Getting NA's in ranking system, why?

Research
1

Hi,

I/m testing a P123 ranking system (ETF Rotation conservative) and I get NA’s for some weights. Playing around with dates, I get one column with NA’s and with other dates I get another column with NA’s but I can never find a date that all weights have values.

Is this the correct functioning?

https://www.portfolio123.com/app/ranking-system/88102

Thanks.

2

It seems to work for me. What ETF Universe are you using?
Steve

3

AXJL EDV EWJ GLD IEV ILF IWM SHY SPY

Do you think its related to these etfs?

4

I can confirm its not the etf list. I tried a few other lists and even All Etfs as a list with todays date and I get 3 NA’s (see screenshot).

5

Yes I see that. I thought you were seeing N/As displayed in one of the other columns.

I believe you are seeing a bug - at least it deserves an explanation from P123 as to what the “N/As” column means. I don’t believe it is affecting your rankings.

Steve

6

Thats what I was hoping, but I noticed that changing that date changes the NA column data and the final ranking is always the value of the only showing column that has data.

I’m not sure if this is because the ranking system in particular is tied to the fact that the market is up therefore down market factors are NA and vice versa its in up market therefore down market is in NA.

I hope Marco or someone else catches this thread and writes a line.

Thanks!

7

This is where you are losing me. “but I noticed that changing that date changes the NA column data and the final ranking is always the value of the only showing column that has data.”

What you mean to say is every column has the same data… making it likely that all data is N/A?

OK - it is the way the nodes are written. There are conditions Eval(… up market …, xx, N/A) so that if it is not an up market then N/As are generated.

Steve

8

Steve, now I understand.

On your comment I went to study the eval() expression and now I understand. It’s done on purpose: if the conditions are correct for up market then it uses the up market expression and sets the other to NA so in theory it should NEVER be both up and down.

Thanks!