The thesis
RSI Snap-Back is a mean-reversion play on the seven largest US tech names — AAPL, MSFT, NVDA, GOOGL, AMZN, META and TSLA. The idea is well-worn but defensible: large-caps that get hammered into short-term momentum extremes tend to snap back. The rules are clean. Buy when RSI drops below 35, sell when it climbs above 70, and cap the book at four names so no single reversion bet can dominate concurrent drawdown. Discipline is baked into the structure rather than left to discretion, which is exactly what you want from a systematic strategy.
Recent activity
The live record tells a quieter story than the thesis. The last two executed trades were a 10-share NVDA buy at $204.04 on 2 November and a 7-share GOOGL buy at $280.28 on 30 October. Since then, six consecutive scheduled runs (6–13 November) each reported 0 executed, 0 rejected — the model simply isn't finding entries. Cash has held flat at $5,956.92 the whole time, meaning roughly 62% of the book is parked, waiting for an RSI < 35 trigger that hasn't fired.
Total equity has drifted between about $9,637 and $9,837 across those runs, closing most recently near $9,656. With only two of four slots filled and the rest in cash, the strategy is currently expressing a mild view at best. That's the trade-off of a patient mean-reverter: it does nothing — by design — until the tape hands it an oversold name.
Backtest and validation
Over 451 days the backtest returned +20.95% (final equity $12,095.14, ~11.21% CAGR) with a 66.67% win rate across 37 trades. Fees were negligible at $37 and FX cost was zero. On its face, a positive return with two-thirds of trades winning is encouraging.
The risk profile is less flattering. The Sharpe of 0.61 is modest — returns are lumpy relative to their volatility — and the max drawdown of 23.73% is steep for a four-name book that's supposed to limit concurrent exposure. Turnover of 773% is the number that should give pause: the strategy churns its capital nearly eight times over, and while backtest fees stayed low, real-world ii commissions and FX on non-GBP fills would bite harder than the simulation suggests.
The most important caveat is what's missing: validation is null. There's no out-of-sample or holdout confirmation here, so the headline numbers may be fitted to the past rather than predictive of the future — a real overfitting risk for any auto-deployed gate.
Verdict
Strong idea, clean rules, and a respectable win rate — tempered by a bruising drawdown, a thin Sharpe, aggressive turnover, and no validation to lean on. Watch whether live entries actually materialise once the Mag-7 next sells off; right now RSI Snap-Back is mostly cash, waiting.