Does anything beat buy & hold on Tezos?
Every setup we tested on Tezos — 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 0.94 did not clear the 2.19 selection hurdle (best-of-N luck cannot be ruled out). Buy-and-hold benchmark: -15.8% CAGR over 8.9 years (-33.8% CAGR in the out-of-sample window).
Educational research from historical backtests — not investment advice. Past performance does not predict future results.
Tezos (XTZ): Beat Buy-and-Hold in Both Windows, Couldn't Beat the Selection Hurdle
Crypto sets a brutal baseline: Tezos compounds at -15.8% annualized just for holding, and it charges drawdowns near -85.3% for the privilege. Against that backdrop we ran 667 indicator configurations on XTZ. The best of them — Ehlers Relative Vigor on the weekly timeframe — beat buy-and-hold in both the training and holdout windows, with a profitable out-of-sample trade profile across 38 trades. That is genuinely uncommon here. But 'best of 667' is exactly the phrase that should make you slow down, which is what the second paragraph is for.
When you pick the winner from 667 attempts, the result is partly signal and partly luck of the draw. Our hurdle corrects for that: with this many tries and 2.7 years of holdout data, an out-of-sample Sharpe needs to clear 2.19 before we trust it. This one landed at 0.94 — profitable, but statistically indistinguishable from the luckiest of hundreds of tries. Add that crypto structure keeps changing — new venues, new participants, shifting volatility regimes — and a pattern from the past has no obligation to repeat. Treat this as a research lead, not an edge.
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.
Ehlers Relative Vigor
What it is: A momentum rule: it holds while rate-of-change stays positive and steps aside when it rolls over. 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 +98.2% · 10 trades over 2.7 yrs.
Lorentzian Classification
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 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 0.9 · alpha +91.3% · 15 trades over 2.7 yrs.
Pascal's Weighted 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 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 0.84 · alpha +62.8% · 37 trades over 3.9 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 2026-10-27. Currently FLAT.
We tested 667 setups (indicator × parameters × timeframe) on Tezos. Only setups with ≥30 trades qualify (402 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 667 tries mines even the holdout, the VALIDATED verdict additionally requires the top setup’s OOS Sharpe to clear a selection hurdle of 2.19 (√(2 ln N)/√T) AND positive alpha in both windows. Of the eligible setups, 93.5% had positive out-of-sample alpha (median OOS Sharpe 0.28) — 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 402 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 | Ehlers Relative Vigor | Weekly | -19.5% | 0.31 | -85.3% | 34.2% | 38 | +13.4% | 0.94 | +98.2% | 10 |
| 2 | Lorentzian Classification | Weekly | +150.8% | 0.42 | -69.5% | 52.7% | 55 | +26.7% | 0.9 | +91.3% | 15 |
| 3 | Pascal's Weighted MA | Daily | +663.1% | 0.54 | -79.9% | 47.7% | 155 | +29.3% | 0.84 | +62.8% | 37 |
| 4 | Impulse MACD | Daily | >+999% | 0.67 | -76.2% | 46.1% | 102 | +38.1% | 0.78 | +57.9% | 27 |
| 5 | Bollinger Breakout | Daily | +291.7% | 0.45 | -82.9% | 33.3% | 54 | +23.4% | 0.75 | +56.2% | 12 |
| 6 | Acceleration Bands | Daily | +182.2% | 0.39 | -80.3% | 46.3% | 123 | +20.6% | 0.75 | +55.5% | 31 |
| 7 | Andean Oscillator | Daily | >+999% | 0.69 | -76.6% | 48.8% | 43 | +40.4% | 0.74 | +55.9% | 10 |
| 8 | LSMA 100 Trend | Daily | +678.8% | 0.55 | -60.1% | 34.0% | 97 | +29.5% | 0.72 | +55.5% | 28 |
| 9 | Volume Oscillator | Daily | +284.1% | 0.45 | -84.2% | 42.1% | 114 | +23.3% | 0.72 | +54.3% | 24 |
| 10 | STARC Bands | Daily | +202.7% | 0.41 | -87.5% | 39.6% | 48 | +21.2% | 0.69 | +52.1% | 11 |
| 11 | ROC (5) | Weekly | +22.9% | 0.42 | -87.1% | 32.6% | 43 | +18.2% | 0.68 | +68.2% | 10 |
| 12 | Elder Ray (Bull/Bear Power) | Daily | +265.0% | 0.45 | -85.3% | 39.0% | 200 | +22.8% | 0.66 | +50.8% | 51 |
| 13 | Volume-Weighted EMA | Daily | +753.6% | 0.56 | -80.1% | 33.2% | 190 | +30.4% | 0.66 | +50.6% | 50 |
| 14 | Ulcer Index | Daily | >+999% | 0.62 | -62.0% | 31.2% | 80 | +32.9% | 0.66 | +50.1% | 26 |
| 15 | Fractal Adaptive MA | Weekly | +261.0% | 0.52 | -72.5% | 37.5% | 48 | +31.3% | 0.64 | +63.8% | 15 |
| 16 | TEMA 100 Trend | Daily | +375.9% | 0.48 | -82.0% | 29.5% | 122 | +25.1% | 0.64 | +49.5% | 36 |
| 17 | Vortex (7) | Daily | +390.1% | 0.51 | -91.5% | 38.7% | 230 | +25.4% | 0.63 | +49.3% | 63 |
| 18 | ADX / DMI | Daily | +414.5% | 0.5 | -80.7% | 36.6% | 82 | +25.8% | 0.62 | +48.3% | 21 |
| 19 | J_TPO | Daily | +773.4% | 0.56 | -84.9% | 36.0% | 172 | +30.6% | 0.62 | +48.3% | 44 |
| 20 | WMA 100 Trend | Daily | +308.6% | 0.48 | -67.1% | 35.5% | 62 | +23.8% | 0.61 | +47.7% | 16 |
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.