Cross-validation with overlapping labels leaks the future
You build a signal to predict each day's forward 20-day return. You evaluate it with ordinary random -fold cross-validation: shuffle all the daily observations, split into folds, train on nine, validate on one. The cross-validated accuracy looks excellent. Live, the signal disappoints badly.
Explain why this cross-validation is over-optimistic and what resampling scheme fixes it.
Your answer
Solving needs a free account
Answers, streaks and solutions unlock when you are signed in. Reading the question and the hint stays free.
Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion · reading is open to everyone
💡 Discussion rules
- No full solutions here. Hints and approaches only.
- Complexity, edge cases and intuition are the point.
- Interview experiences are welcome. Respect your NDAs.
Loading discussion…
Learn the concepts
The theory behind this question.
Related questions
Cross-validation, and why it is dangerous on time seriesCross-validation, and the leaks that silently inflate itHow big is each validation fold in k-fold CV?How many models does leave-one-out CV train?Model fits for k-fold CV with a hyperparameter gridGreat in-sample, great in CV, dead live, what happened?
All questions →