---
title: "Screener-backtest benchmark"
description: "The screener-backtest benchmark is the reference a screener backtest measures against, so every above-or-below figure it reports is a gap, not a raw return."
canonical_url: "https://fincanva.com/docs/screeners/screener-backtest-benchmark"
last_updated: "2026-09-17"
md_url: "https://fincanva.com/docs/screeners/screener-backtest-benchmark.md"
---

# Screener-backtest benchmark

The screener-backtest benchmark is the reference a [screener backtest](/docs/screeners/screener-backtest) measures itself against, which is why every headline figure such a backtest reports is a *gap* rather than a return: the screener's result minus the benchmark's result over the same holding horizon. A screen that averaged 10% a year in a stretch when the benchmark also averaged 10% a year showed no edge at all, even though 10% reads well on its own. Which series the benchmark is, and how it is put together, are not documented — Fincanva has not released either, so this page covers what the benchmark *does* and not what it is.

## Why is a screener's result only meaningful next to its benchmark?

Because a raw return over a long window mixes two things that a screener cannot take equal credit for: the market's own move across the period, and whatever the filters added on top of it. Over a run that spans decades the first of those dominates — most instruments rose, so most screens produce a positive number, and a positive number is therefore no evidence that the filters did anything. Subtracting the benchmark removes the shared part and leaves the part attributable to the screen, the same logic that [excess return](/docs/analysis/excess-return) applies to a strategy.

That is also why the *level* of the figure is not the finding. Two screens that both returned 12% a year are not equally good if one ran in a decade the benchmark returned 5% and the other in a decade it returned 14%.

## How does the benchmark shape the numbers you read?

In four ways, each of which changes how a verdict should be read:

- **The verdict is directional.** A screener is reported as being above the benchmark, below it, or level with it — never as a bare return.
- **Zero is a tie, not a win.** A gap of exactly zero resolves to neutral wording rather than being rounded up into a win.
- **The gap is in percentage points.** It is the difference between two percentages, so a screener at 12% against a benchmark at 9% is +3 pp — three points of annualized return above the benchmark, not "3% more".
- **There is one gap per [holding horizon](/docs/screeners/holding-horizon).** The benchmark is measured over the same set of holding horizons as the screener, so each horizon compares like with like — and a screener can be ahead at one horizon and behind at another. The benchmark is also drawn alongside the screener on the [event-time path](/docs/screeners/event-time-path), so the two can be read together rather than one at a time.

## Can I choose the benchmark for a screener backtest?

No. Unlike a strategy's [benchmark](/docs/getting-started/benchmark), which you pick per strategy from market presets or — on the plans that include them — from one of your own live portfolios, a [screener backtest](/docs/screeners/screener-backtest) arrives with its benchmark already decided: there is no benchmark control on a screener's **Backtest** tab. The practical consequence is that a screener verdict and a strategy's benchmark comparison are two different measurements, and a figure from one should not be read as if it came from the other.

## Is the verdict a statement about what my strategy will hold?

No — it is a measurement of the screener's [matches](/docs/screeners/matches) as a group. A strategy built on the same screener holds a trimmed, liquidity-ranked slice of those matches (see [max-symbols cap](/docs/screeners/max-symbols-cap)) and applies its own allocation, exit rules, and costs on top, so its result is a different quantity from the screener's verdict. Fincanva does not tell you whether a verdict is good enough to act on — see [Is this financial advice?](/docs/investing-theory/is-this-financial-advice).

## Defaults in Fincanva

- Every screener-backtest figure labelled above or below the benchmark is a comparison, not an absolute return measured from zero.
- The comparison is a difference between two annualized figures, so it is read in percentage points.
- A gap of zero is reported as level with the benchmark rather than as an outperformance.
- The benchmark covers the same period and the same holding horizons as the screener, so both sides move when new market data arrives and the backtest is re-run (see [screener execution and caching](/docs/screeners/screener-execution-and-caching)).
- The benchmark cannot be selected, changed, or switched off for a screener backtest.
- Not every figure in a screener backtest is a gap against this benchmark: the per-filter impact table mixes a raw return with two deltas measured against other filter sets — see [filter impact lenses](/docs/screeners/filter-impact-lenses).

## Worked example

At the 12-month holding horizon a screener's matches averaged +10.8% annualized, while the benchmark averaged +7.8% over the same horizon. The verdict is the difference: **+3.0 pp annualized above the benchmark at 12 months**.

The same run at the 1-month horizon tells a different story — the screener averaged +9.4% against the benchmark's +10.0%, a gap of **−0.6 pp**, so at that horizon the screen was behind. One screener, one run, two horizons, opposite signs. Note what the two absolute figures (+10.8% and +9.4%) cannot tell you on their own: both are solidly positive, yet one horizon beat its benchmark and the other did not. The level says how the period went; only the gap says what the screen contributed to it.

*Backtests show what would have happened — not what will. Fincanva provides no financial advice — see [Is this financial advice?](/docs/investing-theory/is-this-financial-advice).*