same window · same costs · same engine
Momentum vs Mean Reversion
Backtested on the same Hyperliquid perps over 2024-08-15 → 2026-07-05, at the same costs and on the same engine: Mean Reversion wins on risk-adjusted return, a Sharpe of 1.56 against 0.98. Mean Reversion rode out the shallower worst drawdown (21%), and Mean Reversion made the most in total. When Bitcoin was trending up, Momentum gained more; when it was falling, Mean Reversion held up better.
By Keel Research · Data as of 2026-07-05 · how these backtests were produced
Momentum Mean Reversiongrowth of $100, net of costs
- Net Sharpe
- 0.98
- Total return
- +90.5%
- Max drawdown
- −39.0%
- Trades
- 949
- Win rate
- 48%
Mean Reversionwinner
- Net Sharpe
- 1.56
- Total return
- +145.7%
- Max drawdown
- −20.6%
- Trades
- 1,238
- Win rate
- 55%
Run the winner — Mean Reversion
Mean Reversion came out ahead here (Sharpe 1.56 vs 0.98). Start it on your own Hyperliquid account, or fork it and change the settings first.
At $1,000, Mean Reversion's worst historical dip was about $206. Free account, your own keys — Keel only places the trades.
When each one wins
Total return while Bitcoin was trending up vs trending down (split by Bitcoin’s 100-day trend line).
| Market | Momentum | Mean Reversion | Higher return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rising Bitcoin | +60.4% | +54.4% | Momentum |
| Falling Bitcoin | +18.8% | +59.7% | Mean Reversion |
What this is: a head-to-head backtest of Momentum and Mean Reversion on the same Hyperliquid window, costs and engine — net of fees, slippage and funding. The overlay is growth of $100 (normalized), not a return promise. A higher Sharpe is not a guarantee; both strategies draw down. Past performance does not predict future results, and this is not investment advice.
Related tools
More comparisons
Supertrend vs MACD CrossoverRSI vs StochasticMACD Crossover vs MA CrossoverSupertrend vs Ichimoku Cloud
Or the big question: do crypto trading bots actually work? →