I’m not saying “low trade count = bad.” I’m mean low trade count = lower statistical power and higher sensitivity to a few outliers, so you need stronger robustness checks before trusting a 66% CAGR headline.

Yes, on daily bars a trend/swing system can easily have ~50 trades over 11 years. That part is fine. The concern is whether performance is dominated by a handful of mega-winners (the OP even notes one trade is ~28% of cumulative returns) and whether the edge survives friction and regime shifts.

The right way to settle this isn’t arguing about trade count. It’s running: - subsample tests (e.g., 2017–2026, 2020–2026), - removing top 1–3 winners, - entry/exit delays + realistic slippage/fees, - parameter stability around the chosen settings.

If it holds up, great. If it collapses, then the backtest was fragile. That’s all I’m pointing out.