Velocity Strength Filter vs Fifty-Two Week High Leaderboard

Two US stocks & ETFs strategies from the top of the return-to-drawdown ranking, compared on the same measures: how far each fell, how fast each grew, and how much return each bought per unit of risk.

Side by side

Velocity Strength FilterFifty-Two Week High Leaderboard
Worst drop (max drawdown)-27.4%-34.5%
Yearly growth (CAGR)+17.7%+16.1%
Calmar (CAGR ÷ drawdown)0.650.47
Return per unit of risk (Sharpe)0.840.73
Total return+406.4%+338.3%
Risk tierHigh drawdownHigh drawdown
Strategy typeMomentum rotationMomentum rotation
Period2016-10-24 – 2026-10-052016-10-24 – 2026-10-05

Backtest = historical simulation on past prices, not real trading.

Velocity Strength Filter had the shallower worst fall (-27.4%). Velocity Strength Filter compounded faster (+17.7% a year). On return per unit of drawdown Velocity Strength Filter leads, 0.65 against 0.47.

Equity curves

Velocity Strength Filter

$10,000 start, 2016-10-24 – 2026-10-05, SPY dashed.

Fifty-Two Week High Leaderboard

$10,000 start, 2016-10-24 – 2026-10-05, SPY dashed.

Each strategy in full

Other comparisons

Frequently asked questions

Which has the lower drawdown, Velocity Strength Filter or Fifty-Two Week High Leaderboard?

Velocity Strength Filter, at -27.4%.

Which earned more per unit of risk?

Velocity Strength Filter on the Calmar ratio (0.65 vs 0.47); Velocity Strength Filter on the Sharpe ratio (0.84).

Were both tested on the same data?

Both are US stocks & ETFs strategies re-run with their current code on historical prices, over the same period (2016-10-24 – 2026-10-05).

Browse the backtests another way

By asset class

By strategy type

Risk-based rankings

Metric guides

All strategy backtests, lowest drawdown first

Go further

Disclosure. Backtests are hypothetical simulations on historical data. They do not include every real-world cost, are not live results, and do not guarantee future returns. Educational research only, not investment advice.