The best indicator for Energy (XLE)
We backtested 382 indicators across daily, weekly and hourly charts on real Energy (XLE) history. Here's what actually worked — risk-adjusted, out-of-sample, with costs.
Where Energy (XLE) 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 10/40 Cross
On the weekly chart, this is the strongest risk-adjusted edge we found for Energy (XLE) over ~27.6 years — beating buy-and-hold by 0.5% CAGR.
Energy (XLE) 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 Energy (XLE) — trailing buy-and-hold by 5.0% 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 10/40 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 9.1% | 0.56 | -24.9% | 60.0% | 15 | 0.5% |
| 2 | Schaff Trend Cycle ✓ | Weekly | 3.2% | 0.55 | -14.7% | 57.1% | 49 | -5.5% |
| 3 | WMA 15/60 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 8.7% | 0.54 | -31.8% | 60.0% | 15 | -0.0% |
| 4 | EMA 50/200 Cross ✓ | Daily | 8.7% | 0.53 | -27.7% | 50.0% | 16 | -0.1% |
| 5 | KAMA 10/30 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 10.5% | 0.61 | -35.2% | 69.2% | 13 | 1.8% |
| 6 | SMA 50/200 Cross ✓ | Daily | 8.1% | 0.5 | -34.5% | 61.1% | 18 | -0.7% |
| 7 | WMA 20/50 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.9% | 0.5 | -35.8% | 70.6% | 17 | -0.8% |
| 8 | McGinley Dynamic ✓ | Weekly | 8.4% | 0.5 | -38.0% | 37.9% | 66 | -0.3% |
| 9 | Guppy Multiple MA ✓ | Weekly | 7.8% | 0.5 | -36.9% | 60.0% | 20 | -0.9% |
| 10 | T3 10/40 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.3% | 0.5 | -31.6% | 56.2% | 16 | -1.3% |
| 11 | SMA 10/40 Cross ✓ | Weekly | 7.8% | 0.49 | -34.9% | 45.0% | 20 | -0.9% |
| 12 | Chaikin Oscillator ✓ | Weekly | 7.6% | 0.48 | -32.0% | 55.0% | 80 | -1.1% |
| 13 | A/D Oscillator ✓ | Weekly | 7.6% | 0.48 | -32.0% | 55.0% | 80 | -1.1% |
| 14 | Momentum (50) ✓ | Weekly | 7.6% | 0.48 | -37.1% | 62.5% | 40 | -1.1% |
✓ = held up out-of-sample. Hypothetical, costs included. See methodology.
What it would take to beat buy & hold on Energy (XLE)
30 of 670 tested setups beat buy-and-hold on Energy (XLE) outright. Another 272 could get there with leverage they would survive — but 248 would be liquidated by their own drawdown before they caught it.
| Indicator | Beats B&H unlevered | Leverage needed | Leverage survived |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chande Kroll Stop | 2 | none needed | 2.76× |
| Zero-Lag MACD | 2 | none needed | 2.91× |
| McGinley Dynamic | 1 | 1.02× | 2.79× |
| Chande-Kroll Stop (fast) | 1 | 1.24× | 2.11× |
| KDJ | 1 | 1.3× | 3.34× |
| QQE | 1 | 1.48× | 1.75× |
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 Energy (XLE), EMA 10/40 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 Energy’s signal flips
We track Energy daily. Its backtested best indicator, EMA 10/40 Cross (Weekly), is long right now — we'll email you the moment that changes. Free, no spam, unsubscribe any time.