Are there thoughts about changing simulator to accommodate this in future releases? Would this be a major coding, organizational quagmire? Are there third party Money mgmt programs that can work with WL for this purpose? e.g. Compuvision for Metastock http://www.compuvision.com.au/TradeSim.htm

Just for reference, I recall this concept was discussed in the past:

Cone- Pulled this off the web re another back tester.....What does this mean and does Wealth Lab meet this same criteria as far has being just as robust, etc?

When it comes to sudden innovations that lead to major overhaul, it boils down to bang for the buck.

I should have referenced that thread. I take it then by your response such is not in the cards. I'm still unclear why such a facility is not important enough for practical consideration.

It's bang for the buck.

Backtesting is about approximation, and the proposed kind of approximation might come in costly in implemenation. However, it's touched in the thread.

Thanks Eugene. I believe Bruce provided an eloquent explanation so I defer to his argument. I think that I understand what you are describing and where you are coming from.

Nonetheless, it makes sense to submit the idea to the developers for review.

Again, this is a major redesign, and will never be in Version 5. We'll submit the idea for Version 6 though.

In so many ways, I really enjoy the way WL has been evolving. Of course you guys, your work and attention are a major part of the " big picture" for WL. I'm happy to know that this idea will be considered for future design and forwarded to Fidelity.

BTW: If you were to guess, how much time would such a major re design take? Does the idea get submitted for approval from a board or an individual?

Seems as per Eugene's sentiment, there is that old "bang for the buck" factor involved. If most users don't even understand the basic premise of this concept, perhaps developers wouldn't see the merit of budgeting for costs for development, documentation, bugs, tutorials and not to mention the extra work you guys would have fielding questions, issues and tickets.

All that must be difficult to sort through, even if from a users perspective you happen agree with Bruce and I. Guess the only additional thing I can add is that competition might warrant it's consideration.