Which tools had the biggest impact?

Automated data refresh (saved 3 hours/day) and shared factor library (prevented duplication).

How did you ensure code quality?

Type hints, unit tests, and peer review for all library contributions.

How does this case study work?

Raise a request, talk to experts, fund the project, expert works, review and approve payment. All remote, all through our platform.

Supporting Small Systematic Trading Teams

Executive Summary

A 5-person quant team spent 70% of time on data wrangling. Junior quants built automated data pipelines, reusable analysis libraries, and internal tools that reduced non-research work to 20%, enabling 5x strategy output with the same headcount.

Key Outcomes

▹ 70% → 20% time on non-research tasks
▹ 5x increase in strategy prototypes tested
▹ 3 strategies deployed to production

Client Situation

Senior researchers spent hours cleaning data and writing boilerplate code instead of discovering alpha.

Key Challenges

⚠ Data cleaning consuming 70% of researcher time
⚠ Duplicate analysis across team members
⚠ No shared library for common calculations

Existing Architecture

Each researcher maintained personal Jupyter notebooks. Data downloaded manually from Bloomberg terminal.

No shared code = duplicated work
Manual data refresh delays analysis
Results difficult to reproduce

Solution Design

Shared Python library for data access and common calculations, plus automated reporting dashboards.

Key Decisions

✓ Centralized data warehouse with daily refresh
✓ Internal PyPI package for reusable quant functions
✓ Streamlit dashboards for automated reporting

PythonSQLStreamlitDockerGitHub Actions

Implementation

Built tools incrementally based on researcher pain points, adding features weekly.

Phase 1: Phase 1: Data Automation
Automated data ingestion from Bloomberg and alternative data vendors.
Phase 2: Phase 2: Shared Library
Created internal PyPI package for factor calculations, risk metrics, and backtesting utilities.
Phase 3: Phase 3: Dashboards
Built self-service dashboards for performance monitoring and trade analysis.

Technical Challenges

Balancing flexibility vs standardization

Impact: Overly rigid library rejected by researchers

Resolution: Modular design with sensible defaults + escape hatches

Data access permissions

Impact: Researchers couldn't see each other's derived datasets

Resolution: Centralized warehouse with role-based access control

Results

Non-research task time: Before70%
After20%
Improvement71% reduction
Strategies prototyped per month: Before5
After25
Improvement5x increase
Time from idea to backtest: Before3 days
After4 hours
Improvement94% reduction

Lessons Learned

📘 Researchers adopted tools faster when they could contribute code
📘 Automated testing prevented regression in shared library
📘 Documentation reduced onboarding time for new researchers

What We Would Do Differently

💡 Implement automated code review for library contributions
💡 Add data catalog for easier discovery

Role Relevance

Junior quants with both research and engineering skills built tools that amplified the whole team's productivity, not just their own.

Critical Skills Demonstrated

Python library developmentData pipeline automationInternal tool buildingResearcher workflow optimization

Frequently Asked Questions

Which tools had the biggest impact?: Automated data refresh (saved 3 hours/day) and shared factor library (prevented duplication).
How did you ensure code quality?: Type hints, unit tests, and peer review for all library contributions.