Does anything beat buy & hold on -3x Nasdaq (SQQQ)?
Every setup we tested on -3x Nasdaq (SQQQ) — 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 0.65 did not clear the 1.61 selection hurdle (best-of-N luck cannot be ruled out). Buy-and-hold benchmark: -52.9% CAGR over 16.6 years (-47.3% CAGR in the out-of-sample window).
Educational research from historical backtests — not investment advice. Past performance does not predict future results.
-3x Nasdaq (SQQQ): Hammer Beat the Index, But Couldn't Beat the Odds
Broad index funds like -3x Nasdaq are diversified by construction, which makes them stubbornly hard to beat — most of what looks like edge in a backtest is just the market's own return, rearranged. Here the picture is genuinely mixed. Out of 648 indicator configurations we tested on SQQQ, the strongest was Hammer on the daily timeframe. It outperformed buy-and-hold in both the training and out-of-sample windows, with a profitable trade profile across 65 out-of-sample trades. That is more than most setups on this asset manage, and less than what we would call validated.
Read the figures with the selection problem in mind. An out-of-sample Sharpe of 0.65 sounds fine until you remember it was chosen as the best of hundreds of attempts; our hurdle of 1.61 exists precisely to discount that luck, and this setup did not clear it. The out-of-sample alpha of +58.9% over 5.0 years, a 43.1% win rate, and a -87.1% drawdown describe one historical path, nothing more. Only 99.0% of setups beat buy-and-hold at all here, while buy-and-hold itself compounded at -52.9%. Market regimes shift; past performance carries no promise about future results.
Every figure above is computed from our own backtests — nothing is estimated or invented. Hypothetical results; not investment advice.
The setups that ranked, and what they are
Fully mechanical — no discretionary steps, no hidden filters. We name the indicator and publish its record; we keep the settings.
Hammer
What it is: A market-structure rule: it reacts to swing structure and prior levels rather than to a smoothed average. Long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting. The parameters we tested are not published.
How it was tested: signals evaluated at daily-bar close, the position changes on the NEXT bar, 0.08% cost per side. Same engine, same cost model, same out-of-sample split as every other number on this site.
Out-of-sample (last ~30% of the window, never used to pick this setup): Sharpe 0.65 · alpha +58.9% · 17 trades over 5.0 yrs.
Volatility Regime (VIX-style)
What it is: A volatility-regime filter: it only takes exposure while realised volatility says the tape is calm enough to trust. Long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting. The parameters we tested are not published.
How it was tested: signals evaluated at daily-bar close, the position changes on the NEXT bar, 0.08% cost per side. Same engine, same cost model, same out-of-sample split as every other number on this site.
Out-of-sample (last ~30% of the window, never used to pick this setup): Sharpe 0.3 · alpha +51.4% · 24 trades over 5.0 yrs.
Connors RSI
What it is: An oscillator rule: it reads a bounded momentum gauge and takes exposure when it turns from an extreme. Long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting. The parameters we tested are not published.
How it was tested: signals evaluated at daily-bar close, the position changes on the NEXT bar, 0.08% cost per side. Same engine, same cost model, same out-of-sample split as every other number on this site.
Out-of-sample (last ~30% of the window, never used to pick this setup): Sharpe 0.03 · alpha +42.3% · 71 trades over 5.0 yrs.
Since publication — including if it loses
The setup is ahead so far — over a window this short that is mostly noise. Marked to market nightly from real prices, rules frozen at publication, as of 2026-10-26. Currently FLAT.
We tested 648 setups (indicator × parameters × timeframe) on -3x Nasdaq (SQQQ). Only setups with ≥30 trades qualify (496 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 648 tries mines even the holdout, the VALIDATED verdict additionally requires the top setup’s OOS Sharpe to clear a selection hurdle of 1.61 (√(2 ln N)/√T) AND positive alpha in both windows. Of the eligible setups, 99.0% had positive out-of-sample alpha (median OOS Sharpe -0.5) — the table below is truncated, but this summary covers all of them. How we test: methodology. The scoring contract is published in full; the parameters of each individual setup are not.
Top 20 of 496 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 | Hammer | Daily | -72.8% | -0.31 | -87.1% | 43.1% | 65 | +45.4% | 0.65 | +58.9% | 17 |
| 2 | Volatility Regime (VIX-style) | Daily | -29.8% | -0.08 | -59.9% | 28.6% | 49 | +50.8% | 0.3 | +51.4% | 24 |
| 3 | Connors RSI | Daily | -96.5% | -0.5 | -97.3% | 52.0% | 221 | +34.6% | 0.03 | +42.3% | 71 |
| 4 | Trend Regularity Adaptive MA | Weekly | -87.9% | -0.27 | -87.9% | 23.3% | 30 | +40.8% | 0.03 | +39.7% | 10 |
| 5 | Fractal Adaptive MA | Weekly | -98.6% | -0.52 | -98.7% | 31.3% | 83 | +30.0% | -0.0 | +38.1% | 27 |
| 6 | LSMA 200 Trend | Daily | -97.0% | -0.32 | -97.4% | 29.3% | 99 | +33.9% | -0.0 | +35.7% | 33 |
| 7 | VWAP Bands | Daily | -91.7% | -0.41 | -94.2% | 49.4% | 87 | +39.0% | -0.01 | +42.3% | 25 |
| 8 | Historical Volatility Regime | Daily | -69.2% | -0.43 | -76.7% | 31.7% | 60 | +46.1% | -0.03 | +44.5% | 28 |
| 9 | FRAMA 30 Trend | Weekly | -98.7% | -0.52 | -98.9% | 29.8% | 84 | +29.7% | -0.03 | +34.6% | 28 |
| 10 | ALMA 200 Trend | Daily | -95.7% | -0.41 | -96.0% | 30.0% | 40 | +35.6% | -0.04 | +35.6% | 13 |
| 11 | Schaff Trend Cycle | Daily | -45.8% | -0.16 | -61.4% | 50.0% | 128 | +49.3% | -0.05 | +45.1% | 38 |
| 12 | Donchian 20 Break | Daily | -99.3% | -0.45 | -99.4% | 10.9% | 46 | +26.8% | -0.05 | +33.3% | 13 |
| 13 | CCI (100) | Daily | -97.9% | -0.42 | -97.9% | 10.0% | 60 | +32.1% | -0.06 | +33.4% | 17 |
| 14 | DEMA 100 Trend | Daily | -99.4% | -0.51 | -99.4% | 22.9% | 140 | +26.4% | -0.07 | +32.4% | 38 |
| 15 | CCI (50) | Daily | -99.7% | -0.58 | -99.7% | 20.0% | 120 | +23.4% | -0.07 | +32.0% | 29 |
| 16 | Connors RSI-2 | Daily | -94.1% | -0.49 | -94.9% | 48.6% | 214 | +37.2% | -0.09 | +40.2% | 64 |
| 17 | Intraday Momentum Index | Daily | -99.7% | -0.61 | -99.8% | 37.8% | 45 | +23.5% | -0.11 | +34.8% | 18 |
| 18 | WMA 100 Trend | Daily | -97.5% | -0.41 | -97.5% | 26.0% | 77 | +32.9% | -0.11 | +32.1% | 24 |
| 19 | DEMA 200 Trend | Daily | -98.9% | -0.52 | -99.0% | 14.9% | 74 | +28.9% | -0.11 | +29.2% | 21 |
| 20 | Donchian Midline | Weekly | -94.9% | -0.53 | -94.9% | 33.3% | 30 | +36.4% | -0.13 | +35.5% | 10 |
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.