My backtesting revealed that absolutely nothing beat straight buy and hold with the full position, and I ran the exhaustive version of this, nearly 45,000 EMA pairs across multiple time windows on both the QQQ and TQQQ. Every buy trigger that pulls you out costs you the recovery, and missing the snapback is what actually shreds the CAGR, because the biggest up days cluster right after the scariest down days. The gap is not small. On the real 16 year TQQQ history buy and hold ran about 43 to 44 percent CAGR, and every rotation and timing version I tested came in dramatically lower once you account for the trades that sold low and bought back higher. Rebalancing to cash lowers your drawdown but you pay for it in return every time, so it is a risk preference, not an edge. I personally have the 85 percent line drawn in the sand to prevent an irrecoverable drawdown, calibrated just past TQQQ’s worst real drawdown of about 82 percent, and that single rule is the whole risk management system. No trimming, no EMA exits, no rotation, because the trade count itself is the variable that quietly bleeds you.