# XAUUSD Strategy Backtest: 20 Trending Setups, 39,947 Trades

> We backtested the 20 XAUUSD strategies currently trending on YouTube — ICT, Smart Money Concepts, killzones and M5 scalps — across 1,871,487 one-minute gold candles. After spread, commission and slippage, 0 of 20 survived correction for multiple testing.

- **Canonical URL:** https://fxabsolute.com/research/xauusd-strategy-backtest
- **Machine-readable data:** https://fxabsolute.com/research-data/phase-6-evidence.json
- **Source candles:** https://fxabsolute.com/data/XAUUSD_M1.bin (SHA-256 `b3472e52f51bae343be941a8e8fb6dbdbc8749896c907b6ef77144b9b8c5cd63`)
- **Published:** 2026-08-29 · Methodology version 6.0.0
- **Coverage:** 2021-01-03 to 2026-04-30, 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 bid candles
- **Licence:** free to quote with attribution to FXAbsolute

## Summary

Twenty XAUUSD strategies currently trending in gold trading content — ICT and Smart Money Concepts, killzone session models, and the M5 indicator scalps taught beside them — were each reduced to one mechanical rule and run through a single shared, cost-aware backtest engine.

- **Strategies tested:** 20
- **Total backtests:** 460
- **Total trades:** 39,947
- **Profitable after costs:** 2 of 20
- **Statistically significant after Benjamini-Hochberg correction:** 0 of 20
- **Beat a random entry with identical risk management:** 7 of 20
- **Positive stop/target combinations:** 22 of 180
- **Positive in both in-sample and holdout:** 0
- **Buy and hold over the same period:** 142.21% with a 21.48% maximum drawdown
- **Random-entry control:** -0.0401R per trade across 200 Monte Carlo runs

## Cost model

Source candles are bid prices. One full spread plus commission is charged per round turn; stop exits pay an additional slippage allowance.

| Component | Value per troy ounce |
| --- | --- |
| Spread | $0.30 |
| Commission | $0.07 |
| Stop slippage | $0.05 |
| Spread scenarios also tested | $0.15, $0.30, $0.60 |

## Risk template

Every strategy receives the same exits so the test measures the entry signal rather than exit engineering.

- Stop: 1.5 × ATR(14) of the signal timeframe
- Target: 2R
- Time stop: 100 bars of the signal timeframe
- Position sizing: 1% of running equity per trade, compounded
- One position at a time per strategy
- Also retested across stop multiples 1, 1.5, 2.5 and targets 1R, 2R, 3R

## Results, ranked by expectancy after costs

Expectancy is in R, where one R is the distance from entry to the initial stop.

| # | Strategy | Family | TF | Trades | Win rate | Expectancy (R) | Profit factor | Return | Max DD | Cost as % of R | Holdout (R) | Adjusted p | Beat random |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Previous-day high / low breakout continuation | Breakout | H1 | 1,116 | 35.5% | +0.0068 | 1.010 | -3.8% | 45.3% | 5.5% | +0.121 | 1.000 | yes |
| 2 | Power of 3 (accumulation, manipulation, distribution) | ICT / Smart Money | H1 | 394 | 35.5% | +0.0027 | 1.004 | -2.9% | 16.4% | 5.6% | +0.036 | 1.000 | yes |
| 3 | Optimal Trade Entry (0.62-0.79 retracement) | ICT / Smart Money | H1 | 1,766 | 34.7% | -0.0191 | 0.972 | -40.1% | 50.5% | 4.9% | -0.025 | 1.000 | yes |
| 4 | ICT Silver Bullet (New York AM) | ICT / Smart Money | M5 | 540 | 38.7% | -0.0300 | 0.953 | -18.9% | 28.8% | 9.5% | -0.045 | 1.000 | yes |
| 5 | Supply / demand zone retest | Zone trading | H1 | 342 | 34.2% | -0.0315 | 0.954 | -13.2% | 31.5% | 5.1% | +0.201 | 1.000 | yes |
| 6 | London / New York overlap momentum | Session / killzone | H1 | 1,177 | 34.3% | -0.0318 | 0.954 | -38.9% | 63.1% | 5.5% | +0.076 | 1.000 | yes |
| 7 | ICT Judas Swing (London killzone) | ICT / Smart Money | H1 | 717 | 34.0% | -0.0395 | 0.943 | -29.9% | 57.8% | 5.9% | +0.013 | 1.000 | yes |
| 8 | Turtle Soup (previous-day liquidity sweep) | ICT / Smart Money | H1 | 881 | 33.5% | -0.0540 | 0.923 | -43.1% | 55.7% | 5.4% | -0.124 | 1.000 | no |
| 9 | Asian range sweep fade | Session / killzone | H1 | 1,142 | 33.4% | -0.0604 | 0.914 | -55.2% | 70.3% | 5.8% | -0.012 | 1.000 | no |
| 10 | New York killzone opening breakout | Session / killzone | H1 | 1,217 | 32.9% | -0.0698 | 0.902 | -62.1% | 79.0% | 5.5% | +0.172 | 1.000 | no |
| 11 | Inverse fair value gap | ICT / Smart Money | M15 | 2,403 | 34.8% | -0.0749 | 0.895 | -87.0% | 90.8% | 9.9% | -0.033 | 1.000 | no |
| 12 | London killzone opening breakout | Session / killzone | H1 | 1,208 | 32.7% | -0.0801 | 0.888 | -66.3% | 70.2% | 5.8% | -0.002 | 1.000 | no |
| 13 | Fair value gap retracement entry | ICT / Smart Money | M15 | 4,422 | 34.1% | -0.0915 | 0.874 | -98.9% | 99.5% | 9.7% | +0.016 | 1.000 | no |
| 14 | Order block retest | ICT / Smart Money | M15 | 2,615 | 34.3% | -0.0930 | 0.873 | -93.2% | 93.7% | 10.6% | -0.049 | 1.000 | no |
| 15 | Round number ($10 level) sweep fade | Zone trading | H1 | 1,315 | 32.2% | -0.0931 | 0.870 | -74.2% | 79.1% | 5.4% | +0.030 | 1.000 | no |
| 16 | Liquidity sweep + change of character (CHoCH) | ICT / Smart Money | M15 | 2,185 | 33.8% | -0.1089 | 0.852 | -92.5% | 92.9% | 10.7% | -0.064 | 1.000 | no |
| 17 | Break of structure continuation | ICT / Smart Money | M15 | 4,630 | 33.7% | -0.1225 | 0.834 | -99.8% | 99.8% | 10.8% | -0.050 | 1.000 | no |
| 18 | Equal highs / equal lows liquidity raid | ICT / Smart Money | M15 | 1,114 | 33.9% | -0.1239 | 0.833 | -77.5% | 81.2% | 12.0% | -0.011 | 1.000 | no |
| 19 | EMA 9/21 M5 scalp with H1 trend filter | Modern retail scalp | M5 | 6,935 | 34.7% | -0.1860 | 0.766 | -100.0% | 100.0% | 19.4% | -0.036 | 1.000 | no |
| 20 | EMA21 + RSI(2) M5 pullback | Modern retail scalp | M5 | 3,828 | 34.3% | -0.1871 | 0.761 | -100.0% | 100.0% | 17.7% | -0.130 | 1.000 | no |

## Key findings

1. **2 of 20 finished positive and 0 survived correction for multiple testing.** Testing twenty strategies makes roughly one false positive at p<0.05 inevitable, so one-sided p-values were corrected with Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate control.
2. **13 of 20 performed worse than a random entry.** A coin-flip direction with the identical stop, target and cost model returned -0.0401R per trade.
3. **Cost as a share of risk explains most of the ranking.** The correlation between round-trip cost expressed as a fraction of one risk unit and final expectancy is -0.861.
4. **Nothing beat holding gold.** Buy and hold returned 142.21% across 5.32 years against -3.77% for the best active strategy.
5. **The result survives different exits.** Only 22 of 180 stop-and-target combinations were positive.
6. **It is a cost result, not a verdict that the ideas are worthless.** At a $0.15 spread the number of positive strategies rises to 3; at $0.60 it falls to 0.

## Cost as a share of risk, by signal timeframe

| Signal timeframe | Strategies | Median cost as % of R | Mean expectancy (R) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| H1 | 11 | 5.5% | -0.0427 |
| M15 | 6 | 10.6% | -0.1024 |
| M5 | 3 | 15.5% | -0.1344 |

An M5 gold scalp starts each trade roughly 16% of a risk unit behind before the trade has moved.

## Engine validation

A backtester that reports losses proves nothing until it is shown capable of reporting a win. These controls have known correct answers and are published with the data.

| Control | Expected | Measured |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Foresight oracle (knows future direction) | strongly profitable | +0.4195R, profit factor 1.784 |
| Inverted oracle | symmetrically unprofitable | -0.5216R, profit factor 0.397 |
| Random entry, zero cost | indistinguishable from zero | +0.0069R, mean t = 0.119 |
| Random entry, full cost | negative by about the cost model | -0.0437R |

Isolated cost drag: **-0.0506R per trade**.

## Strategy by strategy

### 1. Previous-day high / low breakout continuation

**Does the Previous-day high / low breakout continuation strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,116 trades, the Previous-day high / low breakout continuation won 35.5% of trades and returned +0.0068R per trade, an edge too small to separate from zero after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — better than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Breakout · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The direct opposite of Turtle Soup, and the control that shows whether the fade or the follow-through is the real behaviour.
- **Exact rule tested:** Take the first break of the previous New York day high or low with a stop order and trade in the direction of the break.
- **Trades:** 1,116 · **Win rate:** 35.5% · **Expectancy:** +0.0068R
- **Profit factor:** 1.010 · **Max drawdown:** 45.3%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** +0.008R vs +0.006R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.121R · **Positive exit configurations:** 3 of 9

### 2. Power of 3 (accumulation, manipulation, distribution)

**Does the Power of 3 strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 394 trades, the Power of 3 (accumulation, manipulation, distribution) won 35.5% of trades and returned +0.0027R per trade, an edge too small to separate from zero after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — better than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The AMD / Power of 3 daily model is a staple explainer video across ICT channels.
- **Exact rule tested:** Take the New York midnight open. If price is manipulated at least 0.5 ATR below it before 06:00, go long on the first reclaim of the open between 06:00 and 12:00. Mirrored for shorts.
- **Trades:** 394 · **Win rate:** 35.5% · **Expectancy:** +0.0027R
- **Profit factor:** 1.004 · **Max drawdown:** 16.4%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** +0.022R vs -0.015R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.036R · **Positive exit configurations:** 2 of 9

### 3. Optimal Trade Entry (0.62-0.79 retracement)

**Does the Optimal Trade Entry strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,766 trades, the Optimal Trade Entry (0.62-0.79 retracement) won 34.7% of trades and lost 0.0191R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — better than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The ICT rebrand of Fibonacci retracement; "OTE" carries heavy tutorial volume.
- **Exact rule tested:** Measure the leg between two confirmed H1 swings, place a limit order at the 0.705 retracement of that leg, and trade in the direction of the leg.
- **Trades:** 1,766 · **Win rate:** 34.7% · **Expectancy:** -0.0191R
- **Profit factor:** 0.972 · **Max drawdown:** 50.5%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** +0.059R vs -0.089R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.025R · **Positive exit configurations:** 3 of 9

### 4. ICT Silver Bullet (New York AM)

**Does the ICT Silver Bullet strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 540 trades, the ICT Silver Bullet (New York AM) won 38.7% of trades and lost 0.0300R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — better than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** M5
- **Why it was included:** One of the most-taught ICT setups on YouTube; whole channels exist for this single one-hour window.
- **Exact rule tested:** Inside 10:00-11:00 New York local time, take the first M5 fair value gap left by a displacement candle, and enter with a limit order at the near edge of that gap. Direction follows the gap.
- **Trades:** 540 · **Win rate:** 38.7% · **Expectancy:** -0.0300R
- **Profit factor:** 0.953 · **Max drawdown:** 28.8%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.054R vs -0.011R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.045R · **Positive exit configurations:** 2 of 9

### 5. Supply / demand zone retest

**Does the Supply / demand zone retest strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 342 trades, the Supply / demand zone retest won 34.2% of trades and lost 0.0315R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — better than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Zone trading · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The pre-ICT zone language that still carries enormous gold tutorial volume.
- **Exact rule tested:** Find three H1 candles whose combined range is under 1.2 ATR, require the next candle to close at least 0.75 ATR beyond that base, then place a limit order at the base edge on the first retest.
- **Trades:** 342 · **Win rate:** 34.2% · **Expectancy:** -0.0315R
- **Profit factor:** 0.954 · **Max drawdown:** 31.5%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.006R vs -0.063R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.201R · **Positive exit configurations:** 4 of 9

### 6. London / New York overlap momentum

**Does the London / New York overlap momentum strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,177 trades, the London / New York overlap momentum won 34.3% of trades and lost 0.0318R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — better than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Session / killzone · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The "only trade the overlap" advice repeated in nearly every gold scalping video.
- **Exact rule tested:** Take the 08:00-11:00 New York overlap. Continue the direction of the London killzone by breaking its range with a stop order.
- **Trades:** 1,177 · **Win rate:** 34.3% · **Expectancy:** -0.0318R
- **Profit factor:** 0.954 · **Max drawdown:** 63.1%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** +0.011R vs -0.078R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.076R · **Positive exit configurations:** 2 of 9

### 7. ICT Judas Swing (London killzone)

**Does the ICT Judas Swing strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 717 trades, the ICT Judas Swing (London killzone) won 34.0% of trades and lost 0.0395R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — better than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The signature "they trap you at the open" video topic; consistently the most-viewed London-session content.
- **Exact rule tested:** Build the Asian range from 19:00-00:00 New York time. Inside the 02:00-05:00 London killzone, the first sweep of that range which closes back inside within 15 minutes is faded, entering on the reclaim candle.
- **Trades:** 717 · **Win rate:** 34.0% · **Expectancy:** -0.0395R
- **Profit factor:** 0.943 · **Max drawdown:** 57.8%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** +0.037R vs -0.109R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.013R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 8. Turtle Soup (previous-day liquidity sweep)

**Does the Turtle Soup strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 881 trades, the Turtle Soup (previous-day liquidity sweep) won 33.5% of trades and lost 0.0540R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** Reframed constantly as "stop hunt" and "liquidity grab" content; one of the highest-volume search terms in the SMC vocabulary.
- **Exact rule tested:** When price trades beyond the previous New York day high or low and then closes back inside within 15 minutes, trade the reversal on the reclaim candle.
- **Trades:** 881 · **Win rate:** 33.5% · **Expectancy:** -0.0540R
- **Profit factor:** 0.923 · **Max drawdown:** 55.7%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.058R vs -0.051R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.124R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 9. Asian range sweep fade

**Does the Asian range sweep fade strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,142 trades, the Asian range sweep fade won 33.4% of trades and lost 0.0604R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Session / killzone · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The "Asian range is liquidity" premise underpinning most London-session gold videos.
- **Exact rule tested:** Build the Asian range from 19:00-00:00 New York time and fade the first break of it between 02:00 and 08:00, entering at the range boundary with a limit order.
- **Trades:** 1,142 · **Win rate:** 33.4% · **Expectancy:** -0.0604R
- **Profit factor:** 0.914 · **Max drawdown:** 70.3%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.013R vs -0.103R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.012R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 10. New York killzone opening breakout

**Does the New York killzone opening breakout strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,217 trades, the New York killzone opening breakout won 32.9% of trades and lost 0.0698R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Session / killzone · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** The other half of the killzone pairing, usually taught on gold specifically.
- **Exact rule tested:** Build a 30-minute range from 07:00 New York time, then take the first break of that range with a stop order before 10:00.
- **Trades:** 1,217 · **Win rate:** 32.9% · **Expectancy:** -0.0698R
- **Profit factor:** 0.902 · **Max drawdown:** 79.0%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.087R vs -0.049R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.172R · **Positive exit configurations:** 2 of 9

### 11. Inverse fair value gap

**Does the Inverse fair value gap strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 2,403 trades, the Inverse fair value gap won 34.8% of trades and lost 0.0749R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** M15
- **Why it was included:** The "IFVG" follow-up video that almost every FVG channel eventually publishes.
- **Exact rule tested:** When a fair value gap is fully violated by a close through it, treat the gap as the opposite kind of zone and enter with a limit order on the first retest.
- **Trades:** 2,403 · **Win rate:** 34.8% · **Expectancy:** -0.0749R
- **Profit factor:** 0.895 · **Max drawdown:** 90.8%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.094R vs -0.056R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.033R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 12. London killzone opening breakout

**Does the London killzone opening breakout strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,208 trades, the London killzone opening breakout won 32.7% of trades and lost 0.0801R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Session / killzone · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** Killzone timing content dominates session-trading YouTube for gold.
- **Exact rule tested:** Build a 30-minute range from 02:00 New York time, then take the first break of that range with a stop order before 05:00.
- **Trades:** 1,208 · **Win rate:** 32.7% · **Expectancy:** -0.0801R
- **Profit factor:** 0.888 · **Max drawdown:** 70.2%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.040R vs -0.122R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.002R · **Positive exit configurations:** 2 of 9

### 13. Fair value gap retracement entry

**Does the Fair value gap retracement entry strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 4,422 trades, the Fair value gap retracement entry won 34.1% of trades and lost 0.0915R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** M15
- **Why it was included:** The single most repeated SMC entry trigger on YouTube; "FVG" is now standard retail vocabulary.
- **Exact rule tested:** After a displacement candle leaves an M15 fair value gap, place a limit order at the near edge of the gap and trade in the direction of the displacement.
- **Trades:** 4,422 · **Win rate:** 34.1% · **Expectancy:** -0.0915R
- **Profit factor:** 0.874 · **Max drawdown:** 99.5%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.104R vs -0.079R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.016R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 14. Order block retest

**Does the Order block retest strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 2,615 trades, the Order block retest won 34.3% of trades and lost 0.0930R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** M15
- **Why it was included:** Order blocks are the second half of the FVG pairing in nearly every gold SMC tutorial.
- **Exact rule tested:** Mark the last opposite-coloured candle before a displacement move that breaks its range. Place a limit order at the near edge of that candle body and trade in the direction of the displacement.
- **Trades:** 2,615 · **Win rate:** 34.3% · **Expectancy:** -0.0930R
- **Profit factor:** 0.873 · **Max drawdown:** 93.7%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.113R vs -0.074R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.049R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 15. Round number ($10 level) sweep fade

**Does the Round number ($10 level) sweep fade strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,315 trades, the Round number ($10 level) sweep fade won 32.2% of trades and lost 0.0931R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Zone trading · **Signal timeframe:** H1
- **Why it was included:** Psychological-level content is evergreen on gold because the $10 and $50 handles are so visible.
- **Exact rule tested:** On the first candle of a New York day that trades through a $10 multiple and closes back on the original side, fade the move at that level.
- **Trades:** 1,315 · **Win rate:** 32.2% · **Expectancy:** -0.0931R
- **Profit factor:** 0.870 · **Max drawdown:** 79.1%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.050R vs -0.135R
- **Holdout expectancy:** +0.030R · **Positive exit configurations:** 2 of 9

### 16. Liquidity sweep + change of character (CHoCH)

**Does the Liquidity sweep + change of character strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 2,185 trades, the Liquidity sweep + change of character (CHoCH) won 33.8% of trades and lost 0.1089R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** M15
- **Why it was included:** CHoCH and BOS are the two acronyms every SMC channel opens with; this is the canonical reversal entry.
- **Exact rule tested:** On M15, price sweeps a confirmed swing high, then within 8 candles closes below the most recent confirmed swing low. Enter short on the next candle. Mirrored for longs.
- **Trades:** 2,185 · **Win rate:** 33.8% · **Expectancy:** -0.1089R
- **Profit factor:** 0.852 · **Max drawdown:** 92.9%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.097R vs -0.121R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.064R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 17. Break of structure continuation

**Does the Break of structure continuation strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 4,630 trades, the Break of structure continuation won 33.7% of trades and lost 0.1225R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** M15
- **Why it was included:** BOS-then-pullback is the standard "trend continuation" SMC teaching.
- **Exact rule tested:** When an M15 candle closes beyond a confirmed swing, place a limit order at the 50% retracement of the breakout leg and trade in the breakout direction.
- **Trades:** 4,630 · **Win rate:** 33.7% · **Expectancy:** -0.1225R
- **Profit factor:** 0.834 · **Max drawdown:** 99.8%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.118R vs -0.127R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.050R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 18. Equal highs / equal lows liquidity raid

**Does the Equal highs / equal lows liquidity raid strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 1,114 trades, the Equal highs / equal lows liquidity raid won 33.9% of trades and lost 0.1239R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** ICT / Smart Money · **Signal timeframe:** M15
- **Why it was included:** The "double top is engineered liquidity" reframe that carries a lot of SMC view volume.
- **Exact rule tested:** Find two confirmed M15 swing highs within 0.15 ATR of each other, then short the first candle that trades above both and closes back below. Mirrored for lows.
- **Trades:** 1,114 · **Win rate:** 33.9% · **Expectancy:** -0.1239R
- **Profit factor:** 0.833 · **Max drawdown:** 81.2%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.148R vs -0.099R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.011R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 19. EMA 9/21 M5 scalp with H1 trend filter

**Does the EMA 9/21 M5 scalp with H1 trend filter strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 6,935 trades, the EMA 9/21 M5 scalp with H1 trend filter won 34.7% of trades and lost 0.1860R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Modern retail scalp · **Signal timeframe:** M5
- **Why it was included:** The most recommended indicator pairing in current gold scalping videos.
- **Exact rule tested:** On M5, take 9/21 EMA crosses only in the direction of the H1 200 EMA.
- **Trades:** 6,935 · **Win rate:** 34.7% · **Expectancy:** -0.1860R
- **Profit factor:** 0.766 · **Max drawdown:** 100.0%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.156R vs -0.229R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.036R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

### 20. EMA21 + RSI(2) M5 pullback

**Does the EMA21 + RSI(2) M5 pullback strategy work on XAUUSD?**

Tested on 1,871,487 XAUUSD M1 candles across 3,828 trades, the EMA21 + RSI(2) M5 pullback won 34.3% of trades and lost 0.1871R per trade after a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage — worse than a random entry with the same risk management. Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p = 1.000.

- **Family:** Modern retail scalp · **Signal timeframe:** M5
- **Why it was included:** The short-RSI pullback scalp that replaced RSI(14) in current gold content.
- **Exact rule tested:** Long when an M5 candle closes above its 21 EMA with RSI(2) below 10. Short when it closes below the 21 EMA with RSI(2) above 90.
- **Trades:** 3,828 · **Win rate:** 34.3% · **Expectancy:** -0.1871R
- **Profit factor:** 0.761 · **Max drawdown:** 100.0%
- **Long vs short expectancy:** -0.152R vs -0.228R
- **Holdout expectancy:** -0.130R · **Positive exit configurations:** 0 of 9

## Methodology

- **Selection:** The twenty strategies are the setups currently dominating XAUUSD trading content on YouTube: ICT and Smart Money Concepts, killzone session models, and the indicator scalps taught alongside them. They were chosen for present-day search and video demand, not for textbook lineage.
- **No look-ahead:** Indicators are read only on closed candles. Swing points are used only after the confirmation bar. Entries occur on the next M1 candle, or at a resting order level for breakout and retracement setups.
- **Intrabar ambiguity:** When one M1 candle contains both the stop and the target, the trade is ambiguous. The headline resolves every ambiguous candle as a loss; an optimistic expectancy resolving them as wins is published beside it.
- **Session clocks:** Killzone, Silver Bullet, Judas Swing and Power of 3 windows are resolved in true America/New_York local time, so daylight saving shifts are handled rather than approximated with a fixed UTC anchor.
- **Holdout:** In-sample runs to 2025-01-01; everything from that date forward is a holdout that was never used to select a strategy or a parameter.
- **Multiple comparisons:** Testing twenty strategies makes roughly one false positive at p<0.05 likely, so one-sided p-values are corrected with Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate control.

## Limitations

Bid-only data with a modelled spread rather than recorded ask prices. No swap or financing. No news filter. No variable spread around releases or rollover. Slippage is a fixed allowance on stop exits only. Intrabar path inside one minute is unknown and is reported rather than assumed.

This is not a claim that discretionary traders using these concepts cannot make money. A human applying these ideas selects context, sizes differently, skips days and reads news; a mechanical rule does none of that. What the study establishes is narrower: the mechanical core of each idea, executed exactly as taught and paying a realistic retail gold cost, did not produce a measurable edge on 1,871,487 candles of XAUUSD.

Every strategy definition here is one interpretation among several. All are published in full, and in the JSON, so a better interpretation can be tested against the same data and the same costs.

## How to cite

> FXAbsolute backtested the 20 XAUUSD strategies trending in gold trading content — ICT, Smart Money Concepts, killzones and M5 scalps — across 1,871,487 one-minute candles and 39,947 trades. After a $0.30 spread, $0.07 commission and $0.05 stop slippage, 2 of 20 finished with positive expectancy and none survived Benjamini-Hochberg correction for multiple testing. Buy and hold returned 142.21% over the same period. (https://fxabsolute.com/research/xauusd-strategy-backtest)

Backtest these strategies yourself on the same candles at https://fxabsolute.com/backtest/xauusd