DeployQuantSQQQ trading strategies, backtested
ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ: -3x daily Nasdaq-100: gains when tech falls, decays when it doesn't. Every DeployQuant template run on SQQQ over 5.7 years of minute data, same engine, same window, sorted by return.
SQQQ is the ProShares UltraPro Short QQQ fund, which aims to return minus three times the daily move of the Nasdaq-100. Over the 1444 sessions from 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02 the fund lost 97.86% in total, a CAGR of -48.82%, on annualized volatility of 67.16%. The peak was 2021-03-08 and the low was the last day of the window, for a drawdown of 97.93% that never recovered. Every template below started with $10,000.
Nothing finished positive. Golden cross lost the least at -7.41% a year, the RSI(2) snapback came second at -9.73%, and the monthly cycle lost the most at -44.62%. Buy-and-hold in the engine returned -42.33% a year, ended at $424.07 and had a maximum drawdown of 96.08%. Eleven templates beat that CAGR and 11 had a shallower drawdown, so only the monthly cycle did worse than holding.
The engine's holding line tracks the fund's own prices in 2021 and 2022 and drifts away afterwards. In the engine, holding returned -61.3%, 78.4%, -71.5%, -44.9%, -43.5% and -34% across 2021 to 2026. The fund itself returned -62.56%, 82.55%, -73.6%, -49.82%, -53.03% and -49.76% in those years. For the full window the engine shows -95.76% and the fund -97.86%. The cause of that gap is not in the facts. The template rows below are measured against the engine's line, and the behaviour tables use the fund's prices.
| Strategy | CAGR | max DD | Sharpe | trades | win rate | final value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Golden Cross (SMA 50/200) | −7.4% | −51.5% | -0.03 | 3 | 33% | $6,428 |
| RSI(2) Dip Snapback | −9.7% | −79.5% | -0.05 | 170 | 54% (+1 open) | $5,554 |
| 200-Day SMA Regime Filter | −10.5% | −63.8% | -0.06 | 13 | 31% | $5,286 |
| SMA-200 Trend + 15% Trailing Stop | −12.1% | −71.3% | -0.14 | 32 | 41% | $4,782 |
| 20-Day Momentum + Trailing Stop | −16.0% | −67.5% | -0.28 | 72 | 29% | $3,684 |
| SMA 10/50 Trend | −21.1% | −79.9% | -0.27 | 18 | 17% | $2,561 |
| RSI(14) Mean Reversion | −23.6% | −85.2% | -0.38 | 16 | 44% (+1 open) | $2,135 |
| EMA 12/26 Trend | −24.3% | −82.8% | -0.35 | 21 | 14% | $2,019 |
| 3-Month Momentum Switch | −25.8% | −86.7% | -0.45 | 25 | 16% | $1,805 |
| Weekly Entry + 7% Target | −29.3% | −92.9% | -0.46 | 261 | 38% | $1,363 |
| Drawdown Dip Buyer + 8% Target | −39.2% | −96.0% | -0.54 | 4 | 100% (+1 open) | $576 |
| First-to-Last Day of Month | −44.6% | −97.0% | -0.60 | 69 | 32% (+1 open) | $336 |
| Buy & hold SQQQ | −42.3% | −96.1% | -0.63 | – | – | $424 |
Why every template lost money on SQQQ
SQQQ rose in one calendar year, 2022, when the fund returned 82.55% and the Nasdaq-100 fund QQQ fell 32.39%. In the other five years the fund lost between 49.76% and 73.6%. A rule needs to be in the fund during 2022 and out of it for the rest, and a daily-decision rule that reads trend or momentum cannot do both. The best templates did a part of this. The worst ones sat in the fund year after year.
Golden cross made 3 round trips and won 1. The win was 4.91% over 191 days from 2022-03-15, and the other two lost 9.54% over 108 days from 2022-10-04 and 33.02% over 35 days from 2025-04-23. The average win was 4.91% and the average loss 21.28%, and the profit factor was 0.12. The CAGR was -7.41%, the maximum drawdown 51.51% and the exposure 15.9%. By year it returned 6.2% in 2022, lost 10.6% in 2023 and 32.4% in 2025, and held no position in 2021, 2024 or 2026. It was ahead of the engine's holding line in five of the six years and behind in 2022, when holding returned 78.4%.
The RSI(2) snapback made 170 round trips and won 92 of them, a 54% win rate. The average win was 4.8% and the average loss 5.82%, so the profit factor was 0.93, the closest to break-even of any template. The yearly returns were 0.2% in 2021, 149.2% in 2022, then -53.2%, -31%, -7.2% and -25.8%. The 149.2% year is the largest single-year return of any template on this fund. It beat the engine's holding line in all six years, including 2022, when holding returned 78.4%. Its median trade made 0.33%, and its worst trade, -31.05%, lasted 20 days from 2026-04-02. One trade, opened on 2026-10-01, had not closed by the last day and stood at -2.95%.
The 200-day regime filter made 13 round trips and won 4, with an average win of 3.12% and an average loss of 8.13%. The CAGR was -10.51% and the drawdown 63.83%. Its best trade made 5.2% over 111 days from 2022-04-12 and its worst lost 14.78% over 14 days from 2025-04-11. Trend plus trailing stop made 32 round trips and won 13, a 41% win rate, the highest of the trend rules. The average win was 10.25% and the average loss 9.73%, and the CAGR was -12.06%. Its best trade was 39.49% over 11 days from 2025-03-27 and its worst was -16.22% over 6 days from 2026-04-02. It lost 18.7% in 2022 and 24.8% in 2026 so far, and made 0% in 2021 and 2024.
The templates that traded often
Momentum breakout made 72 round trips with a 29% win rate. The average win was 10.95% and the average loss 5.93%, and the profit factor was 0.7. The CAGR was -15.97% and the drawdown 67.48%. It made 34.4% in 2022 and lost in every other year. In 2021 it won 1 of 10 round trips, and in 2022 it won 12 of 29. Its best trade, 28.9%, lasted 7 days from 2022-05-05.
The weekly 7% target made 261 round trips and won 99, a 38% win rate. The average win was 7.37% and the average loss 5.33%, and the profit factor was 0.85. The CAGR was -29.33% with a drawdown of 92.92% and a final value of $1,363.25. It was invested 57.8% of the time. The target needs a 7% rise, and the fund's average intraday range is 4.75%, so a share of weeks end at the Thursday exit instead of the limit. Calendar years were -19.9%, 45%, -46.2%, -50.3%, -50.4% and -17.2%. Its worst trade was -31.34% from 2025-04-07 to 2025-04-10, and its median trade lost 1.55%.
The monthly cycle made 69 round trips and won 22, a 32% win rate, with an average win of 15.25% and an average loss of 12.49%. It was invested 95.2% of the time, ended with $336.10 and had a drawdown of 96.98%. In 2022 it returned 113%, and in the other five years it lost between 46.1% and 70.5%. Its best month was 39.83% in January 2022 and its worst was -33.25% in April 2026. It also had an open trade at the end, entered on 2026-10-01 at $34.1381, the same entry as the RSI(2) snapback's open trade.
RSI(14) mean reversion made 16 round trips and won 7, a 44% win rate. The average win was 19.05% and the average loss 23.79%, and the profit factor was 0.53. The CAGR was -23.58% and the drawdown 85.21%. It held for 87.4 days on average. It made 53.3% in 2022 and lost in the other five years. Its two worst trades were -52.27% over 203 days from 2025-04-30 and -49.08% over 206 days from 2023-01-24. Its best were 33.15% from 2022-03-28 and 31.36% over 110 days from 2025-12-10. Its last position, entered on 2026-08-18, was still open at -11.11%.
The rules that mostly sat out or waited for confirmation
SMA 10/50 made 18 round trips and won 3, a 17% win rate, with a profit factor of 0.28. All three wins came in 2022 and made 15.63%, 13.56% and 9.89%, and the rule returned 37.5% that year. In every other year it lost, from -14.2% in 2025 to -36.7% in 2023. The CAGR was -21.12% and the drawdown 79.92%. EMA 12/26 made 21 round trips and won 3, with a longest losing streak of 14, a CAGR of -24.32% and a drawdown of 82.8%. Its best trade was 23.57% over 48 days from 2022-04-21 and its worst was -26.23% over 11 days from 2022-11-03.
The 3-month momentum switch made 25 round trips and won 4. The average win was 1.15% and the average loss 7.97%, which gives a profit factor of 0.04. The CAGR was -25.78% and the drawdown 86.72%. Its best trade made 2.29% over 95 days from 2022-01-24. It lost 49.2% in 2022, the year the fund rose 82.55%.
The dip buyer closed 4 round trips, all winners at its 8% target, in February and March 2021. It bought again on 2021-03-08 at an adjusted price of $1,485.84 and held to the end, down 97.77% on that position. Its CAGR was -39.18% against -42.33% for holding, and its yearly returns follow the holding line within a few tenths of a point from 2022 on. Every trend and momentum rule trailed the engine's holding line in 2022, when it returned 78.4%, and beat it in 2021 and in 2023 to 2026.
How each strategy traded SQQQ
| Strategy | Time in market | Avg hold (days) | Best trade | Worst trade | Profit factor | With 10 bps slippage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| golden cross | 15.9% | 111 | 4.9% | −33.0% | 0.12 | −7.5% |
| RSI(2) snapback | 47.3% | 6 | 17.6% | −31.1% | 0.93 | −14.9% |
| 200-day regime filter | 14.5% | 24 | 5.2% | −14.8% | 0.16 | −10.9% |
| trend + trailing stop | 14.3% | 10 | 39.5% | −16.2% | 0.69 | −13.0% |
| momentum breakout | 18.1% | 5 | 28.9% | −13.4% | 0.70 | −18.0% |
| SMA 10/50 trend | 28.2% | 33 | 15.6% | −21.0% | 0.28 | −21.6% |
| RSI mean reversion | 68.8% | 87 | 33.1% | −52.3% | 0.53 | −24.0% |
| EMA 12/26 trend | 27.1% | 27 | 23.6% | −26.2% | 0.29 | −24.9% |
| 3-month momentum | 21.5% | 18 | 2.3% | −25.9% | 0.04 | −26.4% |
| weekly 7% target | 57.8% | 4 | 15.2% | −31.3% | 0.85 | −37.5% |
| dip buyer | 98.4% | 7 | 8.3% | 8.0% | – | −39.4% |
| monthly cycle | 95.2% | 28 | 39.8% | −33.3% | 0.60 | −46.0% |
Trade statistics and what costs did
Exposure ranged from 14.3% for trend plus trailing stop and 14.5% for the 200-day filter to 95.2% for the monthly cycle and 98.4% for the dip buyer. Average holds ran from 3.6 days for the weekly target and 5.3 for momentum breakout to 87.4 for RSI(14) mean reversion and 111.3 for golden cross. Profit factors were below 1 for every template with losses. The RSI(2) snapback had 0.93, the weekly target 0.85, momentum breakout 0.7, trend plus trailing stop 0.69, the monthly cycle 0.6, RSI(14) mean reversion 0.53, SMA 10/50 0.28, EMA 12/26 0.29, golden cross 0.12 and the 3-month switch 0.04.
The cost runs changed the order near the top. At zero cost the RSI(2) snapback was second at -9.73%. At 5 basis points per trade it was -12.33% and at 10 it was -14.86%, which put it behind the 200-day filter at -10.91% and trend plus trailing stop at -13.03%. Golden cross stayed first, going from -7.41% to -7.46% and -7.51%. The weekly target went from -29.33% to -34.77% and -37.46%, the largest cost effect of any template on this fund. Rules with few trades barely moved, and rules with hundreds of round trips lost several points a year to a small charge.
SQQQ traded an average of $2,125,645,480 a day with a median minute volume of 11,285 shares. A $10,000 order is small against that. The headline run has no fees and no margin.
Months, streaks and drawdowns by template
April 2022 and July 2022 frame the monthly results on SQQQ. Holding made 43.86% in April 2022 and lost 31.44% in July 2022. Golden cross had its best month in April 2022 at 44.55% and its worst in July 2022 at -31.72%. The 200-day filter, trend plus trailing stop, the RSI(2) snapback, RSI(14) mean reversion and the 3-month switch also had April 2022 as their best month, with the trend rules at 27.35% and 27.36%. Trend plus trailing stop lost 33.96% in July 2022. The templates entered the rally and stayed through the reversal, since the rules decide once a day and the fund can move more than 14% in one session.
The weekly 7% target is the exception. Its best month was July 2026 at 40.42% and its worst April 2026 at -27.98%, so its results came from a different stretch than the trend rules. Momentum breakout had a mild worst month, -14.39% in December 2021, and a best of 27.89% in September 2022. The monthly cycle made 39.02% in January 2022 and lost 32.56% in April 2026.
Losing streaks are longer for the rules that exit on a crossover. EMA 12/26 lost 14 trades in a row and the weekly target 12. SMA 10/50 lost 11 and momentum breakout 9. The golden cross lost only 2 in a row and trend plus trailing stop 5. The RSI(2) snapback had both the longest winning streak, 8, and a losing streak of 7. RSI(14) mean reversion never strung together more than 2 of either, which leaves its result to the size of a few long holds.
The calendar year of 2022 divides the results most sharply. SQQQ itself returned 78.4% that year in the engine. The RSI(2) snapback made 149.2% and the monthly cycle 113%, both ahead of holding. The dip buyer made 78.3% because it was nearly always invested. The golden cross made 6.2%, and the 200-day filter lost 16.7% and trend plus trailing stop 18.7% in the one year the fund rose. Those two rules were ahead of holding in the other five years, largely by sitting in cash, and they were at their weakest when the fund was strongest.
Recovery times differ as well. Golden cross fell 51.51% from 2022-06-16 and bottomed 1,077 days later, on 2025-05-28, without recovering. The RSI(2) snapback fell 79.45% from 2023-01-03 to 2026-06-02. Momentum breakout's first large drawdown, 42.21% from March 2021, took 310 days to reach its low and recovered on 2022-05-11 as the fund rallied.
By weekday, SQQQ averaged -0.53% on Mondays and -0.28% on Wednesdays. Tuesday, Thursday and Friday were close to flat at -0.04%, -0.02% and -0.04%. The pattern comes from six years of data and a fund that fell in five of them, and it is a small effect next to the 4.75% average daily range.
How SQQQ behaved
| Measure | SQQQ |
|---|---|
| Data in this test | 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02 (1444 sessions) |
| Total return, buy and hold | −97.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 67.2% |
| Deepest drawdown | −97.9% (2021-03-08 to 2026-10-02) |
| Up days | 45.2% |
| Average daily range | 4.75% |
| Average overnight gap | 1.78% |
| Correlation to SPY | -0.94 |
| Correlation to QQQ | -1.00 |
| Correlation to TLT | -0.09 |
| Sessions above the 200-day average | 16.8% |
| Crossings of the 200-day average | 26 |
| Falls of 10% or more from a 20-day high | 85 |
Calendar years
| Year | Return |
|---|---|
| 2021 | −62.6% |
| 2022 | 82.5% |
| 2023 | −73.6% |
| 2024 | −49.8% |
| 2025 | −53.0% |
| 2026 (part) | −49.8% |
Biggest single days
| Best day | Move |
|---|---|
| 2025-04-04 | 18.4% |
| 2022-09-13 | 16.6% |
| 2025-04-03 | 16.0% |
| 2022-05-05 | 15.0% |
| 2022-05-18 | 14.8% |
| Worst day | Move |
|---|---|
| 2025-04-09 | −35.4% |
| 2022-11-10 | −22.1% |
| 2022-11-30 | −13.8% |
| 2022-07-27 | −12.6% |
| 2025-05-12 | −12.1% |
Average return by calendar month
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −3.3% | 1.3% | −2.6% | −2.2% | −14.7% | −7.7% | −5.5% | −2.1% | 6.6% | −8.3% | −12.8% | 2.3% |
Most and least correlated funds
| Most correlated | Least correlated | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| QID | 1.00 | TQQQ | -1.00 |
| PSQ | 1.00 | QLD | -1.00 |
| TECS | 0.97 | QQQ | -1.00 |
| REW | 0.96 | QQQM | -1.00 |
| SDS | 0.94 | VOOG | -0.98 |
Leverage and decay against QQQ
| Year | SQQQ | QQQ | -3× QQQ, reset daily |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | −62.6% | 29.2% | −62.0% |
| 2022 | 82.5% | −32.4% | 73.5% |
| 2023 | −73.6% | 54.8% | −77.9% |
| 2024 | −49.8% | 25.6% | −58.5% |
| 2025 | −53.0% | 20.8% | −59.6% |
| 2026 | −49.8% | 22.4% | −55.0% |
The last column compounds -3× QQQ's daily return with no fees or financing: the return a perfect daily-reset fund would have had. It leaves out the fund's fees, its borrowing costs and the interest it earns on cash, which put a real fund below or above this line. A daily-reset fund does not aim for -3× the underlying's return over a year.
Over 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02, SQQQ returned −97.9% while QQQ returned 151.1% and a perfect daily-reset -3× version would have returned −98.9%. Its measured daily beta to QQQ was -3.00.
What SQQQ did in the window
SQQQ rose on 45.18% of sessions. The average up day was 3.23% and the average down day was -3.02%. The average intraday range was 4.75% and the average overnight gap 1.78%. The intraday log return was -221.41% and the overnight log return was -157.66%, so 58.41% of the decay came during the trading day and 41.59% overnight. The lag-1 autocorrelation was -0.04. The fund closed above its 200-day average on 16.79% of sessions and crossed it 26 times.
The worst day was 2025-04-09 at -35.41%, followed by 2022-11-10 at -22.12%, 2022-11-30 at -13.75%, 2022-07-27 at -12.59% and 2025-05-12 at -12.09%. The best days were 2025-04-04 at 18.42%, 2022-09-13 at 16.6%, 2025-04-03 at 16.02%, 2022-05-05 at 14.99% and 2022-05-18 at 14.84%. April 2025 holds the worst day and two of the five best. Golden cross entered on 2025-04-23 and lost 33.02% in the weeks after, and the RSI(2) snapback's best trade, 17.65%, ran from 2025-04-02 to 2025-04-04.
Beta to SPY was -3.86 and to QQQ -3, and beta to TLT was -0.39. The correlation to QQQ was -1, to SPY -0.94 and to TLT -0.09. The most correlated funds were QID and PSQ at 1, TECS at 0.97, REW at 0.96 and SDS at 0.94. The least correlated were TQQQ, QLD, QQQ and QQQM at -1 and VOOG at -0.98.
Daily reset against QQQ
SQQQ tracks QQQ with a daily multiple of -3, and its realized beta was -3 with an R-squared of 1. QQQ returned 151.07% over the window and SQQQ returned -97.86%, against -98.9% for a frictionless fund that resets to -3 times QQQ every day. The yearly table shows the fund close to that ideal: -62.56% against -61.98% in 2021, 82.55% against 73.53% in 2022, -73.6% against -77.89% in 2023, -49.82% against -58.51% in 2024, -53.03% against -59.59% in 2025 and -49.76% against -54.95% in 2026 so far. The fund finished above the ideal in five of the six years, and the table caption says that fees, borrowing costs and interest on cash put a real fund below or above the line.
QQQ rose in every year except 2022, and SQQQ lost in every year except 2022. The three-times multiple applies to each day, and a fund that resets daily cannot deliver three times a year's move when the path is volatile. The 67.16% annualized volatility and the 85 episodes of falls of 10% or more from a 20-day high, covering 866 days, are the path.
RSI(14) was below 30 on 120 sessions and above 70 on 18. After an RSI(14) reading below 30 the median forward 5-day return was -0.05% against a baseline of -1.8%, and the 20-day figure was -5.1% against -5.73%. That is better than the baseline at both horizons and close to flat at 5 days. After RSI(2) fell below 10, on 245 sessions, the median 5-day return was -1.78% and the 20-day return -6.54%. A low RSI(14) reading was followed by a median 5-day return close to zero here, and RSI(14) mean reversion still returned -23.58% because of two holds of more than 200 days.
Calendar months and the inverse peers
By calendar month, May averaged -14.73%, November -12.78%, October -8.29% and June -7.65%. September averaged 6.62%, December 2.26% and February 1.33%. With five or six observations per month, treat these as a description of this window.
The peer pages in this category give a different winner for each fund. The RSI(2) snapback leads on QID at -1.85% and on PSQ at 0.13%, where holding lost 29.46% and 13.76% a year. Golden cross leads on SDS at -2.33% and REW at -6.71%. Trend plus trailing stop leads on SOXS at -4.93% and TECS at -11.04%. EEV is the only inverse fund with a clearly positive template, RSI(14) mean reversion at 5%, and TBF, which gained 12.21% when held, was led by the monthly cycle at 11.93%.
On SQQQ the winner was golden cross at -7.41%, as it was on SDS and REW. The RSI(2) snapback led on QID, PSQ, SH and SPDN, the less leveraged Nasdaq and S&P inverse funds, and was second here. Everything here comes from one window, with daily decisions and fills on minute bars. Trade-list prices are split-adjusted, which is why an entry such as $1,485.84 is far from the quote printed at the time.
Build it from blocks (or type it in English), backtest it on 5.7 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
What was the best strategy for SQQQ?
Of the 12 templates tested on SQQQ over 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02, the strongest by CAGR was golden cross at −7.4% (max drawdown 51.5%), versus −42.3% for buy-and-hold. The best result in hindsight is not a forecast. Check drawdowns and trade counts before drawing conclusions.
Did any strategy beat buying and holding SQQQ?
11 of 12 templates beat SQQQ buy-and-hold (−42.3% CAGR) on this window; 11 of 12 had a shallower maximum drawdown than holding (96.1%).
What was the best strategy for SQQQ?
Golden cross, at -7.41% a year against -42.33% for holding, with a maximum drawdown of 51.51%. It made 3 round trips and won 1. The RSI(2) snapback was second at -9.73%, and no template had a positive CAGR.
Did any strategy beat buying and holding SQQQ?
Eleven of the 12 templates beat holding on CAGR and 11 had a shallower drawdown. The monthly cycle was the exception at -44.62% against -42.33%. Beating holding here means losing less, since all 12 lost money.
Why do all the strategies lose money on SQQQ?
The fund resets to -3 times QQQ daily, and its total return was -97.86% while QQQ returned 151.07%. It rose only in 2022, by 82.55%, and fell by between 49.76% and 73.6% in each of the other five calendar years. A rule has to be in the fund in 2022 and out of it otherwise to make money.
What happened to the dip buyer on SQQQ?
It won 4 round trips at the 8% target in early 2021 and then bought on 2021-03-08 at an adjusted price of $1,485.84. That position was still open at the end, down 97.77%. The CAGR was -39.18% against -42.33% for holding.
How much did trading costs matter on SQQQ?
For the high-turnover rules, a lot. The weekly target went from -29.33% to -37.46% at 10 basis points per trade. The RSI(2) snapback fell from second place at -9.73% to -14.86%, behind the 200-day filter and trend plus trailing stop. Golden cross barely moved, from -7.41% to -7.51%.
What was the worst day for SQQQ?
2025-04-09, when it fell 35.41%. The best day was 2025-04-04 at 18.42%, with 16.02% on 2025-04-03. Golden cross entered on 2025-04-23 and lost 33.02% over the following 35 days.
Does holding SQQQ in the engine match the fund's own return?
Close in 2021 and 2022 and not after. Holding in the engine returned -95.76% over the window against -97.86% for the fund, and the yearly figures differ most from 2024. The facts do not explain the gap.
Other inverse etfs
Backtests are hypothetical, computed by DeployQuant's engine on minute-resolution consolidated US market data (2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02, $10,000 starting capital, no margin, no fees or slippage in the headline run; buy-and-hold puts 98% of the account in at the first open, as the templates do) and do not guarantee future results. Nothing on this page is investment advice. Live trading involves risk of loss.