ORB 15 vs 30 minute is one of the most argued-over choices in futures day trading: do you trade the break of the first 15 minutes, or wait for a 30-minute opening range? We tested both on 3,884 Nasdaq-100 futures (NQ) sessions from June 2010 to April 2026, and the answer depends heavily on which decade you look at.
The opening range breakout (ORB) is commonly credited to Toby Crabel, whose 1990 book Day Trading With Short Term Price Patterns and Opening Range Breakout studied what happens after price leaves the early-session range. The simple time-based versions tested here, a fixed 15- or 30-minute box, are the way most retail traders run the idea today; they are not a reproduction of Crabel's own rules.
The exact 15 minute ORB and 30 minute ORB rules we tested
- Market and data: NQ continuous front-month futures, regular session only (09:30–16:00 ET), 15-minute bars, June 7, 2010 to April 16, 2026.
- Opening range: the high and low of the first 15-minute bar (15-minute ORB) or the first two 15-minute bars (30-minute ORB).
- Entry: a stop order at the range high (long) or range low (short). One trade per day; the first side broken wins. A bar that pierces both sides is skipped as ambiguous. No new entries after the 15:00 bar.
- Stop: the opposite side of the opening range.
- Exit (three versions): hold to the session close, take profit at 1R (one times the range), or take profit at 2R.
- Fill assumptions: fills at the exact breakout, stop and target levels. If one bar touches both the stop and the target, the stop is counted first (conservative).
- Costs: 1.0 NQ point per round trip.
All results are in NQ index points for one contract. MNQ is $2 per point and NQ is $20 per point, so MNQ dollars below are simply points × 2. Every trade has 1.0 point deducted for costs (slippage plus commission).
ORB 15 vs 30 minute: the full-sample results
| Variant | Trades | Win rate | Avg pts | Total pts | Profit factor | Closed-trade DD (pts) | 2010–2019 pts | 2020–2026 pts | PF 2020–2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15-min ORB, hold to close | 3,880 | 39.6% | +3.92 | +15,205 | 1.17 | 2,918 | +642.2 | +14,562.8 | 1.21 |
| 15-min ORB, 1R target | 3,880 | 52.9% | +1.85 | +7,166 | 1.09 | 3,596.8 | -1,414 | +8,580 | 1.15 |
| 15-min ORB, 2R target | 3,880 | 42.8% | +3.43 | +13,324.8 | 1.15 | 2,398.2 | -282 | +13,606.8 | 1.21 |
| 30-min ORB, hold to close | 3,857 | 43.7% | +2.85 | +11,010.8 | 1.12 | 5,237 | -2,252.8 | +13,263.5 | 1.19 |
| 30-min ORB, 1R target | 3,857 | 51.3% | +1.81 | +6,967 | 1.08 | 5,073 | -2,082.8 | +9,049.8 | 1.14 |
| 30-min ORB, 2R target | 3,857 | 44.8% | +2.17 | +8,388 | 1.09 | 5,259.2 | -2,028.8 | +10,416.8 | 1.15 |
Over the whole sample the 15-minute opening range breakout wins on nearly every line. Held to the close, it made 15,205 points on 3,880 trades (about $30,410 on one MNQ), with a profit factor of 1.17 and a 2,918-point closed-trade drawdown. The 30-minute version made 11,010.8 points with a profit factor of 1.12 and a much deeper 5,237-point closed-trade drawdown.
The 30-minute ORB does win more often (43.7% vs 39.6%), but that is the only column it takes. Its median opening range was 33.25 points versus 25.75 for the 15-minute range, so every losing trade costs more, and waiting longer means you enter after some of the day's move has already happened.
Profit targets did not help either version. Holding to the close beat both the 1R and 2R targets for both range lengths. The 1R target lifted the win rate above 50% but roughly halved total points — a classic case of trading a nicer-looking win rate for a worse edge.
Why the 2010s vs 2020s split changes the answer
NQ rose from roughly 1,800 to roughly 26,000 over this test. A 1% move in 2025 is worth many more points than a 1% move in 2012, so point totals are dominated by 2020–2026. That is why we always split the sample.
From 2010 to 2019 the 15-minute ORB (hold to close) made just 642.2 points, and the 30-minute ORB lost 2,252.8 points. Every 30-minute variant was negative in the 2010s. Even the 15-minute ORB's small 2010s profit came almost entirely from 2018 and 2019 — 2010 through 2017 added up to -878 points lost.
| Year | 15-min ORB (pts) | 30-min ORB (pts) |
|---|---|---|
| 2015 | -590.8 | -697.8 |
| 2018 | +906.8 | -234.5 |
| 2019 | +613.5 | +221.8 |
| 2020 | -2,122.2 | -2,649.8 |
| 2021 | +2,984.8 | +1,664.8 |
| 2022 | +3,502.5 | +4,014.5 |
| 2024 | +2,650 | +3,839.8 |
| 2025 | +4,380.5 | +2,575.5 |
Then the regime changed. From 2020 to 2026 both versions worked: the 15-minute ORB made 14,562.8 points (profit factor 1.21) and the 30-minute ORB made 13,263.5 points (profit factor 1.19). Notice that 2020 itself was the worst year for both, then 2021–2025 were all positive. Note that 2026 is a partial year, ending April 16.
So the honest summary is: in the 2010s, neither opening range had a meaningful edge after costs; in the 2020s both did, and the 15-minute range was a bit better. If you believe the post-2020 Nasdaq — bigger intraday ranges, more directional opens — is the market you will be trading, the ORB looks viable. If you think the 2010s tape could return, the evidence is thin.
Our take: On NQ, the 15-minute ORB is the better default. It has the higher profit factor, the smaller closed-trade drawdown and the only non-negative 2010s result. But a profit factor of 1.17 is a slim edge, and it leans almost entirely on one regime. We would treat the 15-minute ORB as a base layer to be filtered (by volatility, gap, or trend), not as a finished system. See how stop placement and NR7 filters changed things.
Buy and hold as a reality check
Simply holding one NQ contract from June 7, 2010 to April 16, 2026 gained 24,677.2 points, with a 5,878.2-point peak-to-trough drawdown along the way. The 15-minute ORB made about 62% of that while flat every night. That is not a like-for-like comparison — buy and hold carries overnight and weekend risk the ORB never takes — but it keeps the numbers in perspective.
What this backtest does not model
- It is a backtest. Past results do not guarantee future results.
- Fills are assumed at the exact breakout, stop and target prices; fast opens can slip well beyond 1 point.
- 15-minute bars hide the order of highs and lows inside a bar; we assume the worse case when a bar touches both stop and target.
- No overnight gap risk applies (all trades close by 16:00 ET), but also no taxes, data fees or platform costs.
- Both long and short breakouts are taken; nothing is optimized or filtered.
Key takeaways
- Full sample: 15-minute ORB 15,205 pts (PF 1.17) vs 30-minute ORB 11,010.8 pts (PF 1.12), held to the close.
- 2010–2019: 15-minute ORB 642.2 pts; 30-minute ORB -2,252.8 pts.
- 2020–2026 is where nearly all the profit sits for both ranges.
- Holding to the close beat 1R and 2R profit targets for both range lengths.
- Costs of 1.0 point per round trip are included; MNQ = $2/pt, NQ = $20/pt.
Put the research to work on your Desk
Explore the tools behind the research, compare the available access, or open your Desk if you already have an account.
FAQ
Is the 15-minute or 30-minute ORB better for NQ futures?
In our 2010-2026 NQ backtest, the 15-minute ORB held to the close made 15,205 points (profit factor 1.17) versus 11,010.8 points (profit factor 1.12) for the 30-minute ORB, after 1 point of costs per trade. Nearly all of the profit for both came from 2020-2026.
Did the opening range breakout work in the 2010s?
Barely. From 2010 to 2019 the 15-minute ORB made 642.2 points and the 30-minute ORB lost 2,252.8 points in our test.
Should I use a profit target on an ORB trade?
In this test, holding to the session close beat both 1R and 2R targets for both the 15-minute and 30-minute ranges. Targets raised the win rate but lowered total points.
Who invented the opening range breakout?
The ORB is commonly credited to Toby Crabel, author of Day Trading With Short Term Price Patterns and Opening Range Breakout (Traders Press, 1990). The fixed 15- and 30-minute versions tested here are the common retail form, not Crabel's exact rules.
Loomi.Ai provides educational market research, not financial advice. Trading futures and options involves substantial risk of loss, and backtested results are historical and do not guarantee future returns.