LearnComparisons › 3-month momentum vs trend + trailing stop

3-Month Momentum Switch vs SMA-200 Trend + 15% Trailing Stop

Two rule sets, 59 ETFs, one engine and window — a genuinely like-for-like comparison.

Head-to-head: trend + trailing stop won on 47 of 59 ETFs by CAGR. Median CAGR — 3-month momentum: 0.1% · trend + trailing stop: 3.2%. Median max drawdown — 26.8% vs 30.0%.
3-month momentumtrend + trailing stop
Median CAGR (59 ETFs)0.1%3.2%
Median max drawdown−26.8%−30.0%
ETFs won (by CAGR)1247
Styleassets with long, persistent cycles — index, sector, and even managed-futures ETFslong trends with tolerable pullbacks; the 15% trail is wide enough to survive normal corrections

Where the gap was biggest

ETF3-month momentumtrend + trailing stopgap
UST −100.0%−7.6% 92.4%
SOXS −14.2%9.2% 23.4%
UVXY −44.2%−23.3% 20.9%
SQQQ −24.4%−12.1% 12.3%
TQQQ 10.8%22.1% 11.3%
TBF 0.1%10.0% 9.9%
QQQE −3.4%6.3% 9.7%
FAS 1.0%−8.1% 9.0%
EEM −0.5%8.4% 8.9%
TECS −17.1%−8.9% 8.2%
Run 3-month momentum or trend + trailing stop yourself — free →

Build it from blocks (or type it in English), backtest it on 5.5 years of minute data in seconds, tweak any parameter, then paper trade it on live data. No card, no broker needed to start.

Frequently asked questions

Which is better: 3-month momentum or trend + trailing stop?

On this 2021-01-04–2026-07-17 window, trend + trailing stop produced the higher CAGR on 47 of 59 ETFs. Median CAGR: 3-month momentum 0.1% vs trend + trailing stop 3.2%; median max drawdown: 26.8% vs 30.0%. "Better" depends on the asset and what you optimize — the per-ETF table shows where each wins.

Dig deeper

3-Month Momentum Switchrules + all 59 ETF results SMA-200 Trend + 15% Trailing Stoprules + all 59 ETF results

Backtests are hypothetical, computed by DeployQuant's engine on minute-resolution consolidated US market data (2021-01-04 to 2026-07-17, $10,000 starting capital, no margin, fees and slippage not modeled) and do not guarantee future results. Nothing on this page is investment advice. Live trading involves risk of loss.