Comparing Backtrader and Zipline on Supported Trading Strategies
Summary
This notebook reports parity comparisons between Backtrader, Zipline Reloaded, and an internal trading framework on selected real case-study strategies. It includes ETF and US equity-panel comparisons for both external engines, plus CME futures and USD-quoted FX comparisons for Backtrader. The audit checks fill prices and quantities, valuation timestamps, and account values at cent precision. Unsupported asset models are listed rather than credited as successful comparisons; neither engine is treated as natively supporting crypto perpetual funding in this audit.
The notebook also reports engine-only runtimes for passing comparisons and presents synthetic stress tests against matching framework profiles. It cautions that timing excludes data and adapter preparation and should not be generalized to other strategies or machines. Synthetic stress results are secondary evidence about workload scale and event conventions; their terminal values differ because each profile follows its own framework conventions. The stated passing records describe this audit’s tested combinations and do not establish parity for other instruments, engine features, or execution assumptions.
Key ideas
- The audit compares fills, valuations, timestamps, and account values for supported strategy-engine pairs.
- Backtrader is tested on ETFs, US equities, CME futures, and USD-quoted FX; Zipline is tested on ETFs and US equities.
- Unsupported asset models are excluded from the pass denominator rather than treated as supported.
- Runtime measurements cover the engine call only and may not transfer to other machines or strategies.
- Synthetic stress tests assess scale and event conventions, while real-data rows provide the required comparisons.
Tags
Full text
# 17_backtrader_zipline_engine_parity.py
```py
# ---
# jupyter:
# jupytext:
# cell_metadata_filter: tags,-all
# text_representation:
# extension: .py
# format_name: percent
# format_version: '1.3'
# jupytext_version: 1.19.3
# kernelspec:
# display_name: Python 3
# language: python
# name: python3
# ---
# %% [markdown]
# # Backtrader and Zipline on Current Case-Study Strategies
#
# This notebook reports the Backtrader and Zipline Reloaded rows from the current real-strategy
# audit. It does not infer asset support from ML4T's configurability: a pair is included only when
# the external engine and frozen bundle can express the same native contract.
#
# **Learning objectives**
#
# - Compare Backtrader and Zipline against ML4T on supported real strategies
# - Apply a monetary comparison unit to account values without weakening fill comparison
# - Interpret the measured engine-only runtime boundary
# - Use synthetic stress evidence as a secondary conformance result
#
# **Book reference**: Chapter 16, Section 16.3
# %% [markdown]
# ## Setup
# %%
"""Current Backtrader and Zipline parity evidence."""
import json
import polars as pl
from IPython.display import display
from utils.paths import get_chapter_dir
# %% tags=["parameters"]
# Production defaults - Papermill injects overrides after this cell
ROUND_SECONDS = 3
# %%
AUDIT_PATH = get_chapter_dir(16) / "resources" / "framework_parity_audit.json"
audit = json.loads(AUDIT_PATH.read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
FRAMEWORKS = ["backtrader", "zipline"]
FRAMEWORK_NAMES = {
key: f"{audit['frameworks'][key]['display_name']} {audit['frameworks'][key]['version']}"
for key in FRAMEWORKS
}
CASE_NAMES = {
"etfs": "ETF allocation",
"cme_futures": "CME futures",
"crypto_perps_funding": "Crypto perpetual funding",
"fx_pairs": "FX allocation (USD-quoted pairs)",
"us_equities_panel": "US equity panel",
}
# %% [markdown]
# ## 1. Required comparisons
# %% tags=["results"]
results = (
pl.DataFrame(audit["real_strategy_records"])
.filter(pl.col("framework").is_in(FRAMEWORKS))
.with_columns(
pl.col("case_study").replace_strict(CASE_NAMES).alias("strategy"),
pl.col("framework").replace_strict(FRAMEWORK_NAMES).alias("engine"),
)
.select(
"strategy",
"engine",
"status",
"fills",
"valuations",
"valuation_timestamps_match",
"equity_gap",
"equity_raw_gap",
"terminal_gap",
"terminal_raw_gap",
)
.sort("strategy", "engine")
)
assert results.height == 6
assert results.filter(pl.col("status") == "pass").height == 6
assert results["valuation_timestamps_match"].all()
display(results)
# %% [markdown]
# Backtrader and Zipline both participate in the ETF and US equity-panel comparisons. Backtrader
# also participates in the CME and USD-quoted foreign-exchange comparisons. The fill stream is
# compared at eight-decimal price precision and five-decimal quantity precision, while account
# values must round to the same cent. Zipline has no required CME or spot-FX row because the frozen
# inputs do not map to its native asset models.
# %% [markdown]
# ## 2. Unsupported asset models
# %% tags=["results"]
unsupported = (
pl.DataFrame(audit["unsupported_records"])
.filter(pl.col("framework").is_in(FRAMEWORKS))
.with_columns(
pl.col("case_study").replace_strict(CASE_NAMES).alias("strategy"),
pl.col("framework").replace_strict(FRAMEWORK_NAMES).alias("engine"),
)
.select("strategy", "engine", "reason")
.sort("strategy", "engine")
)
display(unsupported)
# %% [markdown]
# Neither engine is credited with crypto-perpetual funding support it does not natively provide.
# Unsupported rows are excluded from the pass denominator.
# %% [markdown]
# ## 3. Engine-only timing
#
# Timing is retained only for correctness-passing rows and covers the engine call only.
# %% tags=["results"]
timing = (
pl.DataFrame(audit["performance_records"])
.filter(pl.col("framework").is_in(FRAMEWORKS))
.with_columns(
pl.col("case_study").replace_strict(CASE_NAMES).alias("strategy"),
pl.col("framework").replace_strict(FRAMEWORK_NAMES).alias("engine"),
pl.col("framework_median_seconds").round(ROUND_SECONDS).alias("external_seconds"),
pl.col("ml4t_median_seconds").round(ROUND_SECONDS).alias("ml4t_seconds"),
pl.col("framework_to_ml4t_ratio").round(2).alias("external_div_ml4t"),
)
.select("strategy", "engine", "external_seconds", "ml4t_seconds", "external_div_ml4t")
)
assert timing.height == 6
display(timing)
# %% [markdown]
# The timer excludes data and adapter preparation. The ratios should not be applied to other
# strategies or machines.
# %% [markdown]
# ## 4. Synthetic stress evidence
# %% tags=["results"]
stress = (
pl.DataFrame(audit["synthetic_stress"]["records"])
.filter(pl.col("framework").is_in(FRAMEWORKS))
.with_columns(pl.col("framework").replace_strict(FRAMEWORK_NAMES).alias("engine"))
.select("engine", "intents", "fills", "trades", "terminal_value", "status")
)
display(stress)
# %% [markdown]
# Both synthetic stress rows pass against their matching ML4T profiles. Their terminal values differ
# because the profiles reproduce different framework conventions. The test is pairwise: ML4T versus
# Backtrader and ML4T versus Zipline. The workload tests scale and event conventions, while the
# required rows above determine the real-data comparison.
```Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: MIT
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.