Strategy Lab
Every strategy over the same symbols and the same window, ranked against each other.
A single backtest tells you what one rule set did. It does not tell you whether that was good, because there is nothing to compare it against — a 40% return means one thing in a year the asset doubled and something very different in a year it halved.
The lab runs the whole library over one window and puts the results in a table. Same symbols, same dates, same costs, same starting balance, so the only thing that differs between two rows is the rules themselves.
It will also report how much of each result the fees took, which is usually the number that settles an argument. A strategy that trades often can look strong gross and be a losing system net, and that difference is invisible until you put the two figures side by side.
What it will do
Every strategy over the same candles and the same cost model, so the comparison is between the rules and nothing else.
What each result was before fees and slippage, and what survived them. Frequent traders lose most of their edge here, and the table makes that obvious.
A strategy that could not run — too little history, an unsupported timeframe — is listed as skipped rather than silently dropped, so an empty row is never mistaken for a bad result.
Sample size, the window tested and what that window contained. A leaderboard without those is a ranking of how well each rule fit one particular stretch of market.
Comparison is the point of this page, and also its main risk: run enough strategies against one window and the top of the table is partly luck. The walk-forward split in the backtester is what separates the two.