DeployQuantWeekly Entry + 7% Target on TQQQ
ProShares UltraPro QQQ: 3x daily leveraged Nasdaq-100, with large trends and deep drawdowns. Backtest 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02, $10,000 starting capital, computed by the same engine that runs live DeployQuant strategies.
The weekly template buys at the first open of each week, rests a limit order 7% above the entry, and sells at 2:00pm on the second-to-last session of the week if the trade is losing. On TQQQ from 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02 it turned $10,000 into $43,997, a 29.44% CAGR, against $36,585 and 25.35% for holding. The max drawdown was 49.66% against 80.77%. It made 227 round trips, won 50% of them, and was invested on 61.0% of days.
This is one of the few pages where the strategy beat the fund on both measures. It ranks second of 12 templates on TQQQ, behind the RSI(2) snapback at 39.31%, and fifth of 59 funds for this strategy. The median CAGR for the template across all 59 funds is 6.61%, and across leveraged funds it is 25.62%, so TQQQ sits above the leveraged group.
The result needs a caution that the cost runs make plain. With 455 fills, the CAGR falls to 18.69% at 5 basis points and 15.60% at 10, which is below holding at both levels. The headline win is a no-cost result.
Year by year
| Year | weekly 7% target | buy & hold |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 25.2% | 88.9% |
| 2022 | −12.1% | −78.1% |
| 2023 | 101.1% | 187.6% |
| 2024 | 39.1% | 57.1% |
| 2025 | 34.5% | 33.9% |
| 2026 | 12.0% | 54.1% |
Giving up the best years to avoid the worst
Held, TQQQ returned 88.9% in 2021, -78.1% in 2022, 187.6% in 2023, 57.1% in 2024, 33.9% in 2025 and 54.1% in 2026 to date. The weekly template returned 25.2%, -12.1%, 101.1%, 39.1%, 34.5% and 12.0%. It beat the fund in 2022 and 2025 and trailed in the other four years.
2022 decides the result. The fund fell 78.1% and the template lost 12.1%, a gap of 66 points in the template's favour. In a year when most of the weekly entries lost money, the Thursday exit cut those losers inside the same week, so the position did not ride the long decline. 47 trades closed in 2022 and 25 won. The year's worst trades were three-day losses: -18.13% from 2022-10-31 to 2022-11-03, -17.45% from 2022-05-09 to 2022-05-12 and -15.64% from 2022-09-12 to 2022-09-15. Each is a week in which the fund fell after Monday's entry.
2023 is where the template pays for the exit rule. The fund returned 187.6% and the template returned 101.1%, which is 86.5 points behind. A strategy that exits losing trades on Thursday and re-enters on Monday is out of the fund for part of every week, and in a year of persistent gains that means missing the days between exits and the next Monday entry. The 2023 record was 39 closed trades with 21 wins, and the monthly numbers were positive in most months, with 5.32%, 14.98%, 12.89%, 2.76%, 10.01%, 12.41% and 12.39% in the first seven.
2021 shows a similar shortfall, 25.2% against 88.9%, with a mid-year drop in May at -14.46% and September at -8.39%. In 2024, 39.1% against 57.1% is a smaller gap. In 2025 the template made 34.5% against 33.9% held, a narrow win in a year with a sharp April drawdown. In 2026 to date it made 12.0% against 54.1%, with losses of 17.01% in June and 14.74% in July after a 31.54% April.
The pattern is steady: the template trails in strong years and leads in the bear year. The cost of that insurance in this window was the gap in 2021, 2023 and 2026, and the benefit was the 2022 gap and the shallower drawdown.
Month by month
| Year | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 8.3% | −6.2% | −8.1% | 8.9% | −14.5% | 12.4% | 7.1% | 4.6% | −8.4% | 22.9% | −0.8% | 2.3% |
| 2022 | 7.6% | 9.7% | 5.0% | −12.2% | −21.1% | −18.8% | 12.9% | 7.4% | −14.3% | 26.0% | 1.9% | −5.6% |
| 2023 | 5.3% | 15.0% | 12.9% | 2.8% | 10.0% | 12.4% | 12.4% | −3.9% | −14.3% | −3.3% | 17.8% | 9.9% |
| 2024 | −0.8% | 17.7% | 2.3% | −12.5% | 7.6% | 14.5% | −12.9% | 6.1% | 6.9% | −7.3% | 9.4% | 7.9% |
| 2025 | −3.2% | 1.3% | −21.3% | 7.4% | 29.6% | 12.4% | 4.7% | −0.1% | 15.2% | 8.3% | −14.2% | −0.5% |
| 2026 | −2.4% | −5.8% | −8.0% | 31.5% | 11.9% | −17.0% | −14.7% | 10.9% | 10.4% | 3.8% | – | – |
The months that made and lost the most
The best month was April 2026 at 31.54%, followed by May 2025 at 29.56%, October 2022 at 26.02% and October 2021 at 22.92%. The fund's own best month was also April 2026, at 51.68%. The template captured 31.54% of a month in which the fund made 51.68%, which is typical of its capture in a sharp rebound: it takes part of the move, because it exits at 7% and re-enters the next week.
The worst months were March 2025 at -21.30%, May 2022 at -21.11% and June 2022 at -18.80%, then June 2026 at -17.01% and September 2022 at -14.25%. The fund's worst month was April 2022 at -36.68%, and the template made -12.23% in that month. In the three consecutive months from April to June 2022 the template lost 12.23%, 21.11% and 18.80%, which is the 49.66% drawdown from 2022-04-04 to 2022-07-18.
Months cluster by regime. In 2022 the template made 7.60%, 9.70% and 5.03% in January to March, then lost for three months, made 12.95% and 7.44% in July and August, lost 14.25% in September and made 26.02% in October. A weekly entry works when the fund oscillates in a range and fails when it trends down for weeks. In the sell-off months the template took small repeated losses and then lost more when a rebound week stopped out at a lower level.
The record in 2023 had two negative months in the last third, September at -14.33% and October at -3.30%, and then November at 17.75% and December at 9.86%. September also shows up in 2021 at -8.39%, in 2022 at -14.25% and in 2024 positive at 6.91%. The month table has 5 or 6 observations for each calendar month and the pattern is a description of this window.
Every trade
weekly 7% target on TQQQ made 227 closed round trips and one position still open at the end of the test, an average hold of 5 days, an average winner of 7.40%, an average loser of −5.51%, a profit factor of 1.26, a longest losing streak of 7. It held a position at the close on 61.0% of trading days.
Best 10 round trips
| Entry | Entry price | Exit | Exit price | Return | Days held |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-12-12 | $9.99 | 2022-12-13 | $11.50 | 15.2% | 1 |
| 2025-05-05 | $28.70 | 2025-05-12 | $32.56 | 13.4% | 7 |
| 2025-04-21 | $21.51 | 2025-04-23 | $24.35 | 13.2% | 2 |
| 2022-10-03 | $9.39 | 2022-10-04 | $10.41 | 10.8% | 1 |
| 2026-04-06 | $43.75 | 2026-04-08 | $48.44 | 10.7% | 2 |
| 2022-10-17 | $9.01 | 2022-10-18 | $9.92 | 10.1% | 1 |
| 2026-08-03 | $64.15 | 2026-08-04 | $70.19 | 9.4% | 1 |
| 2022-06-21 | $11.38 | 2022-06-24 | $12.42 | 9.1% | 3 |
| 2024-11-04 | $34.75 | 2024-11-06 | $37.67 | 8.4% | 2 |
| 2024-05-06 | $27.91 | 2024-05-15 | $30.10 | 7.8% | 9 |
Worst 10 round trips
| Entry | Entry price | Exit | Exit price | Return | Days held |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-10-31 | $10.11 | 2022-11-03 | $8.28 | −18.1% | 3 |
| 2021-03-01 | $22.26 | 2021-03-04 | $18.29 | −17.8% | 3 |
| 2022-05-09 | $15.59 | 2022-05-12 | $12.87 | −17.4% | 3 |
| 2022-09-12 | $14.45 | 2022-09-15 | $12.19 | −15.6% | 3 |
| 2025-04-14 | $25.68 | 2025-04-16 | $22.03 | −14.2% | 2 |
| 2022-06-27 | $13.54 | 2022-06-30 | $11.71 | −13.5% | 3 |
| 2022-02-28 | $24.26 | 2022-03-10 | $21.17 | −12.7% | 10 |
| 2025-03-03 | $37.50 | 2025-03-06 | $32.73 | −12.7% | 3 |
| 2021-05-10 | $24.22 | 2021-05-13 | $21.15 | −12.7% | 3 |
| 2022-04-25 | $19.34 | 2022-05-05 | $17.00 | −12.1% | 10 |
Prices are adjusted for splits and dividends, so they sit below the quotes printed at the time. An open position is marked at the last close.
What 227 round trips look like
The template made 227 closed round trips, with 113 winners, and one position open at the end: bought on 2026-09-28 at an adjusted 78.12 and 3.70% ahead. The average hold was 4.6 days, the median 3 days and the longest 31 days. The average winner returned 7.40% and the average loser lost 5.51%, so the profit factor was 1.26. The median trade returned -0.03%, which says that half the trades were round trips that went nowhere and the profit came from the winners above the target.
The winners are close to the target by design, but the best trades are well above it. The best was 15.15% in one day, from 2022-12-12 at an adjusted 9.99 to 2022-12-13 at 11.50. Next were 13.45% from 2025-05-05 to 2025-05-12, 13.20% from 2025-04-21 to 2025-04-23, 10.84% from 2022-10-03 to 2022-10-04 and 10.72% from 2026-04-06 to 2026-04-08. A limit order at 1.07 times the entry fills at the open when the fund gaps through it, so a gap day gives more than 7%. TQQQ's average overnight gap was 1.78%, and the data shows that the gap pays: the best trades are mostly one- or two-day holds that ended on a gap.
The worst trades are the Thursday exits. The five worst are -18.13%, -17.83% from 2021-03-01 to 2021-03-04, -17.45%, -15.64% and -14.21% from 2025-04-14 to 2025-04-16. Four of the five were held for 3 days, which is the entry on Monday and the exit on Thursday. The average loss of 5.51% is nearly as large as the average win of 7.40%, and the strategy lives on a 50% win rate. A deep loss like -18.13% on a rule with a stop-at-Thursday rather than a price stop shows the exit is a time exit and not a protection against a large fall inside the week.
By exit year the win counts were 19 of 42 in 2021, 25 of 47 in 2022, 21 of 39 in 2023, 18 of 33 in 2024, 18 of 39 in 2025 and 12 of 27 in 2026. The win rate was highest in 2022, the year the template beat the fund by the most. The longest win streak was 6 and the longest loss streak was 7, so the equity curve has runs on both sides.
Largest drawdowns
| Peak | Low point | Depth | Days to low | Recovered | Days to recover |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-04-04 | 2022-07-18 | −49.7% | 105 | 2023-05-17 | 303 |
| 2026-06-02 | 2026-07-29 | −37.5% | 57 | not yet | – |
| 2024-12-24 | 2025-04-21 | −37.4% | 118 | 2025-06-03 | 43 |
Buy-and-hold's deepest drawdown ran from 2021-11-19 to 2022-12-28 and reached −80.8%.
Three drawdowns and a shallower floor
The max drawdown was 49.66%, from 2022-04-04 to 2022-07-18 in 105 days, recovering on 2023-05-17 after 303 more. That is the same period in which the fund fell 80.77%. The second was 37.47% from 2026-06-02 to 2026-07-29, which had not recovered by the end of the data, and the third was 37.39% from 2024-12-24 to 2025-04-21, recovered on 2025-06-03 in 43 days.
Buy-and-hold had three drawdowns of its own: 80.77% from 2021-11-19 to 2022-12-28 with recovery on 2024-12-04, 57.40% from 2024-12-16 to 2025-04-08 and 36.73% from 2025-10-29 to 2026-03-30. The template's first and third drawdowns are shallower than the fund's matching ones by a wide margin, and the template's gap against the fund in the first case is 31.11 points of max drawdown.
The second drawdown is the one to look at. The 37.47% fall in mid-2026 is as deep as the 2025 drawdown, and it did not recover. In the fund's own record, 2026 had a sharp fall to 2026-03-30 and a rebound to 2026-04-22. The template's June and July 2026 months at -17.01% and -14.74% are a different episode, after the fund's recovery, and the template was still down from its 2026-06-02 peak on the last day. The drawdown tells that a 7% target with a Thursday exit does not cap losses in a volatile fund: three-day losses of 15% to 18% repeat in each one.
The drawdown comparison depends on a feature of the test. The template's 49.66% drawdown is calculated on its equity, which is in the fund for 61.0% of days, and exits are on a weekly cycle. An investor needs to survive about a 50% decline to get this result, which is less than the fund's 80.77%, and not small.
With trading costs
The headline run fills at the bar price. These runs charge slippage on every fill.
| Slippage per fill | CAGR | Max drawdown | Final value | Sharpe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None (headline) | 29.4% | −49.7% | $43,997 | 0.79 |
| 5 basis points | 18.7% | −54.9% | $26,748 | 0.61 |
| 10 basis points | 15.6% | −55.5% | $22,990 | 0.56 |
The cost runs reverse the ranking
The headline result has no fees or slippage. With 455 fills, costs matter a great deal. At 5 basis points per fill the CAGR is 18.69%, with a max drawdown of 54.87%, a Sharpe of 0.61 and a final value of $26,748. At 10 basis points the CAGR is 15.60%, the max drawdown is 55.47%, the Sharpe is 0.56 and the final value is $22,990.
Both cost runs are below buy-and-hold at 25.35%, and the final values are below the fund's $36,585. The drawdown is still shallower than the fund's 80.77%. The claim that the template beat TQQQ on return holds only in the no-cost run. What survives costs is the lower drawdown.
The fund is liquid, with an average daily dollar volume of $4,150,045,180 and a median minute volume of 285,786.5 shares, so 5 or 10 basis points is likely a high estimate for the order sizes in this test. The test uses the same cost assumption for every fund and does not measure real execution. A reader who expects lower costs on TQQQ can read the result as lying between the headline and the 5 basis point run.
The cost response is steep because a trade held for an average of 4.6 days makes about two fills per round trip and the average winner is 7.40%. Ten basis points on each fill takes a visible share of every trade.
Changing the parameters
| Version | CAGR | Max drawdown | Round trips | Win rate | Final value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Published rules | 29.4% | −49.7% | 227 | 50% | $43,997 |
| 5% target | 37.3% | −39.1% | 262 | 58% | $61,592 |
| 10% target | 29.4% | −55.9% | 198 | 42% | $43,881 |
| 15% target | 56.0% | −50.3% | 159 | 38% | $128,720 |
Changing the target is not a smooth dial
The page tests three other targets. A 5% target gives a 37.25% CAGR with 262 trades, 152 wins, a 39.13% max drawdown and a final value of $61,592. A 10% target gives 29.38% with 198 trades, 84 wins, a 55.90% drawdown and $43,881. A 15% target gives 56.05% with 159 trades, 60 wins, a 50.33% drawdown and $128,720. The published 7% gives 29.44%.
The 10% variant is almost the same as the 7% result and the 5% and 15% variants are far better, so the result is not a smooth function of the target. A 5% target wins on most of its trades and a 15% target wins on fewer than half. The 15% result is more than double the 7% result, and it comes from a small number of large winners, since 60 trades are spread over almost six years. A target that rarely fills turns the strategy into one that holds a week and sometimes much more, and its result depends on a few episodes such as the 2023 rally.
This is an example of why the headline parameters should not be read as an optimum. The 15% number is a single run on one window with no costs, and its Sharpe of 1.10 depends on the same few runs. The 5% variant has the lowest drawdown of the set at 39.13% and the highest win rate. Neither says what the template would do in a different period. The published 7% was not tuned, and the three variants show the range of results from nearby settings: from 29.38% to 56.05%.
How TQQQ behaved
| Measure | TQQQ |
|---|---|
| Data in this test | 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02 (1444 sessions) |
| Total return, buy and hold | 291.9% |
| Annualized volatility | 67.1% |
| Deepest drawdown | −81.7% (2021-11-19 to 2022-12-28) |
| Up days | 54.5% |
| Average daily range | 4.74% |
| 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 | 69.5% |
| Crossings of the 200-day average | 28 |
| Falls of 10% or more from a 20-day high | 56 |
What TQQQ's own numbers show
TQQQ returned 291.92% on its price series, 26.86% a year, with annualized volatility of 67.11% and an average daily range of 4.74%. Up days were 54.47% of sessions, with an average gain of 3.01% and an average loss of -3.22% on down days. The deepest drawdown was 81.68% from 2021-11-19 to 2022-12-28, recovered on 2024-12-04, with a longest drawdown of 762 sessions.
The moves the template is built around are large. The fund had 56 falls of 10% or more from a 20-day high over 478 days, and its best days were 35.25% on 2025-04-09 and 22.13% on 2022-11-10, with worst days of -18.30% on 2025-04-04 and -16.59% on 2022-09-13. A 7% weekly target is within the range of an ordinary week for this fund, which is why the template works here and fails on slower funds. The template's median CAGR across all 59 funds is 6.61%.
The leverage block shows the fund's relation to QQQ. Realized beta was 3.00 with an R-squared of 1.00. QQQ returned 151.07% in the window, three times that is 453.22%, and the daily-rebalanced ideal is 568.66%, while TQQQ returned 291.92%. The shortfall against the simple triple is 161.29 percentage points. By year the fund beat a plain triple in 2021, 2022 and 2023, at 198.32% against 164.42% in 2023, and fell short in 2024, 2025 and 2026. A weekly rule that exits and re-enters is partly sidestepping the compounding in the long drawdown years.
RSI(14) fell below 30 on 18 sessions, with a median 5-day forward return of 10.30% and a 20-day return of 6.90%, against baselines of 1.24% and 3.62%. RSI(2) below 10 on 152 sessions gave 1.73% and 4.54%. The fund bounces hard from oversold readings, which suits a short-hold template with a 7% target.
TQQQ earned 74.87% of its log return overnight and 25.13% intraday, with a 1.78% average overnight gap. The correlation to QQQ was 1.00, to SPY 0.94 and to TLT 0.09, with a beta of 3.86 to SPY. Calendar returns were 90.95% in 2021, -79.07% in 2022, 198.32% in 2023, 58.22% in 2024, 34.36% in 2025 and 54.60% in 2026 to date.
Among leveraged funds, the template did better on TECL at 35.49% and ROM at 30.27%, and about the same on SOXL at 29.47%. It made 25.62% on QLD, 23.28% on SPUU and 21.27% on SSO, and lost money on UST at -8.16% and TMF at -11.83%, where the leveraged underlying fell.
The rules
Buy at the first open of each week, rest a +7% profit target, and exit Thursday afternoon if the trade is losing.
- WHEN the first session of the week opens · IF not invested · THEN buy with 98% of the sleeve (once per week)
- WHILE invested · a managed limit order rests at entry price × 1.07
- WHEN it's 2:00pm on the week's second-to-last session · IF the position is losing · THEN sell everything
A weekly swing template: enter Monday, aim for +7%, and do not carry a loser into the weekend. The profit target rests at the broker as a real limit order the whole time (DeployQuant maintains it as a managed order). The Thursday-afternoon exit gives losing trades a time deadline instead of a price stop.
Good for: volatile assets that regularly swing 7% within a week, such as leveraged ETFs.
Watch out: the time-based exit realizes many small losses by design. The template needs the +7% winners to outnumber them, which the per-ETF results test directly.
How the three rules fit this fund
The three rules are an entry on the first session of each week, a resting limit at 1.07 times the entry, and a 2:00pm exit on the second-to-last session of the week if the trade is losing. A winning trade that has not reached the target is held into the following week.
On TQQQ the rules produce short holds because the fund routinely moves 7% inside a week. The average hold was 4.6 days. The limit order fills quickly in an up week and the time exit removes the loser by Thursday. The 50% win rate and the 1.26 profit factor are the product of a fund that is volatile in both directions: wins of 7.40% against losses of 5.51%.
The weak point is gaps against the position. A loss of 18.13% in three days is possible because a 3x fund can fall 6% a day. The strong point is the target, which fills at the open on gap-up days. The result for this template is therefore a statement about a high-volatility fund with large overnight gaps, and it is the same reason that slower funds do worse. The other templates on this fund are listed on the TQQQ page, including the RSI(2) snapback at 39.31% and the trend plus trailing stop at 25.03%. The strategy page has the 59-fund table.
The limits are one window, daily-decision rules with one intraday exit, and no fees or slippage in the headline run.
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
Did weekly 7% target beat buy-and-hold on TQQQ?
Over 2021-01-04 to 2026-10-02, weekly 7% target on TQQQ returned 29.4% annualized vs 25.4% for buy-and-hold: it beat buy-and-hold by 4.1% per year, with a maximum drawdown 31.1 points shallower than holding (49.7% vs 80.8%).
How many trades did it make?
227 completed round trips over 5.7 years (455 fills), with 50% of round trips closing profitably.
Why exit on Thursday?
It is a time deadline. The template does not hold a losing trade over the weekend gap. On holiday-shortened weeks the exit moves to the week's second-to-last session automatically.
Does the 7% target rest at the broker?
Yes. Deployed live, the target is a real GTC limit order that DeployQuant places and maintains.
Did the weekly 7% target beat buy-and-hold on TQQQ?
In the no-cost run, yes: 29.44% a year against 25.35%, with a max drawdown of 49.66% against 80.77%. With costs of 5 and 10 basis points it made 18.69% and 15.60%, below holding. The shallower drawdown held at both cost levels.
How many trades did it make?
227 round trips and 455 fills, with 113 winners and a 50% win rate. The average hold was 4.6 days and the template was invested on 61.0% of days. One position was open at the end, bought on 2026-09-28.
Why did it do so well in 2022?
TQQQ fell 78.1% held and the template lost 12.1%. The Thursday exit cut losing weeks short, and 25 of the 47 trades closed in 2022 were winners. It gave back ground in 2023, making 101.1% against 187.6% held.
What was the worst trade?
A loss of 18.13% in three days, from 2022-10-31 at an adjusted 10.11 to 2022-11-03 at 8.28. The time exit does not stop a large fall inside the week. The next worst were -17.83% in March 2021 and -17.45% in May 2022.
What happens with a different profit target?
A 5% target gave 37.25%, a 10% target 29.38% and a 15% target 56.05%, against 29.44% for 7%. The results are not smooth and the 15% case has 60 wins over 159 trades, so the numbers depend on a few large winners in one window.
How much do costs matter for the weekly template on TQQQ?
A great deal. The CAGR fell from 29.44% to 18.69% at 5 basis points and 15.60% at 10, and the final value from $43,997 to $26,748 and $22,990. TQQQ is liquid, so these costs may be high for it, but the test applies one assumption to every fund.
Related
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.