50/200 SMA crosslong

Backtest-Ergebnisse @ TSLA • 10 Minutes

The backtest results for this SMA cross strategy on TSLA show some interesting patterns, but I have concerns about its robustness.

First the positives: The strategy shows a decent Risk/Reward ratio of 1.90 and the win rate leeway is quite good - you only need 34.5% win rate to break even, and you're achieving 41%. This gives you some buffer for worse market conditions. Also, the market exposure of 47.2% means you're not constantly in the market, which helps manage risk. But here comes the problematic part: The maximum drawdown of -34.8% is quite high for a trend-following strategy, and the total return of 18.4% significantly underperforms the buy & hold return of 59%.

What really makes me sceptical is the low trade count - only 29 trades over more than 12 months is not enough to make reliable statistical conclusions. With such few trades, individual outliers can heavily skew the results. I would want to see at least 100 trades before making any strong conclusions about the strategy's effectiveness. Also, the volatility metrics suggest this might be too wild of a ride for most traders - a realized volatility of 43.36% is quite high, even if it's better than TSLA's native 72.08%.

Yo fam, let me break down this TSLA backtest for you! 🚀

This 50/200 SMA cross strategy is giving some interesting vibes. We're looking at a decent 18.4% profit over the year, which isn't too shabby, but kinda falls short of that juicy 59% buy & hold return. But here's where it gets interesting - the strategy only keeps us in the market 47.2% of the time, so we're actually taking way less risk than going all-in! 💎🙌

The risk metrics are actually pretty solid for a TSLA play. That 1.90 risk/reward ratio is sweet, and even though the win rate is only 41%, we're still way above the minimum needed (34.5%). Plus, that max drawdown of -34.8% is better than TSLA's raw -55.3%, so we're definitely managing risk better than hodling! The Sharpe and Sortino ratios aren't mindblowing but they're positive, which means we're not just gambling here.

I gotta say though, 29 trades over a year (about 4-5 per month) feels a bit slow for my Wendy's paycheck YOLO style 😅 But maybe that's not such a bad thing - fewer trades means lower fees and less chance of paper-handing during tough times. Overall, this looks like a decent strategy for someone who wants to play TSLA with less stress than going full degen! 🎢 Just remember, past performance doesn't guarantee future tendies! 🍗

Por dios, this is one of those typical amateur strategies that make me want to punch somebody in the face. Let me tell you why this is terrible.

First off, you're getting destroyed by the buy & hold strategy - 18.4% vs 59%? That's pathetic! You're basically paying money to underperform the market by a massive margin. And with Tesla of all stocks! The volatility alone should have given you better returns if you were just throwing darts at a board.

The risk metrics are laughable. A -34.8% drawdown with only 29 trades? Madre mía, that's like jumping out of a plane with a broken parachute. The Sharpe ratio of 0.78 is mediocre at best, telling me this strategy is about as sophisticated as a brick.

The only slightly positive thing I see is the Risk/Reward ratio of 1.90 and the win rate leeway - but honestly, it's like putting lipstick on a pig. With those massive drawdowns and terrible market exposure, you're basically turning good money into confetti. My advice? Either completely rebuild this strategy from scratch or stick to buying index funds. This is embarassing.