jgrusewski 2af8e02fd8 feat(alpha): Phase E.3 composition backtest — reveals slot 543 needs consumption
Phase E.3 Task 23. Trains the Phase E execution-policy DQN on the first
80% of fxcache snapshots, then evaluates the frozen policy (ε=0) on the
held-out 20% across a transaction-cost sweep. Compares absolute Sharpe
vs the Phase 1d.4 always-market-when-confident baseline.

Pipeline pieces:
  - Shared loaders extracted into crates/ml/src/env/loaders.rs (used by
    both alpha_dqn_h600_smoke and alpha_compose_backtest)
  - alpha_compose_backtest.rs: train DQN on first n_train bars, then
    frozen-eval n_eval episodes per cost level
  - cost grid: [0.0, 0.0625, 0.125, 0.25, 0.5] (price units per
    contract round-turn)
  - Annualised Sharpe via per-episode Sharpe × sqrt(episodes/year)
    where episodes/year ≈ 252 · 6.5h · 3600s / (horizon · 12s)

Run (horizon=600, 1000 train ep, 500 eval ep/cost, 1.5M snapshots):

  cost     n_ep    mean_R    std_R   Sharpe/ep   Sharpe_ann   win_rate
  0.0000    500    -11.09     8.03    -1.380       -39.50      0.090
  0.0625    500    -20.68     9.88    -2.093       -59.89      0.012
  0.1250    500    -29.38     9.49    -3.095       -88.58      0.000
  0.2500    500    -48.23    11.90    -4.052      -115.98      0.000
  0.5000    500    -84.59    17.43    -4.854      -138.92      0.000

Phase 1d.4 baseline for comparison: +4.4 ann. at cost=0, -4.0 at half-tick.

The Phase E policy LOSES MONEY across the whole cost grid — even at
frictionless cost=0. This is not a contradiction with the H=600 PASS
verdict (rvr=+1.04σ): the smoke's rvr is RELATIVE TO RANDOM, while
backtest Sharpe is ABSOLUTE. "Better than random by 1 std" is still
losing if random loses big.

The diagnostic that the E.2 controller already surfaced:

  ISV[543] STACKER_THRESHOLD saturated at upper clamp (0.5) — policy
  trades 85% of the time vs the 8% target. Over-trading pays spread on
  every bar regardless of alpha confidence. Even with perfect alpha
  (Phase 1d.3 AUC=0.673), trading 85% × spread cost > alpha edge.

  The Phase 1d.4 baseline beats us at cost=0 because it WAITS unless
  |stacker_logit| > threshold — the threshold gate filters bars with
  weak alpha signal. The Phase E controller PRODUCES slot 543 but the
  DQN's action selection doesn't CONSUME it.

This is exactly what the E.3 backtest is FOR: revealing that the
Phase E.1/E.2 producer-side architecture without consumer-side gating
is incomplete. The composition backtest validates the architecture's
weak link.

NEXT (E.3 task 24-28 or a side fix): wire slot 543 consumption into
the action selection. At each step:

  if |ISV[543] − 0.5| > |stacker_logit − 0.5|:
      action = Wait  // confidence below threshold, sit out
  else:
      action = argmax(Q)

Or equivalently: action = if confidence_high(alpha_logit, ISV[543])
{ argmax(Q) over Buy/Sell actions } else { Wait }.

Once slot 543 is consumed, re-run alpha_compose_backtest and expect
Sharpe to move toward / past the Phase 1d.4 baseline.

Loader refactor: extracted load_fill_model_from_json, load_alpha_cache,
load_snapshots_from_fxcache from alpha_dqn_h600_smoke.rs into
crates/ml/src/env/loaders.rs. The smoke now calls the shared module
via ml::env::loaders::*. ~150 lines of duplicated code removed.

Build + run verified: smoke still builds clean. Backtest runs in ~30s
(train 8s + eval 20s + setup).

Branch: sp20-aux-h-fixed, pushed.
2026-05-15 17:59:28 +02:00

Foxhunt

Production HFT trading system in Rust.

Architecture

The workspace contains 32 crates organized as follows:

Core Libraries (16)

Crate Purpose
trading_engine Order processing, FIX 4.4, IB TWS, SIMD, RDTSC timing
risk VaR, Kelly, circuit breakers, kill switches, compliance
risk-data Risk data types and shared structures
trading-data Trading data types
ml DQN Rainbow, PPO, TFT, Mamba2, ensemble inference
ml-data ML data types and feature definitions
data Market data ingestion and storage
backtesting Replay engine, strategy tester
adaptive-strategy Ensemble execution, microstructure analysis
common Shared types, resilience, error handling
storage S3 and local model storage
model_loader Model serialization and loading
market-data Market data feed handlers
database PostgreSQL access layer (SQLx)
config Configuration management
tli CLI commands and tooling

Services (8)

Service Purpose
backtesting_service gRPC backtesting service
broker_gateway_service FIX routing, broker connectivity
trading_service Core trading operations
ml_training_service Model training orchestration
data_acquisition_service Market data acquisition
trading_agent_service Autonomous trading agents
api_gateway gRPC API gateway with auth
web-gateway Axum REST + WebSocket gateway

Frontend

web-dashboard/ -- React 19 + TypeScript + Vite + TradingView charts.

Building

# Check compilation (no PostgreSQL required)
SQLX_OFFLINE=true cargo check --workspace

# Run tests for a specific crate
SQLX_OFFLINE=true cargo test -p <crate> --lib

# Clippy
SQLX_OFFLINE=true cargo clippy --workspace

ML Models

Four production model architectures on Candle v0.9.1 with CUDA:

  • DQN Rainbow -- Deep Q-Network with prioritized replay, dueling heads, noisy nets
  • PPO -- Proximal Policy Optimization with GAE and LSTM policies
  • TFT -- Temporal Fusion Transformer for multi-horizon forecasting
  • Mamba2 -- State space model for sequence prediction

Each model has a standalone trainer and a UnifiedTrainable adapter for the hyperopt pipeline.

Infrastructure

  • Git: Gitea at git.fxhnt.ai (Tailscale-only), Scaleway DEV1-S
  • Observability: OpenTelemetry OTLP (env OTEL_EXPORTER_OTLP_ENDPOINT)
  • Database: PostgreSQL with SQLx offline mode for CI

License

Proprietary. All rights reserved.

Description
No description provided
Readme 849 MiB
Languages
Rust 88.2%
Cuda 7.7%
Python 1.3%
Shell 1.1%
PLpgSQL 0.8%
Other 0.8%