The best indicator for Financials (VFH)
We backtested 382 indicators across daily, weekly and hourly charts on real Financials (VFH) history. Here's what actually worked — risk-adjusted over the full backtest, with costs, and checked out-of-sample.
Where Financials (VFH) 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.
EMA 8/21 Cross
On the weekly chart, this is the strongest risk-adjusted edge we found for Financials (VFH) over ~22.8 years — beating buy-and-hold by 1.2% CAGR.
Financials (VFH) 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 Financials (VFH) — trailing buy-and-hold by 3.8% 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 | EMA 8/21 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.7% | 0.6 | -25.3% | 64.7% | 17 | 1.2% |
| 2 | Ichimoku Cloud ✓ | Weekly | 7.4% | 0.6 | -26.9% | 45.5% | 22 | 0.9% |
| 3 | WMA 10/40 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.5% | 0.59 | -29.2% | 50.0% | 18 | 1.0% |
| 4 | Ichimoku TK Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.2% | 0.57 | -22.5% | 56.5% | 23 | 0.7% |
| 5 | Hull Suite ✓ | Weekly | 7.3% | 0.57 | -26.1% | 52.2% | 23 | 0.7% |
| 6 | TSI (13,7) ✓ | Weekly | 7.5% | 0.57 | -28.5% | 54.8% | 31 | 1.0% |
| 7 | EMA 20/80 Cross ✓ | Daily | 7.2% | 0.56 | -33.0% | 50.0% | 34 | 0.6% |
| 8 | DEMA 20/50 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 6.8% | 0.56 | -25.3% | 68.8% | 16 | 0.3% |
| 9 | Awesome Oscillator ✓ | Weekly | 6.9% | 0.55 | -36.4% | 60.0% | 20 | 0.4% |
| 10 | Relative Volatility Index ✓ | Weekly | 7.7% | 0.55 | -39.5% | 55.7% | 61 | 1.2% |
| 11 | MAMA / FAMA ✓ | Weekly | 6.9% | 0.55 | -26.1% | 66.7% | 21 | 0.4% |
| 12 | McGinley 30 Trend ✓ | Weekly | 8.3% | 0.55 | -29.3% | 63.6% | 22 | 1.8% |
| 13 | TRIX (9) ✓ | Weekly | 6.7% | 0.53 | -32.4% | 41.2% | 17 | 0.2% |
| 14 | Supertrend (7,3) ✓ | Weekly | 6.5% | 0.56 | -23.5% | 42.9% | 14 | -0.1% |
✓ = held up out-of-sample. Hypothetical, costs included. See methodology.
What it would take to beat buy & hold on Financials (VFH)
8 of 624 tested setups beat buy-and-hold on Financials (VFH) outright. Another 433 could get there with leverage they would survive — but 118 would be liquidated by their own drawdown before they caught it.
| Indicator | Beats B&H unlevered | Leverage needed | Leverage survived |
|---|---|---|---|
| LSMA 10/30 Cross | 1 | 1.07× | 5.22× |
| Williams %R (21) | 1 | 1.57× | 4.83× |
| CCI Trend | 1 | 2.32× | 5.1× |
| Relative Volatility Index | 1 | none needed | 3.8× |
| FRAMA 10/30 Cross | 1 | none needed | 3.91× |
| Net Volume | 1 | none needed | 3.5× |
Out-of-sample, costs included. A setup is only listed if the leverage it needs is less than the leverage its own worst drawdown survives — when it isn't, no amount of leverage gets there. Volatility drag isn't modelled, so these are the optimistic case. Every indicator, ranked this way
For Financials (VFH), EMA 8/21 Cross 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 Financials’s signal flips
We track Financials daily. Its backtested best indicator, EMA 8/21 Cross (Weekly), is long right now — we'll email you the moment that changes. Free, no spam, unsubscribe any time.