Stratsemble
Preparation · Stage 2 of 5 — Test
XLK · Tech Sector ETF (XLK)ETFs

Does the Time-Series Momentum strategy beat buy & hold on Tech Sector ETF (XLK)? (XLK · backtested honestly)

Time-series (absolute) momentum measures the asset against itself, not a ranking: it compares the asset's own trailing 12-month return (skipping the last ~month) to its own history.

Lagged buy & hold2021-10-28 → 2026-10-27 · 1,254 barsCosts & slippage onvs Buy & HoldHypothetical · not advice
Total return
+90.6%
Buy & hold +144.2%
vs Buy & Hold
-53.7 pts
lagged the benchmark
Max drawdown
-19.1%
Sharpe 0.88 · 11 trades
The honest read

Over this period, Time-Series Momentum on Tech Sector ETF (XLK) returned +90.6%, while simply buying and holding returned +144.2% — it lagged buy & hold by 53.7 points, with a worst drawdown of -19.1%. It traded 11 times and sat in cash about 52% of the time. It's a mechanism you test.

What this settles — and the next dig

It lagged buy & hold over this window — that's a result, and a backtest you can kill for free just did its job. Re-tuning this same idea until it looks better only adds another shot at looking good by luck, so the honest next move is a fresh one: test a different strategy on Tech Sector ETF (XLK), or build your own — free. Most ideas die cheaply right here, and that's exactly how the rare one that holds up gets found.

Or stop here — walking away from an idea that didn't beat simply holding is a result, not a failure.

Interactive

Run it yourself

Change the parameters and the window, then re-run — no account needed.

Change the rules? Open the Time-Series Momentum rules on Tech Sector ETF (XLK) in the no-code builder — the same rules tested here — and make them your own.

Open in the builder →
Worked example

Two real trades from this backtest

Shown at the modeled fills — entries at the next open; a stop at its level, or at that day's open if the day opened past it; a target at its level; costs on. A single trade is never a signal and says nothing about the next one — not the best or worst, a middling winner and a middling loser among the completed trades.

11 trades total — 5 winners, 6 losers (45% won). Below is one of each, not a scoreboard. One position is still open at the window end — its result is unrealized and is counted in the totals above at its current mark, not shown as a card below.

  1. Entry. A long entry fired; filled at the next open on 2025-10-06 at $144.28 — never the signal bar's own close.
  2. Held. 9 daily bars.
  3. Exit. Exited on 2025-10-17 at $141.41 (the exit rule fired (filled at the next open)).
  4. Result. -2.09% after costs.

The worst single trade in this whole test reached -5.15%.

  1. Entry. A long entry fired; filled at the next open on 2025-08-27 at $131.65 — never the signal bar's own close.
  2. Held. 24 daily bars.
  3. Exit. Exited on 2025-10-01 at $140.21 (the exit rule fired (filled at the next open)).
  4. Result. +6.41% after costs.

Trading costs + slippage (0.10%) are already deducted from every figure above. One trade is never the edge — it's the whole distribution (the win rate, the losers, the reality-check) that matters; this just makes the mechanics concrete. It describes the past; it is not a prediction.

Put this honest verdict on your site

A live badge that re-runs itself and links back here. Free to embed on any blog, newsletter or forum — it shows the honest result, beat or lagged.

<iframe src="https://stratsemble.com/embed/tech-sector-etf-momentum-backtest" width="360" height="340" style="border:0;border-radius:12px;max-width:100%" loading="lazy" title="Does the Time-Series Momentum strategy beat buy & hold on Tech Sector ETF (XLK)?"></iframe>
The Proving Ground

See which strategies actually beat buy & hold — and which only look like they do.

Free, in seconds, no sign-up. Put any famous strategy to the proof the honest way — real costs, every loss shown, measured against simply holding — so a tip, a guru, or your own hope can't fool you.

  • Prove any strategy — free
  • See if it's an edge, or just luck
  • Read today's names that cleared every check
Test · the proof
Does AAPL + Aroon really beat just holding it?

Put it to the proof the honest way — real costs, every loss, measured against simply holding. Free, no sign-up.

Prove it →
Catch the lie
Someone swears the death cross always means a crash is coming.

Paste their exact claim and watch the honest engine put it to the test — free, losses and all.

Test the claim →
Stress-test · the reality check
A great backtest is the easiest thing to fool yourself with.

Put a survivor through the reality check — is the edge curve-fit to the past, or does it hold up? The honest way to tell a pattern from luck.

Run the reality check →

an honest backtest — real costs on, measured against simply buying & holding

How to read this
  • • The strategy line is Time-Series Momentum on Tech Sector ETF (XLK); the dashed line is simply buying and holding XLK. Beating the dashed line is the whole point — many strategies don't.
  • • Max drawdown is the worst peak-to-trough fall you'd have sat through. A higher return with a much deeper drawdown is not obviously better.
  • • Every fill assumes next-open execution with costs & slippage on — no acting on prices you couldn't have known.
  • • A small number of trades means a small sample. Treat a great-looking result on a handful of trades with suspicion.
What this is — and isn't

This is a hypothetical backtest of a well-known mechanism on past data. It is not advice, not a prediction, and not a claim that the strategy works. We hold no funds and place no orders. The value here is the ability to test an idea honestly — see where it would have helped, and where it would have hurt — before you ever risk real money on your own broker.

How this is computed → · who's behind it · where a backtest fits

See what actually beats buy & hold — most don't, here are the rare few that do →

Indicator and strategy names identify the published rule being tested; no affiliation with, or endorsement by, any person or trademark owner is implied.