A few weeks ago we published our first Strategy Report: RSI/SMA Cross (1W, parameters 14/14) on the Binance Top-50 USDT pairs. The result: the strategy beats Buy & Hold on 40 of 50 coins (80 %), with +20 % Strategy CAGR vs. โ2.8 % Avg B&H. Strong outperformance, because the strategy excels exactly where crypto coins drop 70-90 % between cycles.
The obvious follow-up question: does the same strategy work on US stocks?
We tried it. Same strategy. Same indicator parameters. RSI/SMA Cross 14/14 on the Top-100 US stocks by market cap (deduplicated to USD listings, one share class per company โ so GOOGL, not GOOG; BRK-B, not BRK-A). Weekly candles, from 2010-01-01 to 2026-05-02. 16 years of history, 103 stocks.
The result was unambiguous:
0 of 103 stocks are beaten by the strategy.
Not a single US stock entry. Not even TSLA (strategy +30.9 % CAGR, Buy & Hold +43.5 %), NVDA (+28.5 % vs +45.8 %), NFLX (+23.5 % vs +34.2 %), AMD (+16.3 % vs +25.0 %). The strategy produces a positive return in 91.3 % of cases โ it's not "broken." It just always loses to Buy & Hold.
Why the strategy fails so brutally here
The answer lies in market structure. RSI/SMA Cross is a trend-following strategy with cash phases. It buys when trend and momentum turn up, sells when both cross down. Performance depends on what happens during the cash phases.
US stocks 2010-2026 have been a secular bull market with a few short corrections (Covid crash, 2022 bear). 16 years where Buy & Hold more than 5x'd the S&P 500. Every cash phase the strategy took was a missed bull phase.
Crypto coins in contrast cycle through market cycles with bear markets of -70 % to -90 % between peaks. Anyone holding B&H here saw their coin at -50 %, -70 %, in many cases stuck near zero permanently. The strategy was often in cash during those phases because RSI and SMA had crossed down โ meaning it sidestepped the very thing that broke B&H.
Put differently: A trend-following strategy needs drawdown risk to work. It has its edge where Buy & Hold hurts. In a linear bull market โ where B&H compounds well and nothing "hurts" โ the strategy systematically loses.
What else the data shows
- % positive CAGR on stocks: 91.3 %. The strategy is profitable, just less profitable than Buy & Hold.
- Trade frequency: Median 148 trades across 16 years on US stocks (~18 % weekly cross frequency). On crypto we saw median 45 trades over 8 years in the Quick Insight comparison โ lower trade frequency, less whipsaw, more trend capture.
- Top stocks among the 103: even the US market's biggest performers (TSLA, NVDA, META) lose against their own B&H. There is no mid-cap or sub-sector subgroup within the Top-100 stocks where the strategy beats B&H.
What you should take away as a trader
A strategy is not a universal tool. Its effect depends on the market structure it operates in.
-
Backtest across many markets. If a strategy only works on one, that's not edge โ it's a single-market phenomenon. Honest strategy vendors show out-of-sample results across multiple asset classes.
-
Always compare to Buy & Hold. A strategy with +5 % CAGR is worthless if the asset itself does +15 %. The spread vs. B&H is the only honest performance metric.
-
Understand the market structure you trade in. Trend-following in a linear bull = structural underperformance risk. Trend-following in a cyclical market = edge.
-
Find the strategy that fits the market structure. For US stocks in the current regime, Buy & Hold (or DCA with sector rotation) is probably better. For crypto, possibly small-caps or emerging markets, a trend-following strategy like RSI/SMA Cross can deliver edge.