Want to make money with data? First, understand these four steps.
In the crypto market, quantitative trading relies on prediction signals as your weapon. But the truth is: most people's strategies collapse as soon as they go live, and the problem is often not the complexity of the model, but the lack of proper preparation beforehand.
Data preparation, feature engineering, machine learning modeling, and ensemble configuration—these four stages are indispensable. Many people only focus on stacking algorithms and applying the latest models, unaware that 70% of failures stem from the fundamental stages of data and features.
What exactly should you do? There’s a lot to handle in data processing: cleaning, alignment, denoising. Market data itself is full of noise, with a very low signal-to-noise ratio. Feature engineering is even more critical—how to extract predictive signals from raw data? This requires understanding both financial logic and technical details.
Different model families excel at different tasks during the modeling phase. Some are suitable for capturing linear relationships, while others excel at nonlinear patterns. Choosing the wrong one means that even the most refined parameter tuning is useless. The final ensemble configuration involves organizing multiple signals to improve overall signal purity.
A key insight: don’t just focus on total return prediction, but break down the sources of returns and model specific signals. Predictions based on this approach are more robust and interpretable.
For quantitative researchers, this methodology is worth serious study. Understanding the logic and technical details of these four stages is the foundation for building long-term, usable quantitative strategies.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
CryptoPhoenix
· 22h ago
70% die on data, this hits home. Another story of "foundation determines height," it really wears me out [laugh-cry]
---
Stacking models to think you can sit back and earn passively? Dream on, brother. In the end, you still have to go back to the most boring task: data cleaning.
---
Recalling last year's collapsing strategy, we were in such a rush to launch that the signal-to-noise ratio was outrageously high. Reading this now feels a bit painful.
---
Feature engineering is truly an esoteric skill; extracting gold from garbage data is the real talent, isn't it?
---
The bottom zone is brewing opportunities. I suggest mastering the four basic steps first—don't rush to make money. Learn how to survive first.
---
A quant trader's path to self-redemption is: from superstition in algorithms → back to data cleaning → rebirth. I've gone through this cycle more than once [bitter smile].
---
Faith + data processing are the true weapons to cycle through periods. Having dreams alone isn't enough; you need solid skills.
View OriginalReply0
MEVHunterWang
· 22h ago
70% of failures come from the basics? Then my previous model was a waste of effort haha
---
Data cleaning is really a one-person job that can take a month, no exaggeration
---
Reminds me of that friend who brags about their neural network every day, but all the data is garbage—garbage in, garbage out
---
The low signal-to-noise ratio really hits home; the market itself is noise
---
Feature engineering is the real craftsmanship; anyone can stack algorithms
---
The combination configuration part is interesting, but running it in real trading is another story
---
Feels like most people are still complicating things for the sake of complexity
---
Breaking down the sources of returns is a good idea; it's much more reliable than just looking at total returns
---
Looks simple, but in practice, it's hellish, everyone
---
Choosing the wrong model really can't be saved; lesson learned
View OriginalReply0
AirdropJunkie
· 01-08 05:27
70% of failures are due to data features... Doesn't that mean the foundation wasn't solid? It feels like many people have fallen into this trap.
With both large models and non-linearity, the result still comes back to the most basic work. Feeling a bit hopeless.
View OriginalReply0
ApeEscapeArtist
· 01-07 20:52
70% of failures are in the fundamentals? Then doesn't that mean my previous strategy died unjustly...
---
Data cleaning really is a headache. Are there any recommended tools?
---
It's the feature engineering again. Every time it's this hurdle, and it feels like no one really explains how to do it clearly.
---
Choosing a model is basically gambling. Whether it's linear or nonlinear, I feel uneasy about both choices.
---
The phrase "low signal-to-noise ratio" hits too close to home. The market itself is deceiving you.
---
After half a year of quantitative trading, I realized 70% of the time should be spent on data? That's mind-blowing.
---
How can I avoid detours when configuring a portfolio?
---
Don't just focus on returns? I'll just focus on losses directly, and that'll be enough.
---
Needing to understand both finance and technology at the same time, my brain can't handle it.
---
Tuning parameters is all for nothing, this is harsh... I spent two months tuning before.
View OriginalReply0
TokenStorm
· 01-07 20:50
70% of failures are due to data and features. It sounds good, but the reality is that any strategy that has been backtested can make money; once launched, it becomes a slaughterhouse.
How did I not think of that? Turns out, I was losing money because my data wasn't cleaned properly, not because my model itself had issues, haha.
Another "Master these four steps to get rich" type of copy. I bet the author’s strategy with five ETH didn't beat the market either.
I agree that the signal-to-noise ratio is extremely low; on-chain data is ridiculously noisy. But who makes us love to gamble?
Feature engineering is the real skill, but honestly, 99% of people, including myself, just can't do it well.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityHunter
· 01-07 20:47
70% of failures are due to basic work, wake up everyone
Data cleaning is really nobody's favorite task, but not doing it is a dead end
Feature engineering is the real art, not something that can be solved by stacking models
Another article that sounds right but is extremely difficult to implement
Most people are still tuning parameters, unaware that they've already lost at the starting line
These four steps sound simple, but the pitfalls are in the details
After working in quantitative analysis for so long, the biggest fear is garbage data, no matter how smart the model is, it will produce garbage
The signal-to-noise ratio is easy to talk about, but few have truly handled it well
Modeling is just the tip of the iceberg; the early-stage work is the real grind
View OriginalReply0
metaverse_hermit
· 01-07 20:34
70% of failures are due to data and features? I knew that long ago. The problem is that most people simply don't want to admit it.
This theory sounds plausible, but very few people are truly willing to stick to solidifying the fundamentals.
Data cleaning can really wear you out, but since you're doing quantitative work, you have to accept this reality.
Want to make money with data? First, understand these four steps.
In the crypto market, quantitative trading relies on prediction signals as your weapon. But the truth is: most people's strategies collapse as soon as they go live, and the problem is often not the complexity of the model, but the lack of proper preparation beforehand.
Data preparation, feature engineering, machine learning modeling, and ensemble configuration—these four stages are indispensable. Many people only focus on stacking algorithms and applying the latest models, unaware that 70% of failures stem from the fundamental stages of data and features.
What exactly should you do? There’s a lot to handle in data processing: cleaning, alignment, denoising. Market data itself is full of noise, with a very low signal-to-noise ratio. Feature engineering is even more critical—how to extract predictive signals from raw data? This requires understanding both financial logic and technical details.
Different model families excel at different tasks during the modeling phase. Some are suitable for capturing linear relationships, while others excel at nonlinear patterns. Choosing the wrong one means that even the most refined parameter tuning is useless. The final ensemble configuration involves organizing multiple signals to improve overall signal purity.
A key insight: don’t just focus on total return prediction, but break down the sources of returns and model specific signals. Predictions based on this approach are more robust and interpretable.
For quantitative researchers, this methodology is worth serious study. Understanding the logic and technical details of these four stages is the foundation for building long-term, usable quantitative strategies.