Inconclusive · Instruments & watchlist · before 2026-09-26 (committed 2026-09-30)
Does the daily top-40 list hold up over 2016-2026?
What this means
The daily top-40 list won 64% of tranche trades over 2016-26, but the list was chosen on overlapping data, so this is largely in-sample. Each stock had only about 8 trades. Rows such as AEP (profit factor 0.52), NUE and NTRS show a positive profit with a profit factor below 1, the same sign bug as the early scrapes, so about 37 rather than 40 were profitable. The numbers should not be relied on.
Explanation checked against the data.
By timeframe
| Timeframe | Verdict | n | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15-minute | Not tested: a single hand-picked daily list by design | ||
| 1-hour | Not tested: a single hand-picked daily list by design | ||
| 4-hour | Not tested: a single hand-picked daily list by design | ||
| Daily | Inconclusive | 313 | about 37/40 profitable, 63.9% tranche win |
- Hypothesis
- The 40 best daily names (picked on a full-history daily scrape) stay profitable over 2016-26.
- Method
- TradingView headline scrape, daily, 2016-2026, 40 tickers.
- Result
- 313 tranche trades, 63.9% win, median ticker PnL +16.9%; file shows 40/40 profitable, but AEP (PF 0.52), NUE (0.93) and NTRS (0.98) show positive PnL with PF < 1, so about 37/40 were profitable.
- How much to trust it
- Low: picked on overlapping data (in-sample); ~8 trades per ticker; probable sign bug on 3 rows
- Did it change the live rule?
- superseded by the 2026-09-30 top-20 daily basket
Scripts and data for this study will be linked here when the research code is published on GitHub.
Education and research only. Not financial advice. Backtests use today's index members (survivorship bias).