Claim check · NQ futures
Breakeven stop test on an IFVG strategy on NQ futures: 3,491 trades, 2020–2026
Summary
The same 3,491 NQ futures trades from an inverse fair value gap (IFVG) model, 2020 to 2026, were resolved two ways, before costs: with the stop moved to breakeven and with the stop left alone. Moving the stop gave a 36.6% win rate and +0.2005R average with a 17.95R maximum drawdown; leaving it alone gave 46.8%, +0.2342R and 21.83R. Tested by CE Market Solutions (cemarketsolutions.com), a backtesting service for CME futures strategies.
The claim tested
A common trade-management habit, tested on a model of DodgyDD’s inverse fair value gap strategy.
Moving the stop to breakeven once a trade is in profit protects the trade.
Rules exactly as tested
- Signals: inverse fair value gap entries on the 1-minute and 3-minute charts, taken at any hour of the Globex session (18:00 ET to a 16:55 ET flatten).
- Filters: a minimum reward-to-risk of 0.7 and a minimum risk of 5 points. The entry, stop and first target come from the test’s IFVG engine, which is unchanged between the two runs.
- Breakeven on: the move is armed when the favorable wick reaches the nearest confirmed short-term pivot between the entry and the first target. After the bar that arms it, the stop becomes the entry price; a touch of that stop scores 0R, and the target can still be reached for a full win.
- Breakeven off: the original stop against the target, nothing else, until the 16:55 ET flatten.
- The two runs resolve exactly the same 3,491 signals. Only the breakeven move changes.
Assumptions where the rules were ambiguous:
- A bar that touches both the stop and the target is scored as a loss.
- The description of the IFVG entry, stop and target is limited to what was varied: those rules are the engine’s and were not changed.
Data
- Instrument
- NQ (E-mini Nasdaq-100) futures, 1-minute and 3-minute signals, Globex session
- Date range
- 2020 to 2026 (seven calendar years)
- Sample size
- 3,491 trades. With breakeven on: 1,279 wins, 1,318 losses, 856 stopped at breakeven, 38 timeouts.
- Costs
- Gross, in R and NQ points. No commission or slippage.
- In-sample or out-of-sample
- In-sample: the whole history, one pass.
Results
| Group and rule | Trades | Win rate | Average R (95% interval) | Points per trade | Max drawdown (R) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All, breakeven on | 3,491 | 36.6% | +0.2005 (+0.160 to +0.246) | +2.76 | 17.95 |
| All, breakeven off | 3,491 | 46.8% | +0.2342 (+0.189 to +0.281) | +3.08 | 21.83 |
| 1-minute signals, breakeven on | 2,690 | 37.2% | +0.2160 (+0.165 to +0.270) | +2.33 | 19.20 |
| 1-minute signals, breakeven off | 2,690 | 45.6% | +0.2540 (+0.195 to +0.313) | +2.62 | 26.00 |
| 3-minute signals, breakeven on | 801 | 34.8% | +0.1484 (+0.086 to +0.209) | +4.20 | 9.56 |
| 3-minute signals, breakeven off | 801 | 50.8% | +0.1674 (+0.091 to +0.251) | +4.63 | 10.46 |
| 09:30–15:30 ET, breakeven on | 1,485 | 36.5% | +0.2044 (+0.140 to +0.274) | +3.73 | 19.16 |
| 09:30–15:30 ET, breakeven off | 1,485 | 44.6% | +0.2241 (+0.154 to +0.306) | +3.74 | 21.53 |
| 18:00–09:29 ET, breakeven on | 1,793 | 37.9% | +0.2147 (+0.157 to +0.273) | +2.16 | 16.42 |
| 18:00–09:29 ET, breakeven off | 1,793 | 50.1% | +0.2573 (+0.190 to +0.320) | +2.75 | 12.60 |
| 15:30–16:55 ET, breakeven on | 203 | 28.6% | +0.0961 (−0.070 to +0.263) | +1.54 | 14.64 |
| 15:30–16:55 ET, breakeven off | 203 | 35.5% | +0.1546 (−0.038 to +0.361) | +1.65 | 12.65 |
| 16:55–17:00 ET, breakeven on | 10 | 0.0% | −0.8080 (−1.258 to −0.397) | −7.50 | 5.70 |
| 16:55–17:00 ET, breakeven off | 10 | 0.0% | −0.8080 (−1.258 to −0.397) | −7.50 | 5.70 |
| Outcome with the stop left alone | Trades | Mean R | Net R | Net points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full loss | 480 | −1.0000 | −480.00 | −7,837.00 |
| Timeout | 21 | +0.5674 | +11.91 | +420.25 |
| Win | 355 | +1.6496 | +585.62 | +8,525.00 |
| All 856 | 856 | +0.1373 | +117.53 | +1,108.25 |
| Period and rule | Trades | Average R (95% interval) | Max drawdown (R) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020–2022, breakeven on | 1,338 | +0.1529 (+0.096 to +0.220) | 17.95 |
| 2020–2022, breakeven off | 1,338 | +0.1979 (+0.133 to +0.278) | 16.01 |
| 2023–2026, breakeven on | 2,153 | +0.2301 (+0.167 to +0.284) | 15.64 |
| 2023–2026, breakeven off | 2,153 | +0.2567 (+0.188 to +0.320) | 21.83 |
- Average R rose from +0.2005 to +0.2342 and points per trade from +2.764 to +3.081 with the stop left alone; the maximum drawdown rose from 17.95R to 21.83R, all of it from the 2023–2026 half.
Video transcript
You think you’re protecting the trade. You’re killing it. I’ve been modelling DodgyDD’s IFVG strategy. Thousands of trades in, one habit keeps showing up. Moving the stop to breakeven. In this model, it’s a negative. This trade: stop moved to breakeven — tagged. Zero. Stop left alone — plus one eighty-four. Across the whole test, the stop staying put was worth one hundred seventeen R. The cost: a deeper drawdown. The full DodgyDD model drops soon.
Questions and answers
Does moving the stop to breakeven help or hurt an IFVG strategy?
On 3,491 NQ trades from 2020 to 2026 the average R was +0.2005 with the breakeven move and +0.2342 with the stop left alone, before costs. The maximum drawdown was 17.95R with the move and 21.83R without it.
How was the breakeven stop backtested?
The same 3,491 IFVG signals were resolved twice. In one run the stop moves to the entry price once price reaches the nearest confirmed pivot between entry and target. In the other the original stop stays until the target or the 16:55 ET flatten.
What sample size was used?
3,491 trades, of which 856 were stopped at breakeven in the run with the move.
What happened to the trades that were stopped at breakeven?
With the stop left alone, 480 of the 856 became full losses and 355 became wins averaging +1.6496R. Together they netted +117.53R.
Related reports
- Asia range sweep reversal backtest on NQ futures: 3,622 trades, 2016–2026
- ICT Silver Bullet backtest on NQ futures: 426 trades, 2016–2026
- Kasen Kennedy 8:00 ET opening range retest backtest on NQ futures: 500 trades, 2020–2026
Read more: R multiples and expectancy, explained · How many trades does a backtest need?
Want your own strategy tested the same way? Every version is $19 at cemarketsolutions.com.
More tests like this on Instagram and TikTok: @cemarketsolutions.