The best indicator for Clean Energy (ICLN)
We backtested 382 indicators across daily, weekly and hourly charts on real Clean Energy (ICLN) history. Here's what actually worked — risk-adjusted over the full backtest, with costs, and checked out-of-sample.
Where Clean Energy (ICLN) stands
Computed from our own daily OHLCV history, not quoted from a third party. Moving averages use closing prices; "52-week" is the last 252 trading sessions.
FRAMA 100 Trend
On the weekly chart, this is the strongest risk-adjusted edge we found for Clean Energy (ICLN) over ~18.3 years — beating buy-and-hold by 14.6% CAGR.
Clean Energy (ICLN) on the weekly chart
The timeframe our backtest found best for this asset. The chart is live market data; the results above are hypothetical and historical.
Chart by TradingView. Loading it contacts tradingview.com, which may set its own cookies — see our privacy policy.
Best multi-indicator combo
Going long only when all 2 agree was the strongest confluence setup we found for Clean Energy (ICLN) — beating buy-and-hold by 9.1% CAGR, out-of-sample. Fewer, higher-conviction trades than any single indicator.
The winner on each chart
Every indicator, ranked
Ranked by Sharpe (risk-adjusted return). Hypothetical, fees included.
| # | Indicator | TF | CAGR | Sharpe | Max DD | Win | Trades | vs B&H |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FRAMA 100 Trend ✓ | Weekly | 10.7% | 0.71 | -45.2% | 39.7% | 63 | 14.6% |
| 2 | Impulse MACD | Weekly | 6.6% | 0.56 | -32.2% | 66.7% | 33 | 10.4% |
| 3 | Std Error Channel ✓ | Daily | 8.5% | 0.55 | -32.0% | 37.8% | 164 | 12.6% |
| 4 | Jurik MA (approx.) ✓ | Weekly | 8.3% | 0.55 | -24.9% | 45.8% | 83 | 12.2% |
| 5 | VuManChu Cipher B ✓ | Weekly | 6.1% | 0.55 | -31.1% | 53.3% | 30 | 10.0% |
| 6 | Geometric MA ✓ | Daily | 8.1% | 0.53 | -33.8% | 41.5% | 207 | 12.2% |
| 7 | ADX / DMI ✓ | Weekly | 7.3% | 0.52 | -40.1% | 55.6% | 18 | 11.1% |
| 8 | Ehlers TrendFlex | Daily | 8.1% | 0.51 | -41.3% | 43.3% | 90 | 12.2% |
| 9 | Ehlers Stochastic ✓ | Daily | 8.2% | 0.5 | -37.0% | 43.7% | 103 | 12.3% |
| 10 | Perfect Trend Line ✓ | Weekly | 8.0% | 0.5 | -42.9% | 48.6% | 105 | 11.8% |
| 11 | STARC Bands ✓ | Daily | 5.7% | 0.49 | -37.4% | 48.0% | 75 | 9.8% |
| 12 | Rainbow MA ✓ | Weekly | 7.7% | 0.49 | -43.0% | 43.7% | 103 | 11.6% |
| 13 | Vortex | Daily | 7.7% | 0.48 | -38.0% | 38.0% | 216 | 11.8% |
| 14 | Hull Suite ✓ | Daily | 7.7% | 0.48 | -35.5% | 45.5% | 99 | 11.9% |
✓ = held up out-of-sample. Hypothetical, costs included. See methodology.
The question doesn't apply here. Buy-and-hold on Clean Energy (ICLN) lost money across the out-of-sample window in 592 of 592 tests, so there is no positive benchmark to lever toward — clearing a negative bar is a much weaker claim than beating a real one, and we keep the two apart rather than counting it as a win. How we compute that
For Clean Energy (ICLN), FRAMA 100 Trend on the weekly timeframe gave the best balance of return and risk in our test. It beat buy-and-hold — but remember: this is a hypothetical backtest of a standard rule, not a recommendation. Markets change. See the methodology and disclaimer.
More etf
Get alerted when Clean Energy’s signal flips
We track Clean Energy daily. Its backtested best indicator, FRAMA 100 Trend (Weekly), is flat right now — we'll email you the moment that changes. Free, no spam, unsubscribe any time.