Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation vs Velocity Strength Filter

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

Tactical Leveraged Trend RotationVelocity Strength Filter
Max drawdown-25.4%-27.4%
CAGR+17.8%+17.6%
Calmar (CAGR ÷ drawdown)0.700.64
Sharpe0.810.84
Total return+409.3%+403.3%
Risk tierHigh drawdownHigh drawdown
Strategy typeMomentum rotationMomentum rotation
Period2016-10-21 – 2026-10-022016-10-21 – 2026-10-02

Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation had the shallower worst fall (-25.4%). Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation compounded faster (+17.8% a year). On return per unit of drawdown Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation leads, 0.70 against 0.64.

Equity curves

Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation

$10,000 start, 2016-10-21 – 2026-10-02, SPY dashed.

Velocity Strength Filter

$10,000 start, 2016-10-21 – 2026-10-02, SPY dashed.

Each strategy in full

Other comparisons

Frequently asked questions

Which has the lower drawdown, Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation or Velocity Strength Filter?

Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation, at -25.4%.

Which earned more per unit of risk?

Tactical Leveraged Trend Rotation on the Calmar ratio (0.70 vs 0.64); 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 (2016-10-21 – 2026-10-02).

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.