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, out-of-sample, with costs.
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 ~22.4 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% | 0.59 | -25.4% | 62.5% | 16 | 1.2% |
| 2 | DEMA 20/50 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.2% | 0.59 | -25.7% | 66.7% | 15 | 0.7% |
| 3 | Ichimoku Cloud ✓ | Weekly | 7.4% | 0.59 | -26.9% | 47.6% | 21 | 0.9% |
| 4 | Ichimoku TK Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.4% | 0.58 | -22.6% | 63.6% | 22 | 0.9% |
| 5 | Hull Suite ✓ | Weekly | 7.4% | 0.58 | -26.7% | 59.1% | 22 | 0.9% |
| 6 | WMA 10/40 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.4% | 0.58 | -29.6% | 50.0% | 18 | 1.0% |
| 7 | TSI (13,7) ✓ | Weekly | 7.5% | 0.57 | -28.2% | 53.1% | 32 | 1.0% |
| 8 | TRIMA 200 Trend ✓ | Daily | 6.3% | 0.56 | -37.1% | 54.0% | 50 | -0.2% |
| 9 | EMA 20/80 Cross ✓ | Daily | 7.2% | 0.56 | -33.0% | 50.0% | 34 | 0.6% |
| 10 | Awesome Oscillator ✓ | Weekly | 6.9% | 0.54 | -39.2% | 61.1% | 18 | 0.4% |
| 11 | Relative Volatility Index ✓ | Weekly | 7.5% | 0.54 | -40.2% | 53.1% | 64 | 1.0% |
| 12 | McGinley 30 Trend ✓ | Weekly | 8.2% | 0.54 | -29.8% | 60.9% | 23 | 1.7% |
| 13 | MAMA / FAMA ✓ | Weekly | 6.6% | 0.53 | -27.9% | 71.4% | 21 | 0.1% |
| 14 | DEMA 200 Trend ✓ | Weekly | 5.5% | 0.53 | -19.5% | 44.4% | 18 | -1.0% |
✓ = 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.