Evaluating Structured Strategy Backtests: Peer Benchmarks, Regime Timing, and Live Performance

Institutional allocators often evaluate structured strategies on the basis of marketed backtests -- hypothetical track records constructed by applying a strategy's rules to historical data prior to any live trading, also referred to as pro-forma performance. It is unclear how much of that signal survives once the strategy is actually traded. Using 1,726 commercially distributed structured strategies from ten global institutions, this paper shows that raw pro-forma performance has only limited portability into the live period and weakens sharply once live outcomes are measured relative to peer and external benchmarks. The evidence indicates that marketed backtests predominantly reflect the common factor regime present before launch rather than strategy-specific skill. Strategies launched after unusually strong bucket-factor conditions experience materially worse subsequent deterioration. For allocators, the implication is practical: backtests should be judged relative to appropriate peer benchmarks, and the discount applied to them should increase when launch occurs after an extreme factor run.