Does anything beat buy & hold on Vale?
Every setup we tested on Vale — 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 1.07 did not clear the 1.35 selection hurdle (best-of-N luck cannot be ruled out). Buy-and-hold benchmark: +13.9% CAGR over 24.4 years (+10.9% CAGR in the out-of-sample window).
Educational research from historical backtests — not investment advice. Past performance does not predict future results.
VALE: The Best Setup Beat Buy-and-Hold — and Still Might Be Luck
Vale lands in the awkward middle of our results. Of 742 indicator setups tested on VALE, the strongest — Least Squares MA on the weekly timeframe — beat buy-and-hold in both the training and out-of-sample windows, adding +17.3% annual alpha against a buy-and-hold baseline of +13.9%. For an individual stock, that matters less than it sounds. Single names run on earnings surprises, management turnover, and idiosyncratic shocks that no historical pattern is obliged to survive. A setup that worked here worked on one company's history, once — and the companies whose histories ended badly aren't in anyone's backtest.
The honest read: the out-of-sample Sharpe of 1.07 came from 105 trades over 7.3 years, with a 44.8% win rate and a -69.8% maximum drawdown — a genuinely profitable record. But when you pick the best of 742 attempts, the winner is expected to look good by chance alone. Our selection hurdle for this asset is 1.35, and this setup did not clear it, so we cannot distinguish it from the luckiest of hundreds of tries. Only 18.5% of setups beat buy-and-hold at all. Regimes shift, and past performance predicts nothing about what comes next.
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.
Least Squares MA
What it is: A trend-following rule: it holds while a smoothed trend reference is pointing up and goes flat when it turns. Long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting. The parameters we tested are not published.
How it was tested: signals evaluated at weekly-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 1.07 · alpha +17.3% · 24 trades over 7.3 yrs.
Vortex (7)
What it is: A trend-following rule: it holds while a smoothed trend reference is pointing up and goes flat when it turns. Long/flat only — no leverage, no shorting. The parameters we tested are not published.
How it was tested: signals evaluated at weekly-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 0.94 · alpha +14.2% · 22 trades over 7.3 yrs.
Volume Zone Oscillator
What it is: An order-flow / liquidity model: it reads signed volume to judge whether buyers or sellers are actually being absorbed. 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 0.9 · alpha +10.9% · 172 trades over 7.3 yrs.
Since publication — including if it loses
Buy-and-hold is ahead so far — we publish that too. That is the point. Marked to market nightly from real prices, rules frozen at publication, as of 2026-09-07. Currently LONG.
We tested 742 setups (indicator × parameters × timeframe) on Vale. Only setups with ≥30 trades qualify (617 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 742 tries mines even the holdout, the VALIDATED verdict additionally requires the top setup’s OOS Sharpe to clear a selection hurdle of 1.35 (√(2 ln N)/√T) AND positive alpha in both windows. Of the eligible setups, 18.5% had positive out-of-sample alpha (median OOS Sharpe 0.37) — 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 617 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 | Least Squares MA | Weekly | >+999% | 0.58 | -69.8% | 44.8% | 105 | +1.1% | 1.07 | +17.3% | 24 |
| 2 | Vortex (7) | Weekly | >+999% | 0.64 | -72.7% | 43.4% | 76 | +2.7% | 0.94 | +14.2% | 22 |
| 3 | Volume Zone Oscillator | Daily | >+999% | 0.62 | -75.5% | 41.9% | 589 | +1.4% | 0.9 | +10.9% | 172 |
| 4 | Inside-Bar Breakout | Daily | +99.7% | 0.27 | -66.9% | 44.3% | 131 | -10.9% | 0.89 | -1.1% | 34 |
| 5 | Parabolic SAR | Weekly | >+999% | 0.57 | -87.5% | 50.9% | 57 | +0.4% | 0.86 | +11.2% | 16 |
| 6 | LSMA 100 Trend | Daily | >+999% | 0.54 | -76.9% | 40.7% | 214 | -2.4% | 0.85 | +7.6% | 53 |
| 7 | LSMA 10/30 Cross | Weekly | >+999% | 0.55 | -82.1% | 57.4% | 47 | -0.4% | 0.8 | +9.2% | 13 |
| 8 | TEMA 10/30 Cross | Weekly | >+999% | 0.5 | -70.4% | 50.0% | 46 | -2.1% | 0.79 | +8.7% | 14 |
| 9 | Holt Double-Exp MA | Weekly | >+999% | 0.56 | -69.1% | 55.8% | 120 | -1.3% | 0.79 | +6.4% | 36 |
| 10 | Relative Volume Spike | Daily | +105.1% | 0.32 | -25.9% | 44.2% | 52 | -10.8% | 0.79 | -2.9% | 15 |
| 11 | T3 30 Trend | Daily | >+999% | 0.63 | -62.8% | 39.9% | 138 | +0.4% | 0.78 | +6.3% | 37 |
| 12 | MACD-V | Weekly | >+999% | 0.58 | -86.1% | 48.9% | 47 | +0.4% | 0.77 | +8.0% | 13 |
| 13 | Donchian 55/20 | Daily | +866.9% | 0.5 | -69.9% | 40.0% | 45 | -4.0% | 0.76 | +4.0% | 12 |
| 14 | SMA 20/50 Cross | Daily | >+999% | 0.57 | -68.8% | 44.1% | 59 | -0.1% | 0.75 | +7.8% | 18 |
| 15 | DEMA 20/50 Cross | Daily | +876.8% | 0.45 | -83.3% | 45.5% | 101 | -3.9% | 0.75 | +7.4% | 24 |
| 16 | True Strength Index | Weekly | >+999% | 0.61 | -80.4% | 46.7% | 45 | +1.7% | 0.75 | +7.1% | 14 |
| 17 | SMC: Fair Value Gap | Weekly | >+999% | 0.59 | -76.8% | 46.2% | 52 | +1.0% | 0.75 | +6.8% | 16 |
| 18 | DeMarker (7) | Weekly | >+999% | 0.55 | -73.6% | 44.4% | 81 | -0.4% | 0.74 | +7.6% | 24 |
| 19 | Woodies CCI | Weekly | >+999% | 0.64 | -69.4% | 47.3% | 91 | +1.8% | 0.74 | +5.9% | 29 |
| 20 | Hull MA 30 Trend | Weekly | >+999% | 0.56 | -67.1% | 48.1% | 77 | -2.6% | 0.74 | +4.6% | 20 |
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.