I have experimented extensively with glider and rubber power canards. They are just as capable of all aerobatic maneuvers as a normal tractor layout aircraft, if the CG is correct.

For a fully aerobatic canard, I, too, would start with 0-0-0. incidence and thrust. CG can be determined by building a simple cardboard hand-launched glider with adjustable elevators on the canard. I designed a canard pusher fully aerobatic pattern model for .60 power, which needed some sweepback to get the CG right.

Finished the detail drawings, but never built it. All models eventually crash if you fly them enough, and even a low-speed crash with a canard could be non-repairable, since the heavy parts tend to be rearward. On their path to terra firma during a crash, they will tend to demolish the canard and the front of the fuselage.

Having no control surface are in the propwash to counter torque, canards cannot hover, and torque reaction is much heavier than with a tractor.

My calculations and experiments indicated that its performance would be no better than with a normal tractor layout, and, also, pusher engines tend to overheat. In retrospect, there appeared to be no advantage, except for its startling visual impact at the field.