Does anything beat buy & hold on Gasoline (RB)?
Every setup we tested on Gasoline (RB) — ranked out-of-sample, corrected for multiple testing, and forward-tracked in public from the day this page published. The honest answer is the headline.
Beat buy-and-hold in both windows — but can't be told apart from selection luck.
Beat buy-and-hold in both the full window and out-of-sample but its OOS Sharpe 0.9 did not clear the 1.31 selection hurdle (best-of-N luck cannot be ruled out). Buy-and-hold benchmark: +4.9% CAGR over 25.5 years (+4.8% CAGR in the out-of-sample window).
Educational research from historical backtests — not investment advice. Past performance does not predict future results.
Gasoline: the winner beat buy-and-hold in both windows — and still can't shake the luck problem
In Gasoline, buy-and-hold is a harder benchmark than it looks: roll costs drag on returns, macro regimes flip the rules mid-game, and prices can go nowhere for years. Against that backdrop, we ran 753 indicator configurations on RB. The best, LSMA 100 Trend on the daily timeframe, beat buy-and-hold in both windows — +6.0% annualized edge over the full period, +16.2% out of sample against a buy-and-hold CAGR of +4.9%. Over 7.7 out-of-sample years it took 207 trades, won 38.2% of them, and drew down -38.9% at worst.
Here is the honest read. When you test 753 setups and keep the best one, the winner looks good by construction — even on pure noise. Our correction for that selection effect sets a Sharpe hurdle of 1.31, and this setup's out-of-sample Sharpe of 0.9 falls short. Statistically, we cannot distinguish it from the luckiest of hundreds of tries. It also has company: 51.9% of setups edged buy-and-hold, which tends to happen when one regime dominated the sample. Of everything tested, 667 produced enough trades to grade at all. Macro regimes rotate, and a rule tuned to one rarely survives the next. Past performance does not predict future results.
Every figure above is computed from our own backtests — nothing is estimated or invented. Hypothetical results; not investment advice.
Top setups as mechanical rules
Exactly as the backtest defined them — no discretionary steps, no hidden filters.
LSMA 100 Trend
Mechanical rule (exactly as backtested): VARIANT — price above a rising LSMA(100). Signals are evaluated at daily-bar close, the position changes on the NEXT bar, 0.08% cost per side, long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting.
Out-of-sample (last ~30% of the window, never used to pick this setup): Sharpe 0.9 · alpha +16.2% · 63 trades over 7.7 yrs.
Bullish Engulfing
Mechanical rule (exactly as backtested): Classic bullish-engulfing reversal — enter long, hold a short horizon. Signals are evaluated at weekly-bar close, the position changes on the NEXT bar, 0.08% cost per side, long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting.
Out-of-sample (last ~30% of the window, never used to pick this setup): Sharpe 0.89 · alpha +15.1% · 15 trades over 7.7 yrs.
T3 10/40 Cross
Mechanical rule (exactly as backtested): VARIANT — T3 10/40 cross; long while fast leads slow. Signals are evaluated at daily-bar close, the position changes on the NEXT bar, 0.08% cost per side, long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting.
Out-of-sample (last ~30% of the window, never used to pick this setup): Sharpe 0.88 · alpha +18.6% · 23 trades over 7.7 yrs.
Since publication — including if it loses
The forward record is just getting started — the gap between the two is the honest score. Marked to market nightly from real prices, rules frozen at publication, as of 2026-07-02. Currently FLAT.
We tested 753 setups (indicator × parameters × timeframe) on Gasoline (RB). Only setups with ≥30 trades qualify (667 did). Setups are ranked by out-of-sample Sharpe — the last ~30% of history, which standard-parameter rules never saw during selection. Because picking the best of 753 tries mines even the holdout, the VALIDATED verdict additionally requires the top setup’s OOS Sharpe to clear a selection hurdle of 1.31 (√(2 ln N)/√T) AND positive alpha in both windows. Of the eligible setups, 51.9% had positive out-of-sample alpha (median OOS Sharpe 0.32) — the table below is truncated, but this summary covers all of them. Full recipe: methodology · the engine’s contract lives in the repo as STRATEGY_METHODOLOGY.md.
Top 20 of 667 eligible setups
Ranked by out-of-sample Sharpe. Full + out-of-sample columns, costs included. Hypothetical.
| # | Setup | TF | Total ret | Sharpe | Max DD | Win | Trades | α vs B&H | OOS Sharpe | OOS α | OOS trades |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LSMA 100 Trend | Daily | >+999% | 0.54 | -38.9% | 38.2% | 207 | +6.0% | 0.9 | +16.2% | 63 |
| 2 | Bullish Engulfing | Weekly | >+999% | 0.57 | -32.5% | 69.5% | 59 | +5.5% | 0.89 | +15.1% | 15 |
| 3 | T3 10/40 Cross | Daily | >+999% | 0.53 | -45.4% | 39.2% | 74 | +6.8% | 0.88 | +18.6% | 23 |
| 4 | SMA 10/30 Cross | Daily | +476.4% | 0.38 | -54.6% | 37.3% | 118 | +2.2% | 0.84 | +17.4% | 37 |
| 5 | MAMA / FAMA | Daily | +343.6% | 0.35 | -55.4% | 37.1% | 140 | +1.1% | 0.83 | +16.6% | 39 |
| 6 | TRIMA 30 Trend | Daily | +470.8% | 0.4 | -58.5% | 42.3% | 201 | +2.2% | 0.83 | +15.3% | 64 |
| 7 | Stochastic (10,3) | Weekly | +639.9% | 0.41 | -73.0% | 47.9% | 163 | +3.2% | 0.82 | +19.4% | 49 |
| 8 | Hull MA 200 Trend | Daily | >+999% | 0.54 | -40.2% | 41.8% | 110 | +5.9% | 0.81 | +13.5% | 28 |
| 9 | Ehlers Cyber Cycle | Weekly | +711.9% | 0.42 | -65.5% | 52.7% | 131 | +3.6% | 0.8 | +18.9% | 38 |
| 10 | HMA 9/21 Cross | Weekly | >+999% | 0.64 | -43.6% | 48.1% | 77 | +11.1% | 0.8 | +18.3% | 24 |
| 11 | Zero-Lag LSMA | Weekly | +334.2% | 0.34 | -65.4% | 45.5% | 88 | +1.0% | 0.79 | +18.6% | 23 |
| 12 | MACD | Weekly | +949.8% | 0.46 | -55.2% | 51.0% | 49 | +4.7% | 0.79 | +18.0% | 11 |
| 13 | Stochastic (20,5) | Weekly | >+999% | 0.56 | -46.0% | 44.0% | 84 | +8.4% | 0.78 | +17.6% | 23 |
| 14 | MACD-V | Weekly | +875.2% | 0.46 | -55.6% | 52.0% | 50 | +4.3% | 0.78 | +17.4% | 13 |
| 15 | Hull MA 30 Trend | Weekly | +941.7% | 0.49 | -44.1% | 43.4% | 76 | +4.6% | 0.78 | +15.5% | 21 |
| 16 | Fisher Transform | Weekly | >+999% | 0.5 | -40.0% | 51.2% | 125 | +6.1% | 0.77 | +17.7% | 36 |
| 17 | Percentage Price Osc. | Weekly | +820.1% | 0.45 | -45.6% | 54.2% | 48 | +4.1% | 0.77 | +16.7% | 11 |
| 18 | PPO Cross | Weekly | +820.1% | 0.45 | -45.6% | 54.2% | 48 | +4.1% | 0.77 | +16.7% | 11 |
| 19 | Coppock Curve | Daily | +284.0% | 0.33 | -68.9% | 42.5% | 160 | +0.5% | 0.76 | +16.1% | 46 |
| 20 | Even Better Sinewave | Daily | +511.4% | 0.39 | -63.3% | 36.1% | 133 | +2.5% | 0.76 | +16.1% | 39 |
Hypothetical backtests with 0.08%/side costs. Not investment advice — see the full disclaimer.
These are historical backtests of mechanical rules. They are educational research, not investment advice, not a recommendation, and not tailored to you. Educational information only — not investment advice. Hypothetical backtested results; past performance does not guarantee future results. Trading involves risk of loss.