Qm
Foundational

Strategy Post-Mortem Analysis

The structured review a team does after a strategy is killed or a bad month happens, so the same mistake doesn't get relearned from scratch next time.

A strategy post-mortem is a written review, done after a strategy is decommissioned or after a significantly bad drawdown, that tries to answer one question honestly: did this fail because markets changed, because the original research was overfit, because of an operational bug, or because of bad luck within normal variance? Each answer implies a completely different lesson, and skipping the post-mortem means the desk is likely to make the exact same sizing or modelling mistake again under a different strategy's name.

A useful post-mortem separates three timelines side by side: the original backtest performance, the live performance up to the point of failure, and the performance of the same strategy logic re-run on the failure period with hindsight. If live performance tracked the backtest closely and then a specific, identifiable regime shift broke it, that's a market-change story. If live performance never matched the backtest even in calm periods, that points to overfitting or a data-snooping problem in the original research. If a single bad day or software bug drove most of the loss, that's an operational failure, not a strategy failure, and shouldn't taint an otherwise sound idea.

The output is usually a short document: what killed it, whether the signal itself is still believed to be real, and one or two concrete process changes, a new stress test, a stricter capacity check, that should apply to future strategies, not just a eulogy for this one.

A strategy post-mortem's value comes from separating "the idea was wrong," "the market changed," and "we had an operational bug", because only the first one should make you distrust the underlying signal.

Discussion

Sign in to join the discussion · reading is open to everyone

💡 Discussion rules

  1. Ask and answer about this concept. Off-topic gets removed.
  2. No homework dumps. Show what you tried first.
  3. Corrections are welcome. Cite a source when you claim an error.

Loading discussion…

Related concepts

Further reading

  • Chan, Algorithmic Trading, ch. 9
ShareTwitterLinkedIn