You're in. Here are your strategies.

Two complete reports — exact rules, full backtests, sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo testing.

Download both reports

Your first email from us is on its way — if it isn't in your inbox within a few minutes, check spam and drag it out so the research reaches you.

Why these two work together

They're deliberately opposite. One buys short-term panic in stock indices; the other rides multi-month gold trends with the classic golden cross — long when the 50-day EMA is above the 200-day, cash otherwise. Monthly correlation between them since 2005: -0.04 — essentially zero, so when one struggles the other usually doesn't care.

Equity curves of mean reversion alone and combined 50/50 with the golden cross on gold, 2005–2026
2005–2026, 0.05% commission per side, rebalanced monthly 50/50. The combination: CAGR 10.6%, Sharpe 1.02, max drawdown -16.4% — versus 11.2%, 0.82 and -20.3% for the mean reversion strategy alone. Better risk-adjusted return, nearly half the worst case.

“But Strategy 1 has higher CAGR — why not just trade that?” Because your position size isn't capped by returns — it's capped by the worst drawdown you can survive. Strategy 1 alone turns every $100k into a $20k hole at its worst; the combination caps it at $16k while earning nearly as much. That headroom is spendable: size the combination up 1.25x and you are at roughly 13% a year at Strategy 1's pain level. Same pain budget, more return, calmer ride.

That's the whole argument for trading a portfolio of uncorrelated strategies instead of hunting for one perfect system — and it's why professionals judge everything on risk-adjusted return, not raw CAGR. Portfolio construction is where the real edge compounds; we'll come back to it.

Start here

Questions? Reply to any email from the list — it's me reading, not a support inbox.

Robin Eriksson

Robin Eriksson

Founder of EdgeLab. Five years of discretionary losses taught me to test everything — now I publish the strategies that survive. About me →