Устойчивость стратегии к транзакционным издержкам

# 14_costs.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 (ipykernel)
#     language: python
#     name: python3
# ---

# %% [markdown]
# # US Firm Characteristics: Cost Sensitivity
#
# **Chapter 18 - Transaction Costs and Execution**
#
# Every Sharpe reported so far is net of one cost assumption: the commission and
# slippage `setup.yaml` declares, charged on turnover at each rebalance. That is a
# single number standing in for the whole of execution, and it was picked before any
# of these strategies existed. This notebook asks what the result would have been had
# that number been wrong.
#
# The question is not whether costs matter but *how fast* the result decays as they
# rise. A strategy whose Sharpe falls slowly across the grid is one whose edge is
# large relative to what it pays to trade, and it can survive being wrong about
# execution. One that falls off a cliff is being carried by the cost assumption
# rather than by the signal, and the assumption is then the finding.
#
# The declared level sits inside the swept range rather than at its edge, so the
# curve shows the result both above and below what the other notebooks charged.
#
# Sections 1-2 write cost-sensitivity backtests to the registry. Section 3 is
# read-only and reads them back.
#
# **Book Reference:** Chapter 18, Sections 18.2-18.5
#
# **Prerequisites:** the Chapter 16 backtest, the Chapter 17 allocation notebook and
# [`13_risk_management`](13_risk_management.ipynb). Cost sensitivity runs last of the
# selection stages: it sweeps the configuration the case study reports, which is chosen
# across the baseline, allocation and risk-overlay stages together, so risk management
# runs before it rather than after.

# %%
"""US Firm Characteristics: Costs."""

import json
import time
from collections import Counter

import polars as pl

from case_studies.research import open_study, reuse_disclosure
from case_studies.utils.backtest_loaders import get_backtest_config, load_backtest_prices_for
from case_studies.utils.backtest_presets import (
    clone_backtest_spec,
    ensure_backtest_spec,
    set_backtest_costs_bps,
    strategy_view,
)
from case_studies.utils.backtest_runner import run_backtest
from case_studies.utils.registry import (
    backtest_dir,
    load_existing_backtest_hashes,
    read_predictions,
    resolve_best_backtest_runs,
)
from case_studies.utils.strategy_analysis import resolve_solvent_carrier
from case_studies.utils.sweep_config import get_cost_grid_bps
from utils.paths import get_case_study_dir
from utils.style import COLORS, add_message_title, show_with_alt

# %% tags=["parameters"]
CASE_STUDY_ID = "us_firm_characteristics"
LABEL = ""
MAX_SYMBOLS = 0
# Both names stay bound here although nothing below reads them: that is what makes the harness
# force preview and supply a workspace - `_declares_tier_and_workspace` in `tests/pm_helpers.py`
# looks for exactly this pair. Without them the canonical branch regenerates in place, which
# needs symlinks a CI checkout does not have.
EXECUTION_TIER = "canonical"
WORKSPACE: str = ""

# %% [markdown]
# The study is opened before anything resolves a path or reads the registry. Under the preview
# tier, opening it activates a workspace and rewrites `ML4T_OUTPUT_DIR` process-wide, and every
# later `get_case_study_dir` call resolves against that. A `CASE_DIR`, a candidate index or a
# `BacktestExplorer` built first would address the released registry while this notebook writes
# to the preview one, and the two never meet.

# %%
study = open_study(CASE_STUDY_ID, execution_tier=EXECUTION_TIER, workspace=WORKSPACE or None)

# %%
CASE_DIR = get_case_study_dir(CASE_STUDY_ID)
bt_config = get_backtest_config(CASE_STUDY_ID)
if not LABEL:
    LABEL = bt_config.primary_label

print(f"Case study: {CASE_STUDY_ID}, label: {LABEL}")

COST_GRID_BPS = get_cost_grid_bps(CASE_STUDY_ID)

# %% [markdown]
# ## 1. Which run is swept
#
# The sweep runs one configuration: the one this case study reports. That is the
# validation rank-1 `resolve_canonical_rank1_lineage` selects, and it is read here through
# `resolve_solvent_carrier` rather than ranked again.
#
# Ranking it again is what this notebook used to do, and a second ranking is not the same
# selection even when it names the same stages. The canonical resolver re-ranks
# `walk_forward_v2` conformal candidates on exact common timestamp support and applies
# `LABEL_RESTRICTIONS`, `UNIVERSE_RESTRICTIONS` and `CARRIER_PINS`; a Sharpe ordering beside
# it does none of those. Where the two disagreed, this notebook would sweep a strategy the
# case study does not report, and [`17_strategy_analysis`](17_strategy_analysis.ipynb) would
# find no cost rows for the one it does.
#
# `resolve_solvent_carrier` also refuses a selected configuration whose equity reached zero. This
# book is long-short with no margin call, so a run can compound through zero and carry a Sharpe
# computed on a balance that no longer exists - and such a Sharpe can top a ranking. It raises
# rather than quietly sweeping the runner-up, because substituting a different configuration is the
# divergence the shared resolver exists to remove.
#
# Which stage the selected configuration came from is printed rather than assumed.

# %%
carrier = resolve_solvent_carrier(CASE_STUDY_ID)

# The label is the selected configuration's, not the case study's declared primary. They are the
# same here, and reading it from the selected configuration is what keeps the prices and the
# predictions loaded below on the same label the swept configuration was fitted and ranked on.
if carrier["label"] != LABEL:
    print(f"Carrier is on {carrier['label']}, not the declared primary label {LABEL}.")
    LABEL = carrier["label"]

print(
    f"  Sharpe={carrier['val_sharpe']:.3f}  stage={carrier['val_stage']}  "
    f"family={carrier['family']}  config={carrier['config_name']}  "
    f"max_drawdown={carrier['max_drawdown']:.3f}  bt_hash={carrier['val_backtest_hash'][:8]}"
)

# Whether the overlay earned its place, reported rather than assumed. The risk stage files a
# row per named control and none for the un-overlaid strategy, so the two sides have to be
# read separately and differenced. A negative difference is the stage saying its controls did
# not help, which is a result and not a failure.
_best = {}
for _stage in ("risk_overlay", "allocation"):
    _frame = resolve_best_backtest_runs(
        CASE_STUDY_ID, LABEL, split="validation", stage=_stage, top_n=1
    )
    _best[_stage] = None if _frame.is_empty() else _frame["sharpe"][0]
if _best["risk_overlay"] is None:
    print(
        "  Risk overlay: no run registered, so the carrier above is un-overlaid. This "
        "case study declares position-level controls only and runs the vectorized "
        "path, where none of them can act."
    )
else:
    _delta = _best["risk_overlay"] - _best["allocation"]
    print(
        f"  Best overlaid {_best['risk_overlay']:.3f} vs best un-overlaid "
        f"{_best['allocation']:.3f}, difference {_delta:+.3f}"
    )

# %%
prices = load_backtest_prices_for(CASE_STUDY_ID, LABEL, split="validation", max_symbols=MAX_SYMBOLS)
print(f"Prices: {len(prices):,} rows, {prices['symbol'].n_unique()} assets")

# %% [markdown]
# ## 2. Cost Grid Sweep
#
# Each selected run is re-executed at every cost level in the declared grid, with
# the level split evenly between commission and slippage. Nothing else about the
# strategy changes, so the only thing separating one row from the next is what it
# was charged to trade.
#
# The grid and the strategy interact through turnover, which this panel keeps low by
# rebalancing monthly: a cost level is paid once a month here rather than once a day,
# so the same bps figure bites a monthly strategy far less than a daily one. That is
# a property of the rebalance cadence, not a virtue of the signal, and it is the
# reason the curve below can stay flat over a range that would destroy a
# higher-frequency strategy.
#
# A backtest hash covers the whole strategy spec, so a level already registered under
# the same spec is served from the registry rather than recomputed. The summary below
# reports two separate facts: what the stage contains, which is the same number whether
# this execution was cold or warm and is what a reader needs, and what this execution
# did, which is what a maintainer needs. Reported as one number they are
# indistinguishable, and a warm re-run publishes a page claiming eleven backtests it
# did not run.
#
# The three execution counts sum to the levels attempted. `n_done` counts attempts, so a
# failure has to come out of the computed figure or it is reported twice.
#
# The reuse count asks `backtest_run_status`, which is the same call `run_backtest`
# makes to decide, rather than checking the hash against a snapshot of the registry
# taken before the loop. The two differ where a row is registered but has no
# `daily_returns.parquet`: the runner recomputes it and a snapshot reports it as
# reused, which is wrong in the direction that hides work.
#
# `run_backtest` fills allocator defaults inside the call, so a hash built from the
# spec this notebook holds is not necessarily the registered one. The set is keyed on
# the hash the runner returns.

# %% tags=["results"]
n_total = len(COST_GRID_BPS)
n_done = 0
n_failed = 0
n_reused = 0
failures: Counter[str] = Counter()
swept_hashes: list[str] = []
reusable_before = {
    _hash
    for _hash in load_existing_backtest_hashes(CASE_STUDY_ID, stage="cost_sensitivity")
    if (backtest_dir(CASE_STUDY_ID, _hash) / "daily_returns.parquet").exists()
}
t0 = time.time()

pred_hash = carrier["val_prediction_hash"]
base_spec = ensure_backtest_spec(
    CASE_STUDY_ID,
    bt_config,
    json.loads(carrier["spec_json"]),
    prices=prices,
    prediction_hash=pred_hash,
    initial_cash=bt_config.initial_cash,
)
alloc_method = strategy_view(base_spec).get("allocation", {}).get("method", "equal_weight")
predictions = read_predictions(CASE_STUDY_ID, pred_hash)

for cost_bps in COST_GRID_BPS:
    n_done += 1

    spec = set_backtest_costs_bps(
        clone_backtest_spec(base_spec),
        commission_bps=cost_bps / 2,
        slippage_bps=cost_bps / 2,
    )
    spec["chapter"] = "ch18"

    try:
        result = run_backtest(
            CASE_STUDY_ID,
            pred_hash,
            spec,
            prices=prices,
            predictions=predictions,
            label=LABEL,
            register=True,
            initial_cash=bt_config.initial_cash,
            calendar=bt_config.calendar,
        )

        swept_hashes.append(result.backtest_hash)
        if result.backtest_hash in reusable_before:
            n_reused += 1
        print(
            f"  [{n_done}/{n_total}] {alloc_method} @ {cost_bps:g} bps: "
            f"Sharpe={result.metrics.get('sharpe', 0):.3f}"
        )
    except Exception as error:
        # Counted rather than swallowed: the summary below reports this count, and
        # the check after the loop refuses to go on when nothing was registered.
        n_failed += 1
        failures[f"{type(error).__name__}: {error}"] += 1
        print(
            f"  [{n_done}/{n_total}] {alloc_method} @ {cost_bps:g} bps: "
            f"FAILED - {type(error).__name__}: {error}"
        )

elapsed = time.time() - t0
stage_total = len(load_existing_backtest_hashes(CASE_STUDY_ID, stage="cost_sensitivity"))
print(f"\nCost-sensitivity stage: {stage_total} backtests registered.")
print(
    f"This execution: {reuse_disclosure(n_done - n_reused - n_failed, n_reused, n_failed)}, "
    f"over {n_done} of {n_total} declared levels "
    f"attempted in {elapsed:.0f}s."
)
for reason, count in failures.most_common():
    print(f"  {count:>3} x {reason[:150]}")

# %% [markdown]
# Section 3 reads the registry rather than the loop above, so a sweep that wrote nothing
# and one that wrote everything look identical from there: the curve would be drawn from
# whatever an earlier run left behind. Counting the failures is not enough on its own,
# so the count stops the notebook.
#
# Any failure stops it, not only a total one. Section 3 tells the reader that every level
# is printed and that the top of the grid is what decides whether the curve reaches zero
# inside it, so a single missing level can be the one the section is about. A grid with a
# hole in it is not a smaller grid.

# %%
if n_failed:
    raise RuntimeError(
        f"{n_failed} of {n_total} cost levels failed, so the grid section 3 renders is "
        "incomplete. Its prose tells the reader every level is shown and that the top of "
        "the grid decides whether the curve reaches zero inside it, and a missing level "
        "may be exactly that one - so a partial sweep is not a partial result here."
    )

# %% [markdown]
# ## 3. Cost Sensitivity Analysis
#
# This section is **read-only**: it reads the cost-sensitivity rows back out of the
# registry.
#
# What to look for in the curve is its slope, not its height. The height is the
# Sharpe already reported by the earlier notebooks and inherits their selection. The
# slope is new information, and it says how much of that Sharpe was a claim about
# execution rather than about the signal. A curve that reaches zero inside the grid
# names the cost level at which the strategy stops being worth trading; one that does
# not reach zero says only that the level is somewhere beyond the range tested, which
# is a weaker statement than it looks.

# %%
from case_studies.utils.backtest_explorer import BacktestExplorer

explorer = BacktestExplorer(CASE_STUDY_ID)

# %% [markdown]
# The read is scoped to the backtests the sweep above registered, not to the prediction
# they were run on. The cost-sensitivity table accumulates across runs and labels, and the
# selection feeding this notebook moves whenever an upstream stage is re-run, so an
# unscoped read pools the current curve with every curve that preceded it and draws them
# as one series per allocator.
#
# A prediction is not a strategy, so scoping by prediction is not enough here. The retired
# `walk_forward_v2` conformal sweep and the `walk_forward_v3` one that replaced it were run
# on the same prediction set, both are in the registry, and both are `conformal_weighted` -
# so a read scoped by prediction returns twenty-two rows under one allocator name and draws
# two generations as one line.

# %%
cost_df = explorer.cost_sensitivity(backtest_hashes=swept_hashes)

# %% [markdown]
# The figure below shows the slope; this is the curve it is drawn from. A reader
# comparing a decay rate against their own estimate of what they would pay needs the
# levels themselves, and reading them off a line is not the same as having them. Every
# level is printed rather than polars' default ten, so the top of the grid - the level
# that decides whether the curve reaches zero inside it - is never the row that is
# elided.

# %% tags=["results"]
if cost_df.is_empty():
    print("No cost sensitivity data in registry")
else:
    with pl.Config(tbl_rows=cost_df.height):
        print(cost_df.sort("allocator", "cost_bps"))

# %%
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

if not cost_df.is_empty():
    fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(10, 4))

    for alloc in cost_df["allocator"].unique().sort().to_list():
        subset = cost_df.filter(pl.col("allocator") == alloc).sort("cost_bps")
        ax.plot(subset["cost_bps"].to_list(), subset["sharpe"].to_list(), marker="o", label=alloc)

    ax.axhline(0, color=COLORS["recede"], linestyle="--", alpha=0.7)
    # The declared level, so the reader can see which part of the curve the rest of
    # the case study was run on and which part is the counterfactual.
    declared_bps = bt_config.commission_bps + bt_config.slippage_bps
    ax.axvline(declared_bps, color=COLORS["amber"], linestyle=":", alpha=0.8)
    ax.annotate(
        "declared",
        xy=(declared_bps, ax.get_ylim()[0]),
        xytext=(4, 6),
        textcoords="offset points",
        fontsize=8,
        color=COLORS["amber"],
    )
    ax.set_xlabel("Commission plus slippage charged per leg (bps)")
    ax.set_ylabel("Sharpe, net of the charge")
    add_message_title(
        ax,
        "No level in the 50 bps grid turns the edge negative",
        subtitle="Validation months; the strategy is unchanged, only what it pays to trade",
    )
    ax.legend(frameon=False)
    # No tight_layout(): matplotlibrc sets `figure.constrained_layout.use: True` repo-wide,
    # and calling tight_layout() over it makes matplotlib switch layout engines and say so in
    # a stderr block under the figure.
    show_with_alt(
        fig,
        "Line chart of validation Sharpe against the total commission and slippage "
        "charged per leg, from zero to fifty basis points. The line starts just under "
        "3.66 and falls almost straight to about 3.36 at the right edge, staying far "
        "above the dashed zero reference across the whole grid. A dotted vertical "
        "marker near the left shows the cost level the rest of the case study was "
        "charged at, with most of the swept range lying to its right.",
    )

# %% [markdown]
# ## What this notebook establishes, and what it does not
#
# The curve is a statement about one strategy, not about the surface. It re-runs the
# single highest-Sharpe validation run at each cost level, so it answers how *that*
# result would have moved had execution been priced differently. It does not say
# whether a different strategy would have been chosen under a different cost
# assumption, which is a larger question: the selection that produced this run was
# itself made on results charged at the declared level.
#
# The height of the curve carries the selection of every stage before it and should
# not be read as an estimate of what the strategy would earn. The slope is the part
# that is this notebook's own, and it is what the strategy analysis notebook uses.
#
# These are validation months throughout. Nothing here reads or selects on the holdout
# period, which stays untouched until the strategy analysis notebook.
#
# **Next:** [`15_holdout_predictions`](15_holdout_predictions.ipynb), which refits the
# configuration swept above on the history before the holdout window;
# [`16_holdout_backtest`](16_holdout_backtest.ipynb) trades it, and
# [`17_strategy_analysis`](17_strategy_analysis.ipynb) reads this sweep back alongside the
# holdout. Risk management is no longer next: it ran before this notebook, and its result
# is one of the stages the selection above drew from.

```