Top 20 Trading Strategies Ranked: 16 Years of NQ Backtests

This is our top 20 trading strategies ranked list, built from one backtest on Nasdaq-100 futures (NQ) instead of opinions. We took 24 well-known day trading, swing trading and trend-following strategies, ran each one with its standard textbook settings on NQ continuous futures from June 2010 to April 2026, and ranked them with a single rule we wrote down before we looked at the answer. Some famous names finished near the top. Some finished near the bottom. A few didn't qualify at all.

Before the list, the method. The ranking method matters more than the ranking, because it's very easy to make any strategy look good by adjusting settings until the backtest looks right.

How we ranked the best trading strategies (read this first)

• Standard settings only. Each strategy uses its common, textbook setting (RSI(2) below 10, Bollinger Bands 20/2, Turtle 55/20, MACD 12-26-9 and so on). The settings were declared before the ranking was run. We didn't try other thresholds to find the best one.
• At least 30 trades to qualify. Anything with fewer trades can't be ranked, however good it looks.
• Score = the lower of two profit factors. We split the test into 2010-2019 and 2020-2026 and computed the profit factor (gross profit divided by gross loss) in each. A strategy's score is the worse of the two. A strategy only ranks high if it worked in both eras.
• Tie-break: total points.
• Data: NQ continuous front-month futures, June 7, 2010 to April 16, 2026. Day trades use 3,884 regular sessions (09:30-16:00 ET) on 15-minute bars; swing and trend systems use daily bars over the same span.
• Costs: 1.0 NQ point is deducted per round trip for slippage and commission.
• Units: Results are in NQ index points for one contract. On Micro Nasdaq futures (MNQ) one point is $2; on NQ it is $20. Where we quote dollars we simply multiply points by 2 for MNQ.

For intraday systems, if one 15-minute bar hit both the stop and the target we assumed the stop was hit first. That is the conservative choice. "Closed-trade drawdown" below means the worst peak-to-trough decline counting closed trades only. It understates the real drawdown for systems that hold for days or weeks, because it ignores open losses.

The big caveat: this is not apples to apples

If you only read one section, read this one. NQ went from roughly 1,800 to roughly 26,000 during the test, about a 13x move. Buying and holding one NQ contract over the same span made 24,677.2 points, with a worst drawdown of 5,878.2 points. That is more than any single strategy in this list made.

That bull market matters for how you read the ranking:

• Long-only daily systems had a tailwind. Every swing and trend system in the top 12 is long-only and holds for days or weeks. In a market that rose about 13x, any system that is long often will look good. Part of what these numbers measure is simply "was in the market during a big bull run."
• Day trades didn't get that tailwind. The intraday systems are flat at the close every day, and many of them go short as often as long. They had to earn their points within a single session. A day-trading profit factor of 1.17 and a swing profit factor of 2.8 are not measuring the same thing.
• Point totals favour the 2020s. A 1% move in 2024 is many more points than a 1% move in 2012. This is exactly why the score uses the lower of the two eras' profit factors, not total points.
• Short sides of the trend systems lost. We tested the short side of the trend systems too, and in this test every one of them lost money. We cover that in shorting Nasdaq futures with trend systems. The rankings below use the long side only for those systems, which is itself a bullish-market choice.

Also note that several of the top strategies are close relatives. The Keltner fade, Bollinger fade, Williams %R, Connors RSI(2) and IBS all buy short-term oversold dips, and they often fire in the same weeks. That's not five independent edges. It's more like one edge (buying pullbacks in an index that kept going up) measured five ways.

What the backtest doesn't model: overnight gap risk and continuous-contract roll gaps for the daily systems, fills that may not happen exactly at the signal price, margin calls during drawdowns, and taxes. It's a backtest. Past results do not guarantee future results, and nothing here is financial advice.

Top 20 trading strategies ranked: the full table

PF is profit factor. The score used for ranking is the lower of the two era columns. All numbers are for one NQ contract after the 1-point round-trip cost.

A few patterns stand out. The top 13 are all daily swing or trend systems. The best day trading strategy, the 15-minute opening range breakout, comes in at #14. Seven of the eight day trades had a 2010s profit factor below 1.0, meaning they lost money in that decade and only the 2020s rescued (or failed to rescue) them. For the best day trading strategies on NQ, the honest conclusion from this test is that simple, unfiltered versions of classic setups have a thin edge at best.

Breaking down each strategy

#1 Keltner Channel Fade (long)

Rule: buy close below 20 EMA - 2 ATR, exit close > 20 EMA. Style: Swing.

Numbers: 55 trades, 81.8% winners, profit factor 3.59 (13.49 in 2010-2019, 2.81 in 2020-2026), 9,676.0 total pts (3,397.2 in the 2010s, 6,278.8 in the 2020s), average 175.93 pts per trade (about $351.86 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,263.8 pts.

Verdict: Commonly credited to Chester Keltner, with the ATR-based bands most traders use today popularised later (Linda Raschke is often named). This is the top-ranked strategy, but read the fine print: only 55 trades in almost 16 years, and the eye-popping 2010s profit factor of 13.49 rests on a small number of trades, so a couple of bad fills would drag it down a lot. It suits a patient swing trader who can sit through a multi-day drawdown while waiting for price to snap back to the 20 EMA. What can go wrong: the one time a 2-ATR dip keeps falling (a 2008-style or 2022-style slide) you have no stop in this rule set.

Deep dive: full Keltner Channel Fade (long) backtest.

#2 Bollinger Band Lower-Band Fade

Rule: buy close below lower band (20, 2), exit close > middle band. Style: Swing.

Numbers: 83 trades, 77.1% winners, profit factor 3.20 (5.44 in 2010-2019, 2.76 in 2020-2026), 11,547.8 total pts (3,836.2 in the 2010s, 7,711.5 in the 2020s), average 139.13 pts per trade (about $278.26 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,694.0 pts.

Verdict: Commonly credited to John Bollinger, who created Bollinger Bands in the 1980s. It is essentially the Keltner fade with standard-deviation bands instead of ATR bands, and it held up in both decades with 83 trades. It suits swing traders who like high win rates (77.1%) and can accept that the rare loser is large. Like the Keltner fade there is no hard stop, so a crash that keeps closing below the band is the key risk.

Deep dive: full Bollinger Band Lower-Band Fade backtest.

#3 Turtle 55/20 Donchian (long)

Rule: buy 55-day high, exit 20-day low, 2 ATR stop. Style: Trend.

Numbers: 41 trades, 53.7% winners, profit factor 4.56 (2.73 in 2010-2019, 5.73 in 2020-2026), 12,520.6 total pts (2,353.2 in the 2010s, 10,167.4 in the 2020s), average 305.38 pts per trade (about $610.76 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,085.5 pts.

Verdict: Commonly credited to Richard Dennis and William Eckhardt's Turtle traders of the 1980s (the 55-day breakout was the 'System 2' entry). A classic trend-follower: barely more than half the trades win, but the winners are big, averaging 305.38 pts per trade. Only 41 trades, so the sample is thin, and 2020-2026 did most of the heavy lifting. It suits someone who can take many small losses and a long wait between signals.

Deep dive: full Turtle 55/20 Donchian (long) backtest.

#4 20/50 Moving Average Crossover

Rule: buy 20-day SMA cross above 50-day, exit cross below. Style: Trend.

Numbers: 45 trades, 60.0% winners, profit factor 2.90 (3.59 in 2010-2019, 2.70 in 2020-2026), 13,350.5 total pts (4,130.2 in the 2010s, 9,220.2 in the 2020s), average 296.68 pts per trade (about $593.36 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 2,791.5 pts.

Verdict: A generic moving-average crossover with no single inventor. It made the second-largest point total in the table and held a profit factor above 2.7 in both eras. The cost is the lag: the closed-trade drawdown of 2,791.5 pts is one of the larger ones here, and the real open-trade drawdown was bigger. It suits a hands-off swing trader who checks the chart once a day.

Deep dive: full 20/50 Moving Average Crossover backtest.

#5 Williams %R Oversold

Rule: %R(10) < -90 with close > 200-day SMA, exit %R > -20. Style: Swing.

Numbers: 82 trades, 75.6% winners, profit factor 2.40 (5.76 in 2010-2019, 2.05 in 2020-2026), 8,699.0 total pts (2,805.8 in the 2010s, 5,893.2 in the 2020s), average 106.09 pts per trade (about $212.18 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,432.5 pts.

Verdict: Commonly credited to Larry Williams, who introduced %R in the 1970s. With the 200-day filter, this is another 'buy the dip in an uptrend' system and it shares many signals with the RSI(2), Bollinger and Keltner fades. It suits swing traders who want frequent-ish, high-win-rate trades (75.6%). The drop from a 5.76 PF in the 2010s to 2.05 in the 2020s is worth watching.

Deep dive: full Williams %R Oversold backtest.

#6 Connors RSI(2)

Rule: daily RSI(2) < 10, close > 200-day SMA, exit close > 5-day SMA. Style: Swing.

Numbers: 166 trades, 71.7% winners, profit factor 2.60 (1.72 in 2010-2019, 3.00 in 2020-2026), 10,039.2 total pts (1,415.0 in the 2010s, 8,624.2 in the 2020s), average 60.48 pts per trade (about $120.96 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,993.5 pts.

Verdict: Commonly credited to Larry Connors, who popularised RSI(2) in his books with Cesar Alvarez. It has the second-largest sample among the swing systems (166 trades), which makes its numbers more trustworthy than those of the rank #1 and #2 strategies. The weaker 2010s PF (1.72) is why it ranks sixth, not higher. It suits swing traders who want a well-documented, simple rule set.

Deep dive: full Connors RSI(2) backtest.

#7 Supertrend (10, 3) (long)

Rule: buy flip to uptrend, exit flip to downtrend. Style: Trend.

Numbers: 76 trades, 48.7% winners, profit factor 1.78 (2.18 in 2010-2019, 1.68 in 2020-2026), 11,275.8 total pts (3,463.0 in the 2010s, 7,812.8 in the 2020s), average 148.37 pts per trade (about $296.74 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 3,304.5 pts.

Verdict: The Supertrend indicator is commonly credited to Olivier Seban. It is a pure trend-follower that loses more often than it wins (48.7%) and relies on catching big runs. The closed-trade drawdown of 3,304.5 pts is large, and you will often give back a big slice of the open profit before the flip exit fires. It suits traders who can stomach watching gains evaporate.

Deep dive: full Supertrend (10, 3) (long) backtest.

#8 Turtle 20/10 Donchian (long)

Rule: buy 20-day high, exit 10-day low, 2 ATR stop. Style: Trend.

Numbers: 92 trades, 48.9% winners, profit factor 1.89 (1.56 in 2010-2019, 2.03 in 2020-2026), 9,232.6 total pts (1,735.9 in the 2010s, 7,496.7 in the 2020s), average 100.35 pts per trade (about $200.70 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,794.1 pts.

Verdict: The shorter Turtle 'System 1' breakout, commonly credited to the same Dennis and Eckhardt program. It trades more than twice as often as the 55/20 version (92 trades) but with a lower edge per trade. Most of its points came in 2020-2026. It suits trend-followers who want more activity than the 55-day version gives them.

Deep dive: full Turtle 20/10 Donchian (long) backtest.

#9 IBS Mean Reversion

Rule: buy close when IBS < 0.2, exit close > prior high or IBS > 0.8. Style: Swing.

Numbers: 575 trades, 70.1% winners, profit factor 1.94 (1.53 in 2010-2019, 2.10 in 2020-2026), 21,201.5 total pts (3,301.5 in the 2010s, 17,900.0 in the 2020s), average 36.87 pts per trade (about $73.74 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,990.0 pts.

Verdict: IBS (internal bar strength) does not have a single well-known inventor; it circulates widely in quant blogs. This is the most active swing system here, with 575 trades, which makes it the best-sampled daily system in the table, and it made the largest point total in the ranked list (21,201.5 pts). The catch: 17,900 of those points came from 2020-2026, when NQ point values were far larger. It suits swing traders who want frequent, short holds.

Deep dive: full IBS Mean Reversion backtest.

#10 9/20 EMA Pullback

Rule: 9 EMA > 20 EMA, low tags 20 EMA and closes above, exit 9 < 20. Style: Trend.

Numbers: 100 trades, 36.0% winners, profit factor 1.75 (1.42 in 2010-2019, 1.89 in 2020-2026), 9,291.8 total pts (1,596.5 in the 2010s, 7,695.2 in the 2020s), average 92.92 pts per trade (about $185.84 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 2,634.8 pts.

Verdict: A common trend-pullback recipe with no single inventor. Only 36% of trades win, so it depends on a few big trends, and the closed-trade drawdown of 2,634.8 pts is substantial. It suits patient trend traders; it does not suit anyone who needs a high hit rate to stay confident.

Deep dive: full 9/20 EMA Pullback backtest.

#11 MACD 12-26-9 Crossover (long)

Rule: buy MACD cross above signal, exit cross below. Style: Trend.

Numbers: 200 trades, 45.0% winners, profit factor 1.32 (1.72 in 2010-2019, 1.22 in 2020-2026), 6,834.5 total pts (3,174.2 in the 2010s, 3,660.2 in the 2020s), average 34.17 pts per trade (about $68.34 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 4,171.8 pts.

Verdict: MACD is credited to Gerald Appel, who developed it in the late 1970s. The crossover used as a stand-alone long signal is the most-traded daily system here (200 trades) but its edge is thin (PF 1.22 in 2020-2026) and it has the largest closed-trade drawdown of the daily systems in the top 11, at 4,171.8 pts. Our view: it is more useful as a filter than as a system on its own.

Deep dive: full MACD 12-26-9 Crossover (long) backtest.

#12 Keltner Channel Breakout (long)

Rule: buy close above 20 EMA + 2 ATR, exit close < 20 EMA. Style: Trend.

Numbers: 76 trades, 51.3% winners, profit factor 1.27 (1.63 in 2010-2019, 1.16 in 2020-2026), 1,891.0 total pts (1,034.0 in the 2010s, 857.0 in the 2020s), average 24.88 pts per trade (about $49.76 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 2,234.5 pts.

Verdict: Same Keltner bands as #1, used the opposite way: buy strength instead of weakness. The fade beat the breakout on every line of this table, which says a lot about how NQ behaved on a daily chart during this period: stretched moves tended to revert more than they extended. The breakout still made money in both eras, but only barely in the 2020s (PF 1.16).

Deep dive: full Keltner Channel Breakout (long) backtest.

#13 Elder Triple Screen (simplified)

Rule: weekly MACD-hist rising + 2-day Force Index < 0, 5-day exit, 2 ATR stop. Style: Swing.

Numbers: 362 trades, 57.7% winners, profit factor 1.14 (1.33 in 2010-2019, 1.08 in 2020-2026), 4,071.3 total pts (2,196.6 in the 2010s, 1,874.8 in the 2020s), average 11.25 pts per trade (about $22.50 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 5,654.3 pts.

Verdict: Commonly credited to Alexander Elder, from his book Trading for a Living. Our version is simplified (weekly MACD-histogram rising, 2-day Force Index below zero, 5-day time exit, 2 ATR stop), so it is not a full test of Elder's system. 362 trades but a thin edge (PF 1.08 in the 2020s) and the biggest closed-trade drawdown among the swing systems, 5,654.3 pts. Hard to recommend as written.

Deep dive: full Elder Triple Screen (simplified) backtest.

#14 15-Minute Opening Range Breakout (ORB)

Rule: first 15-min range, stop at other side, hold to close. Style: Day trade.

Numbers: 3,880 trades, 39.6% winners, profit factor 1.17 (1.03 in 2010-2019, 1.21 in 2020-2026), 15,205.0 total pts (642.2 in the 2010s, 14,562.8 in the 2020s), average 3.92 pts per trade (about $7.84 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 2,918.0 pts.

Verdict: The opening range breakout (ORB) is commonly credited to Toby Crabel's work in the late 1980s. This is the best day-trading strategy in the table, with 3,880 trades, and it is flat at the close, so it gets none of the overnight bull-market tailwind. But the 2010s were close to breakeven (PF 1.03, 642.2 pts), and nearly all profit came in 2020-2026. It suits active day traders on MNQ who accept many small losing days.

Deep dive: full 15-Minute Opening Range Breakout (ORB) backtest.

#15 Initial Balance Breakout (first hour)

Rule: first 60-min range, stop at other side, hold to close. Style: Day trade.

Numbers: 3,690 trades, 48.3% winners, profit factor 1.06 (0.93 in 2010-2019, 1.11 in 2020-2026), 5,421.8 total pts (-1,443.2 in the 2010s, 6,865.0 in the 2020s), average 1.47 pts per trade (about $2.94 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 4,688.2 pts.

Verdict: The initial balance (IB) comes from Market Profile, commonly credited to J. Peter Steidlmayer. Waiting for the first hour gives a bigger range, a wider stop and a less favourable outcome than the 15-minute ORB: it lost 1,443.2 pts in 2010-2019. The positive total is entirely a 2020s story, so treat it as regime-dependent.

Deep dive: full Initial Balance Breakout (first hour) backtest.

#16 30-Minute Opening Range Breakout

Rule: first 30-min range, stop at other side, hold to close. Style: Day trade.

Numbers: 3,857 trades, 43.7% winners, profit factor 1.12 (0.91 in 2010-2019, 1.19 in 2020-2026), 11,010.8 total pts (-2,252.8 in the 2010s, 13,263.5 in the 2020s), average 2.85 pts per trade (about $5.70 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 5,237.0 pts.

Verdict: The 30-minute version of the ORB. Same story as the initial balance: it lost money in the 2010s (-2,252.8 pts) and made it all back and more in 2020-2026. The comparison with #14 is the most useful finding for ORB traders: the shorter 15-minute range held up better in both eras in this test.

Deep dive: full 30-Minute Opening Range Breakout backtest.

#17 Opening Gap Fill (fade)

Rule: fade every gap of 0.1%+ toward prior close, stop = 1x gap. Style: Day trade.

Numbers: 3,236 trades, 48.4% winners, profit factor 0.97 (0.91 in 2010-2019, 0.99 in 2020-2026), -2,369.5 total pts (-1,591.0 in the 2010s, -778.5 in the 2020s), average -0.73 pts per trade (about $-1.46 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 6,051.8 pts.

Verdict: Gap fading is a widely taught idea with no single inventor. Fading every 0.1%+ gap lost money in both decades with 3,236 trades, a large, clear sample. This is the kind of 'everyone knows gaps fill' folklore a backtest is good at checking. Our take: do not trade it unfiltered.

Deep dive: full Opening Gap Fill (fade) backtest.

#18 VWAP Trend Day

Rule: 10:00 bar above/below session VWAP -> long/short to close. Style: Day trade.

Numbers: 3,884 trades, 49.2% winners, profit factor 0.99 (0.89 in 2010-2019, 1.03 in 2020-2026), -1,080.8 total pts (-3,200.2 in the 2010s, 2,119.5 in the 2020s), average -0.28 pts per trade (about $-0.56 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 7,230.5 pts.

Verdict: VWAP as a trend-day filter is widely used by intraday traders; no single inventor. Being long or short to the close based on the 10:00 bar lost 3,200.2 pts in the 2010s and gained 2,119.5 pts in the 2020s, for a net loss. It also has the largest closed-trade drawdown in the table, 7,230.5 pts. Not an edge as tested.

Deep dive: full VWAP Trend Day backtest.

#19 15-Minute RSI(2) Pullback

Rule: 15m RSI(2) < 10 above 50-bar EMA, exit RSI > 70 or close. Style: Day trade.

Numbers: 1,599 trades, 63.5% winners, profit factor 0.85 (0.83 in 2010-2019, 0.86 in 2020-2026), -2,937.0 total pts (-744.5 in the 2010s, -2,192.5 in the 2020s), average -1.84 pts per trade (about $-3.68 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 3,765.5 pts.

Verdict: RSI(2) on 15-minute bars, adapted from the Connors daily idea. It wins 63.5% of the time and still loses money in both eras because the losers are bigger than the winners after the 1-point cost. This is the clearest example in the list of a high win rate hiding a losing system. Compare it with #6: the same indicator works on daily bars and fails on 15-minute bars in this test.

Deep dive: full 15-Minute RSI(2) Pullback backtest.

#20 Inside Day + 30-Min ORB

Rule: 30-min ORB only on the day after an inside day. Style: Day trade.

Numbers: 658 trades, 41.2% winners, profit factor 1.09 (0.79 in 2010-2019, 1.22 in 2020-2026), 1,480.5 total pts (-1,036.8 in the 2010s, 2,517.2 in the 2020s), average 2.25 pts per trade (about $4.50 per MNQ contract), closed-trade drawdown 1,881.0 pts.

Verdict: Toby Crabel wrote about inside days and narrow-range days as setups for breakouts in his late-1980s work. Filtering the 30-minute ORB to days after an inside day did not rescue the 2010s (PF 0.79, -1,036.8 pts). It made money in the 2020s. With 658 trades it is a real sample, just not a robust edge.

Deep dive: full Inside Day + 30-Min ORB backtest.

Missed the cut

#21 NR7 + 30-Min ORB (Crabel). 30-min ORB only on the day after an NR7 day. 399 trades, PF 1.02 overall but 0.67 in 2010-2019 (-877.5 pts) against 1.18 in 2020-2026. The NR7 filter did worse than the inside-day filter at #20, and made only 218.0 pts in total. See the NR7 and inside day backtest.

Three strategies had eye-catching numbers but fewer than 30 trades, so they did not qualify. With samples this small, the results are not statistically meaningful: one or two trades swing the whole picture.

• Golden Cross 50/200 (buy 50-day cross above 200-day, exit cross below): only 13 trades. PF 26.85 overall, 6.89 in 2010-2019, 2020-2026 PF not computable (no losing trades in that era); 17,506.5 total pts. Deep dive.
• Weinstein Stage 2 (weekly) (weekly close above rising 30-week SMA): only 26 trades. PF 8.24 overall, 4.44 in 2010-2019, 2020-2026 PF 10.97; 16,450.0 total pts. Deep dive.
• Bollinger Squeeze Breakout (long) (125-day BandWidth low within 5 days + close above upper band): only 19 trades. PF 3.15 overall, 1.30 in 2010-2019, 2020-2026 PF 4.40; 2,139.2 total pts. Deep dive.

The golden cross and Weinstein Stage 2 are slow, long-only trend filters, so in a market that rose about 13x they sat long through most of the rally. That's close to buy and hold with a few exits, and 13 or 26 trades is not enough to call it an edge. The Bollinger squeeze had only 19 trades, and just 122 of its points came from the 2010s.

FAQ

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.

Sources

• Loomi backtest: blog_strategy_tests.py + results JSON, Loomi research
• Loomi ranking: rank_strategies.py + strategy_ranking.json, Loomi research