  • REITSIMFama-French RlEst from 48 Industry Portfolios - 0.13% p.a. (1926-1993)DFREX (1993-2004)VNQ (2004-present)
  • RSSBSIMSynthetic RSSB allocation proxy (1969-2023)RSSB (2023-present)
  • SHYSIM / SHYTR2Y Treasury rate DGS2 (1962-2002)SHY (2002-present)
  • SLVSIM / SLVTRLBMA Silver Price at 3PM (1968-2006)SLV + 0.50% p.a. (2006-present)
  • SPYSIM / SPYTRSchwert Dow Jones Composite Portfolio (1885-1928)Schwert S&P 500 Composite Portfolio (1928-1962)S&P 500 Price Index with Shiller dividends (1962-1993)SPY + 0.0945% p.a. (1993-present)
  • STIPSIMSimulated STIP using DFII5 with 0.03% expense ratio (2003-2010)STIP (2010-present)
  • SVIXSIM / SVIXXSix Figure Investing backtest derived from SHORTVOL (2005-2022)SVIX (2022-present)
  • TIPSIMVIPSX (2000-2003)TIP (2003-present)
  • TLTSIM / TLTTR20Y Treasury rate DGS20 (1962-1977)30Y Treasury rate DGS30 (1977-2002)TLT (2002-present)
  • URTHSIMVTISIM/EFASIM market-cap-weighted returns (1970-1995)MSCI World Total Net Return Index (1995-2012)URTH + 0.24% p.a. (2012-present)
  • USMVSIMMSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index - 0.15% p.a. (1988-2011)USMV (2011-present)
  • UUPSIMDXY Index + 100% CASHX - 0.70% p.a. (1971-2007)UUP (2007-present)Pre-2007 roll yield from interest-rate differentials is omitted due to limited foreign-rate data
  • UVIXSIMSix Figure Investing backtest derived from LONGVOL (2005-2022)UVIX (2022-present)
  • VBKSIMFama-French US Small Cap Growth (1926-2004)VBK + 0.07% p.a. (2004-present)
  • VBRSIMFama-French US Small Cap Value (1926-2004)VBR + 0.07% p.a. (2004-present)
  • VBSIMFama-French US Small Cap Blend (1926-2004)VB + 0.05% p.a. (2004-present)
  • VCITSIMSimulated VCIT using BAMLC3A0C57YEY and BAMLC4A0C710YEY with 0.03% expense ratio (1995-2010)VCIT (2010-present)
  • VEASIMMSCI EAFE Total Return Index NR (1970-1996)VTMGX + 0.08% p.a. (1996-2007)VEA + 0.03% p.a. (2007-present)
  • VIXSIM / VOLIXVIX series VIXCLS (1990-present)
  • VOESIMFama-French US Mid Cap Value (1926-2007)VOE + 0.07% p.a. (2007-present)
  • VOOSIM / VVSIMFama-French US Large Cap Blend (1926-1993)SPY + 0.20% p.a. (1993-present)
  • VOSIMFama-French US Mid Cap Blend (1926-2004)VO + 0.04% p.a. (2004-present)
  • VOTSIMFama-French US Mid Cap Growth (1926-2007)VOT + 0.07% p.a. (2007-present)
  • VSSSIMDISVX + 0.36% p.a. (1995-2009)VSS (2009-present)
  • VTISIM / VTITRFama-French Rm-Rf + Rf (1926-1992)VTSMX + 0.14% p.a. (1992-2001)VTI + 0.03% p.a. (2001-present)
  • VTSIMVTISIM/VXUSSIM market-cap-weighted returns (1970-2008)VT + 0.08% p.a. (2008-present)
  • VTVSIMFama-French US Large Cap Value (1926-2004)VTV + 0.04% p.a. (2004-present)
  • VUGSIMFama-French US Large Cap Growth (1926-2004)VUG + 0.04% p.a. (2004-present)
  • VWOSIMVEIEX + 0.23% p.a. (1994-2005)VWO (2005-present)
  • VXUSSIM / VXUSXMSCI World ex USA Index NR (1970-1996)VGTSX + 0.18% p.a. (1996-2011)VXUS + 0.05% p.a. (2011-present)
  • XLBSIM / XLBTRFama-French Chems from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLB (1998-present)
  • XLCSIM / XLCTRFama-French Telcm from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-2018)XLC (2018-present)
  • XLESIM / XLETRFama-French Energy from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLE (1998-present)
  • XLFSIM / XLFTRFama-French Money from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLF (1998-present)
  • XLISIM / XLITRFama-French Manuf from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLI (1998-present)
  • XLKSIM / XLKTRFama-French BusEq from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLK (1998-present)
  • XLPSIM / XLPTRFama-French NoDur from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLP (1998-present)
  • XLUSIM / XLUTRFama-French Utils from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLU (1998-present)
  • XLVSIM / XLVTRFama-French Hlth from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLV (1998-present)
  • XLYSIM / XLYTRFama-French average of Durbl and Shops from 12 Industry Portfolios - 0.09% p.a. (1926-1998)XLY (1998-present)
  • ZEROX0% nominal return cash placeholder (1885-present)Future observations are generated as a flat zero-return series
  • ZROZSIM / ZROZX20Y Treasury rate DGS20 (1962-1977)30Y Treasury rate DGS30 (1977-2009)ZROZ (2009-present)
  • ZVOLSIM / ZIVBXSix Figure Investing backtest derived from SPVXMPI (2004-2023)ZVOL (2023-present)

Backtest history limitation: A run begins at the latest first-available date among the portfolio, benchmark, and required proxy series. When a single ticker constrains the start date, Simfolio identifies that ticker beside the backtest inception date.

Live

Live Performance: Provides a view of the portfolio's performance over user specified windows.

Actions: Previous and next scheduled optimization, rebalancing, or contribution/withdraw event for the modeled portfolio.

Live Portfolio Allocation: The current amount allocated to each holding. Allocations drift daily based on market fluctuations and are updated to reflect the current state of any modeled portfolio.

Backtesting

Transaction costs: Effective spreads are derived from each asset's daily OHLC using the Abdi-Ranaldo (2017) microstructure estimator and used to estimate slippage & transaction costs (.1% - .5% ∼ average) every one-way trade.

Walk-forward optimization: Simfolio exposes 16 academically grounded optimization models through a walk-forward process. Historical data is split into rolling training windows and forward evaluation windows with a purged execution gap between them. At each rebalance point, the selected model is fit only on the available training window, the resulting weights are applied to the next forward window, and the process repeats as the windows roll through time.

Lookback window: Each optimization model's training window rolls forward with a fixed trailing history of at least 12 months. Rolling emphasizes recent regimes while avoiding very short samples and all-history expanding fits that can slow live walk-forward runs.

Estimator stabilization: Covariance-sensitive models use Ledoit-Wolf covariance shrinkage (2004); mean-sensitive models shrink the expected-return vector toward a Bayes-Stein grand mean (Jorion, 1986). Both reduce optimizer over-reactions to sample noise in walk-forward fitting.

Constraints: Per-ticker minimums, maximums, and group constraints limit the optimization model during fitting and constrain the respective model from over/under allocating to tickers or groups when optimizing.

Factor model specification: Factor regressions use OLS with Newey-West HAC standard errors. Best Fit compares the available academic factor specifications and displays the one with the strongest adjusted R²; Best Fit + Custom adds user-selected custom factor tickers to that comparison; Custom uses only the selected custom factors.

Forecasting

How we selected our methodology: We tested over 200 unique forecasting models with out-of-sample validation across 80 multi-asset portfolios and more than 40 years of historical data. Our goal is to offer the most distributionally accurate, research-driven, plug-and-play portfolio forecasting solution for investors.

Download Forecasting Methodology White Paper (PDF)

Limitations

Not investment advice: Simfolio is not a registered investment adviser, broker-dealer, or fiduciary. Nothing produced by the platform is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Decisions and their consequences belong to the user.

Past performance: Every backtest is a replay of one realized history and cannot be assumed to always represent the future.

Costs: Slippage is estimated via the Abdi-Ranaldo (2017) microstructure estimator on daily OHLC. This is an estimate of effective half-spreads averaged across the observed sample and is not any broker's actual fill data, does not vary with order size, and does not include market impact for large orders. Taxes and margin interest are not reflected in any of the backtested or forecasted portfolio performance.

Walk-forward optimization can be suboptimal for the future: A model that fits and performs well across in-sample periods (historically) can fail in any future period.

Optimizer sensitivity: Optimization models are highly sensitive to small changes in expected-return, covariance, and constraint inputs. Ledoit-Wolf shrinkage and mean shrinkage can reduce — but not eliminate this sensitivity. Two reasonable users running the same data with slightly different lookback windows, optimization frequencies, or constraints can experience materially different results.

Forecast stationarity assumption: The forecasting methodology is dependent on, and inferred only from the available portfolio history and proxy data. If the future market environment is vastly different, and outside anything represented in historical data, the forecast distribution will miss it.

Research & Citations

Data Libraries & Factor Models

  1. Kenneth R. French (n.d.). Data Library. Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth.
  2. Hou, K., Xue, C., & Zhang, L. (n.d.). Global-q.org Factor and Anomaly Data Library. Global-q.org.
  3. Sharpe, W. F. (1964). Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions of Risk. The Journal of Finance, 19(3), 425–442.
  4. Jensen, M. C. (1968). The Performance of Mutual Funds in the Period 1945–1964. The Journal of Finance, 23(2), 389–416.
  5. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1993). Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 33(1), 3–56.
  6. Carhart, M. M. (1997). On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 57–82.
  7. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (2015). A Five-Factor Asset Pricing Model. Journal of Financial Economics, 116(1), 1–22.
  8. Hou, K., Xue, C., & Zhang, L. (2015). Digesting Anomalies: An Investment Approach. Review of Financial Studies, 28(3), 650–705.
  9. Hou, K., Mo, H., Xue, C., & Zhang, L. (2021). An Augmented q-Factor Model with Expected Growth. Review of Finance, 25(1), 1–41.
  10. Brock, W., Lakonishok, J., & LeBaron, B. (1992). Simple Technical Trading Rules and the Stochastic Properties of Stock Returns. The Journal of Finance, 47(5), 1731–1764.
  11. Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S. (1993). Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency. The Journal of Finance, 48(1), 65–91.
  12. Moskowitz, T. J., Ooi, Y. H., & Pedersen, L. H. (2012). Time Series Momentum. Journal of Financial Economics, 104(2), 228–250.

Portfolio Construction, Diversification & Forward Evaluation

  1. Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio Selection. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77–91.
  2. Jorion, P. (1986). Bayes-Stein Estimation for Portfolio Analysis. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 21(3), 279–292.
  3. Ledoit, O., & Wolf, M. (2004). Honey, I Shrunk the Sample Covariance Matrix. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 30(4), 110–119.
  4. López de Prado, M. (2018). Advances in Financial Machine Learning. Wiley (purged walk-forward cross-validation).
  5. Raffinot, T. (2018). Hierarchical Clustering-Based Asset Allocation. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 44(2), 89–99.
  6. Maillard, S., Roncalli, T., & Teiletche, J. (2010). The Properties of Equally Weighted Risk Contribution Portfolios. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 36(4), 60–70.
  7. Choueifaty, Y., & Coignard, Y. (2008). Toward Maximum Diversification. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 35(1), 40–51.
  8. Konno, H., & Yamazaki, H. (1991). Mean-Absolute Deviation Portfolio Optimization Model and Its Applications to Tokyo Stock Market. Management Science, 37(5), 519–531.
  9. Shalit, H., & Yitzhaki, S. (1984). Mean-Gini, Portfolio Theory, and the Pricing of Risky Assets. The Journal of Finance, 39(5), 1449–1468.
  10. Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of Conditional Value-at-Risk. Journal of Risk, 2(3), 21–41.
  11. Goldfarb, D., & Iyengar, G. (2003). Robust Portfolio Selection Problems. Mathematics of Operations Research, 28(1), 1–38.
  12. Esfahani, P. M., & Kuhn, D. (2018). Data-Driven Distributionally Robust Optimization Using the Wasserstein Metric. Mathematical Programming, 171(1-2), 115–166.
  13. Kelly, J. L. (1956). A New Interpretation of Information Rate. Bell System Technical Journal, 35(4), 917–926.
  14. Hotelling, H. (1933). Analysis of a Complex of Statistical Variables into Principal Components. Journal of Educational Psychology, 24(6), 417–441; 24(7), 498–520.
  15. Jolliffe, I. T. (2002). Principal Component Analysis. Springer (2nd ed.).
  16. Bartlett, M. S. (1950). Tests of Significance in Factor Analysis. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 3(2), 77–85.
  17. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An Index of Factorial Simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36.
  18. Horn, J. L. (1965). A Rationale and Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185.
  19. Marchenko, V. A., & Pastur, L. A. (1967). Distribution of Eigenvalues for Some Sets of Random Matrices. Mathematics of the USSR-Sbornik, 1(4), 457–483.

Risk-Adjusted Performance & Drawdown Measures

  1. Sharpe, W. F. (1966). Mutual Fund Performance. The Journal of Business, 39(1), 119–138.
  2. Treynor, J. L. (1965). How to Rate Management of Investment Funds. Harvard Business Review, 43(1), 63–75.
  3. Sortino, F. A., & Price, L. N. (1994). Performance Measurement in a Downside Risk Framework. The Journal of Investing, 3(3), 59–64.
  4. Keating, C., & Shadwick, W. F. (2002). A Universal Performance Measure. Journal of Performance Measurement, 6(3), 59–84.
  5. Goodwin, T. H. (1998). The Information Ratio. Financial Analysts Journal, 54(4), 34–43.
  6. Grinold, R. C., & Kahn, R. N. (2000). Active Portfolio Management: A Quantitative Approach for Producing Superior Returns and Controlling Risk. McGraw-Hill (2nd ed.).
  7. Young, T. W. (1991). Calmar Ratio: A Smoother Tool. Futures, 20(1), 40.
  8. Martin, P. G., & McCann, B. B. (1989). The Investor's Guide to Fidelity Funds (Ulcer Index, Ulcer Performance Index). John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Magdon-Ismail, M., & Atiya, A. F. (2004). Maximum Drawdown. Risk Magazine, 17(10), 99–102.
  10. Chekhlov, A., Uryasev, S., & Zabarankin, M. (2005). Drawdown Measure in Portfolio Optimization. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, 8(1), 13–58.
  11. Biglova, A., Ortobelli, S., Rachev, S. T., & Stoyanov, S. (2004). Different Approaches to Risk Estimation in Portfolio Theory. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 31(1), 103–112.

Statistical Validity, Hypothesis Testing & Regression Diagnostics

  1. Newey, W. K., & West, K. D. (1987). A Simple, Positive Semi-definite, Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix. Econometrica, 55(3), 703–708.
  2. Lo, A. W. (2002). The Statistics of Sharpe Ratios. Financial Analysts Journal, 58(4), 36–52.
  3. Bailey, D. H., & López de Prado, M. (2012). Probabilistic Sharpe Ratio and Minimum Track Record Length. Journal of Risk, 15(2), 3–44.
  4. Bailey, D. H., & López de Prado, M. (2014). The Deflated Sharpe Ratio: Correcting for Selection Bias, Backtest Overfitting, and Non-Normality. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 40(5), 94–107.
  5. Ledoit, O., & Wolf, M. (2008). Robust Performance Hypothesis Testing with the Sharpe Ratio. Journal of Empirical Finance, 15(5), 850–859.
  6. Jarque, C. M., & Bera, A. K. (1980). Efficient Tests for Normality, Homoscedasticity and Serial Independence of Regression Residuals. Economics Letters, 6(3), 255–259.
  7. Durbin, J., & Watson, G. S. (1950, 1951). Testing for Serial Correlation in Least Squares Regression I and II. Biometrika, 37(3/4), 409–428; 38(1/2), 159–177.
  8. Ljung, G. M., & Box, G. E. P. (1978). On a Measure of Lack of Fit in Time Series Models. Biometrika, 65(2), 297–303.
  9. Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1979). A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation. Econometrica, 47(5), 1287–1294.
  10. Brown, R. L., Durbin, J., & Evans, J. M. (1975). Techniques for Testing the Constancy of Regression Relationships over Time. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 37(2), 149–192.

Forecasting, Bootstrap & Tail Risk

  1. Merton, R. C. (1980). On Estimating the Expected Return on the Market: An Exploratory Investigation. Journal of Financial Economics, 8(4), 323–361.
  2. Campbell, J. Y., & Thompson, S. B. (2008). Predicting Excess Stock Returns Out of Sample: Can Anything Beat the Historical Average?. Review of Financial Studies, 21(4), 1509–1531.
  3. Bollerslev, T. (1986). Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity. Journal of Econometrics, 31(3), 307–327.
  4. Glosten, L. R., Jagannathan, R., & Runkle, D. E. (1993). On the Relation Between the Expected Value and the Volatility of the Nominal Excess Return on Stocks. The Journal of Finance, 48(5), 1779–1801.
  5. Barone-Adesi, G., Giannopoulos, K., & Vosper, L. (1999). VaR Without Correlations for Portfolios of Derivative Securities. Journal of Futures Markets, 19(5), 583–602.
  6. Jacquier, E., Polson, N. G., & Rossi, P. E. (1994). Bayesian Analysis of Stochastic Volatility Models. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 12(4), 371–389.
  7. Roberts, G. O., Gelman, A., & Gilks, W. R. (1997). Weak Convergence and Optimal Scaling of Random Walk Metropolis Algorithms. The Annals of Applied Probability, 7(1), 110–120.
  8. Haario, H., Saksman, E., & Tamminen, J. (2001). An Adaptive Metropolis Algorithm. Bernoulli, 7(2), 223–242.
  9. Politis, D. N., & Romano, J. P. (1994). The Stationary Bootstrap. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 89(428), 1303–1313.
  10. Politis, D. N., & White, H. (2004). Automatic Block-Length Selection for the Dependent Bootstrap. Econometric Reviews, 23(1), 53–70.
  11. Gneiting, T., & Raftery, A. E. (2007). Strictly Proper Scoring Rules, Prediction, and Estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102(477), 359–378.
  12. Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of Conditional Value-at-Risk. Journal of Risk, 2(3), 21–41.
  13. Abdi, F., & Ranaldo, A. (2017). A Simple Estimation of Bid-Ask Spreads from Daily Close, High, and Low Prices. The Review of Financial Studies, 30(12), 4437–4480.

Timing, Attribution & Illiquidity Diagnostics

  1. Treynor, J. L., & Mazuy, K. K. (1966). Can Mutual Funds Outguess the Market?. Harvard Business Review, 44(4), 131–136.
  2. Henriksson, R. D., & Merton, R. C. (1981). On Market Timing and Investment Performance II: Statistical Procedures for Evaluating Forecasting Skills. The Journal of Business, 54(4), 513–533.
  3. Cumby, R. E., & Modest, D. M. (1987). Testing for Market Timing Ability: A Framework for Forecast Evaluation. Journal of Financial Economics, 19(1), 169–189.
  4. Geltner, D. (1991). Smoothing in Appraisal-Based Returns. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 4(3), 327–345.
  5. Getmansky, M., Lo, A. W., & Makarov, I. (2004). An Econometric Model of Serial Correlation and Illiquidity in Hedge Fund Returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 74(3), 529–609.
  6. Scholes, M., & Williams, J. (1977). Estimating Betas from Nonsynchronous Data. Journal of Financial Economics, 5(3), 309–327.
  7. Dimson, E. (1979). Risk Measurement When Shares Are Subject to Infrequent Trading. Journal of Financial Economics, 7(2), 197–226.
  8. Hirschman, A. O. (1964). The Paternity of an Index (Herfindahl-Hirschman concentration). American Economic Review, 54(5), 761–762.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Simfolio give investment advice?: No. Simfolio is a research tool for testing portfolio ideas, not an advisor or asset manager. Any investment decision remains yours, and you should consult a qualified professional for individualized advice.

What price data sources does Simfolio use?: Sourced from an institutional-grade data provider. We use adjusted close prices for all price data.

How accurate are long-horizon forecasts?: Long-horizon forecasts should be read as distributional ranges, not specific predictions. Simfolio reports percentile bands, loss probabilities, VaR, CVaR 1%, and CVaR 5% so users can see how wide the uncertainty is.

Can I import my existing portfolio from a broker?: Not yet. Enter tickers and weights directly, then hit the save button so that portfolio data will load upon login.

Do you offer refunds?: Yes. Paid plans include a 30-day money-back guarantee

What happens if I cancel?: Cancellation stops renewal. Access remains active until the end of the current billing period.

What happens if I downgrade with too many saved portfolios?: Existing saved data is not deleted automatically. Creating additional saved portfolios is blocked until the account is back under the active plan's limit or the plan is upgraded again.