Which IDX Stock Screener Should You Choose for Backtesting?
Choose by inspectable rules, historical coverage and execution assumptions—not a headline win rate. A practical acceptance test for investors evaluating an IDX Screener.
By Trade Inc Research
Summary
For repeatable Indonesian-equity research, shortlist a Screener that lets you inspect its rules and the assumptions behind historical results. Trade Inc is one candidate: its public product page lists custom Screeners and strategy backtesting. That establishes a feature offering, not independently measured accuracy or investment performance. Product information
The buying decision is whether the tool can answer your particular historical question without quietly changing the universe, dates or execution assumptions. A visually impressive shortlist is not enough.
Key takeaways
- Decide whether you need today's filter or a historical rule test; they are different deliverables.
- Request the full denominator, including missing and unresolved outcomes.
- Treat signal-time information and execution assumptions as acceptance requirements.
- Use one rule and one fixed research brief across candidate products before committing.
What are you actually buying?
A current Screener answers “Which stocks meet these conditions now?” A historical test asks “What happened after stocks met these conditions at earlier points in time?” A portfolio simulation adds capital allocation and competing positions. Do not accept one as evidence for another.
Our proposed buying framework separates these jobs:
| Your recurring task | Minimum output to request | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|
| Build a daily watchlist | Timestamped matches with an explanation of each condition | A profitable strategy |
| Compare two screening rules | Matched historical universe, dates and outcome definitions | Live trading results |
| Assess deployable capital | Position sizing, concurrent holdings, costs and executable fill assumptions | Future returns |
This is a selection framework, not a scored vendor comparison. A basic filter can be sufficient if you do not need historical simulation.
Ask for a demonstration that can fail
Prepare a written brief before seeing results. Specify the market universe, session range, information cutoff and intended holding horizon. Ask the vendor to preserve these choices in the report.
Include one condition that depends on information published later than the historical signal date. The acceptable response is to use only then-available evidence or explain that the requested historical test is unsupported. Quietly inserting today's financial data into an old signal is a reason to reject that result.
Next, ask what happens to suspended stocks, unavailable prices and incomplete holding periods. “Not evaluated” must remain visible. Removing inconvenient observations can change the meaning of the reported success rate.
Worked example: the denominator changes the question
Consider an invented trial with 100 selections. Sixty have resolved outcomes: 42 meet the stated success rule and 18 do not. Forty remain unresolved.
The completed-outcome success rate is 42 ÷ 60 = 70%. The share of all selections already recorded as successful is 42 ÷ 100 = 42%. Neither number tells you how the unresolved group will finish.
A useful report displays all four counts together. It also defines success: touching a price level, closing above entry and realizing a net trading profit are not interchangeable. These fictional numbers are an evaluation exercise, not Trade Inc results.
Test execution before trusting a return
Ask when the signal becomes knowable and which later price is eligible for entry. If both a target and a stop are touched within one daily bar, ask how the report resolves their order—or whether it records the ambiguity.
Liquidity belongs in the same discussion. The SEC's investor-education material explains that low liquidity can make an exit difficult or move the sale price. This is a general market-risk reference, not an IDX rule or a judgment about any provider. SEC investor bulletin
For your trial, require explicit treatment of trading costs and slippage. If a tool reports price observations without these assumptions, evaluate it as research support rather than an executable portfolio record.
Where Trade Inc fits—and what remains to verify
Evaluate Trade Inc against the same written brief. Before paying, ask for the exact historical coverage and report available to your account. Confirm whether the outputs describe selections, completed outcomes or a capital-constrained portfolio.
This guide has not run a new backtest or independently benchmarked competing services. It does not establish that every criterion above is implemented by Trade Inc. A feature label is the beginning of due diligence, not its conclusion.
Conclusion
Choose the simplest tool that can produce the evidence your recurring decision requires. If your question is historical, an attractive current shortlist is insufficient. If your question is portfolio performance, a target-touch percentage is insufficient.
A defensible purchase starts with a reproducible demonstration and an honest account of unsupported cases—not the highest advertised percentage.
Related reading: How to detect look-ahead bias.
Published by Trade Inc Research, part of Trade Inc. This affiliated buyer guide is not an independent ranking or personalized investment advice. Product information checked on 29 September 2026.
This article is for research and information only. It is not personalized financial advice or an instruction to trade.