To the point: We are proposing to eliminate infrequently traded funds from the screener. By this we mean those funds that trade less than 8 or 9 days out of 10 over the past 3 months or so. Exact rules are yet to be determined.
Why: There are numerous reasons for this. First, those funds aren’t going to be touched by many of you anyway, and they are a nuisance to filter through. Besides that, the number of these funds has grown through the years with the saturation of the ETF market with niche funds. This has become obvious as we have added data to our database and run some test screens against it. What has also become obvious is that some screen results benefit from these funds being included when in actuality they are not tradeable. We feel it is in everyone’s best interest to make some type of change.
Another issue this would eliminate is the difference in screen results intra-day and after the close. With the current methodology the extremely low-volume funds are not updated intra-day so they do not show up in screen results.  After the close they are pulled in and can change screen results and backtest results as well. Our proposal would be to use the same filter for intra-day updates as is used in the screener.
The common approach would be to use a volume based filter, but after much study we found there are several low volume but consistently traded funds that might could be traded by a small trader. Inversely, we found there are several funds that show relatively decent average volume but trade sporadically. They just seem to trade large volumes when they trade.
We are considering making this change soon but want to give you, our users, an opportunity to comment on the direction we are headed. Please let us know your thoughts.
Several have inquired as to the additional data being added to our backtesting application and the inclusion of a premium subscription service. We’re targeting a couple of weeks from now and are adding data back to at least 2002 and probably 2001. This will provide looks into several differing market types, but users will need to watch the funds they include in their screens because there weren’t that many ETFs in 2001 ( less than 100 on Jan 1 of that year ). We should also remind everyone that the current 5-years of data will remain subscription-free after these changes.
Another ‘usability’ enhancement we have lined up as part of our Premium Access package is in-page charts. These are still being tweaked, but you can now see them in action on your portfolios. Personally, I find it a much faster way to quickly review my various portfolios. If you don’t have a portfolio set up you can try it out on my Euro Players portfolio. Look for the 
image by the fund names.
Please share your thoughts.
Not an issue for me. I only screen with high volume funds for the reason you cite: non-tradeable funds skew backtest results with returns that cannot be achieved. Thanks for the continued site improvements and features.
Ditto. Love the “way back” capabilities and the pop up charts on performance page. I really appreciate the efforts to improve and add useful functionality.
I appreciate the feedback. We don’t foresee this affecting many users but also don’t want to make a change like this without providing an opportunity for input. – Hugh
I agree with removing the low volume ETFs also. I don’t see a need to go back to 2001, but it would be nice if we could fix a start and end date. That would make it easier to run multiple models over time. Currently, dates fall off and new ones are added. This makes it tricky to compare what you made last month to this month. Also, I would love to see a daily trading option.
One and Three day trading intervals are included in the upcoming release. The default backtest period will be 5 years like now, but the user will be able to specify a start date of their choice. The current implementation always ends at the current ending date, but we will be adding some alternatives this area.
– Hugh
I agree with removing funds which show zero volumes on several days per month. It’s a good idea which will make a great site even better, in my view.
1. Put the most RECENT post FIRST, not last. Why should anyone waste time scrolling to the bottom to lear a post? Also, as this is my first post, it took me 15 minutes to find WHERE to post (ie, at the bottom).
2. RE: Screener changes, concur with your suggestions.
3. SUGGESTION: ability to screen RSI 2 setting for ETFs (including leveraged)
Hi, I ran a model using 1 month rebalance. Today’s date is 9/29. Why does the most recent cycle stop only at 9/18? Thx.
Apparently we had a problem with our update routines which has now been fixed. Thanks for pointing it out. I had checked Sat. morning and it looked like everything was running. I didn’t get back to it until this morning and the routines had not run completely. You should be able to run models through 9/28 at this point. Generally the models are run through the most recent Friday, or end of week. – Hugh