Really intrigued by this! Wouldn't be surprised if it did very, very well. I admire all the work put into it. One question is how you will automate decide how many tech stocks to include for example. Arbitrarily choosing the number yourself will add bias and mean it is not so repeatable.
Hey KiwiCam, yeah hopefully it turns out well 😅. That's a great question, I suppose even deciding the weighting between sectors is bias in itself. The reason for having more tech stocks this time was simply that way, way more tech stocks were passing the checklist than other sectors, so I felt if I'm following the checklist I should follow that to some degree. So I may do that going forward, proportion out the sectors to how many pass in each one. I suppose the most un biased way would be to just have 6 of each, though I do feel I would be missing out on some of the higher growth then. Or even simply the top 30 scores, regardless of sector. This would lead to heavy weighting in certain sectors though, especially tech at the moment. But maybe that is what it should do, follow the highest growth sectors for each year. Lot's to think about, thanks for the question. How would you do it?
Really intrigued by this! Wouldn't be surprised if it did very, very well. I admire all the work put into it. One question is how you will automate decide how many tech stocks to include for example. Arbitrarily choosing the number yourself will add bias and mean it is not so repeatable.
Hey KiwiCam, yeah hopefully it turns out well 😅. That's a great question, I suppose even deciding the weighting between sectors is bias in itself. The reason for having more tech stocks this time was simply that way, way more tech stocks were passing the checklist than other sectors, so I felt if I'm following the checklist I should follow that to some degree. So I may do that going forward, proportion out the sectors to how many pass in each one.
I suppose the most un biased way would be to just have 6 of each, though I do feel I would be missing out on some of the higher growth then. Or even simply the top 30 scores, regardless of sector. This would lead to heavy weighting in certain sectors though, especially tech at the moment. But maybe that is what it should do, follow the highest growth sectors for each year. Lot's to think about, thanks for the question. How would you do it?