Composer · investment strategy
by Composer Technologies · via Composer
An adaptive, All‑Weather‑style portfolio that rotates among tech growth, Treasuries, cash, gold/commodities, and volatility hedges. It uses leveraged and inverse ETFs to ride uptrends and hedge panics, aiming to beat the S&P 500 over time. High risk.
Description from Composer
of the return and risk figures:as the source publishes them
What $10,000 would have become, from the strategy's own published history, against the S&P 500 over the same dates. The basis is labelled.
This strategy doesn’t publish a performance history we can chart.
Each rule is quoted word for word from the strategy's own documents.
No rules extracted from this strategy’s text yet.
18 positions as of 2026-10-11
: the platform's backtest holdings, not a client account.
Compares the stated rules with the holdings (or, where none are published, a mix estimated from returns), using tests fixed before any results were seen.
0.2% of weight in (IVV: 3.0%)
14 funds (SEC N-PORT, as of 2026-05-31) · : SPY via IVV
: 3.4% (DBC 9% × 0.37), shown separately from fossil-fuel companies.
This strategy’s rules haven’t been extracted yet, so there’s no claim to compare with. The measurement is still shown. : 97% · 2026-10-11 ()
49.0% of weight in (SPY: 0%)
This strategy’s rules haven’t been extracted yet, so there’s no claim to compare with. The measurement is still shown. : 100% · 2026-10-11 ()
15 of 45 funds in its are : ERX, FAS, PSQ, SH, SOXL, SPXL, SQQQ, SVXY, TECL, TECS, TMF, TMV, TQQQ, UGL, UVXY
This strategy’s rules haven’t been extracted yet, so there’s no claim to compare with. The measurement is still shown. : 100%
Strategies that share its Aggressive risk label, from other sources first, strongest risk-adjusted return first.
Composer Technologies · Composer
Composer Technologies · Composer
How much of what we look for this strategy has, and why anything is missing. Fields that don't apply to it aren't counted.
4 missing
The text the rules are quoted from, with where it came from.
Think of it as a weather-aware portfolio.<br>- If “fear” is rising, it shifts defensive: T‑bills/short‑term bonds, the U.S. dollar, gold, or funds that go up when stocks or long‑term bonds fall.<br>- If markets are calm and trending up, it rides growth with funds that magnify tech and chip stocks (like 3x versions of QQQ/technology).<br>- After quick drops, it can buy the dip in those same growth funds—only if safety checks look okay.<br>- A bond engine adds or removes long‑term Treasuries (sometimes with 3x leverage) depending on whether rates are falling or rising; in rising‑rate trouble it may hold cash, the dollar, or short Treasuries instead.<br>- A small sleeve owns gold/commodities only when they’re in uptrends.<br>- A “crash catcher” parks assets in short‑term bonds whenever the S&P 500 breaks down or volatility gets extreme.<br>Everything uses regular ETFs (no K‑1 forms). It does use leveraged and inverse ETFs, so expect bigger ups and downs.
An adaptive, All‑Weather‑style portfolio that rotates among tech growth, Treasuries, cash, gold/commodities, and volatility hedges. It uses leveraged and inverse ETFs to ride uptrends and hedge panics, aiming to beat the S&P 500 over time. High risk.
This adaptive, all-weather strategy beat the S&P on out-of-sample data: 28.54% annualized return vs 21.65%, lower max drawdown 15.61% vs 18.76%, lower beta ~0.69, and Calmar 1.83.
Ray Dalio's All Weather Portfolio is a great design that intends to maintain exposure to various asset classes to profit in any economic environment. A significant flaw, however, is that it is not capable of handling a rising rates environment, due to the heavy bonds exposure. This symphony is an attempt to maintain the "profit in any environment" nature of the AWP and deploys leverage and shorting to beat the S&P 500 over a long enough time horizon. As a bonus, this strategy is entirely K-1 free. This symphony uses components from the Commander BND strategy by HinnomTX, Beta Baller v1 by Deez, and the volatility switch developed by Garen Phillips.
Every value on file, each labelled with its calculation basis and as-of date.
| Backtest final value (from $10,000) | $34.5M | 2026-10-11 | |
| Backtest regulatory fees | $90k | 2026-10-11 | |
| Backtest slippage cost | $819k | 2026-10-11 |
| AI categories (Composer) | bond/rate timing, leveraged & inverse etfs, multi-asset, tactical allocation, trend-following, volatility hedging | 2026-10-11 | |
| Asset classes / instruments | equities | 2026-10-11 |
| Logic complexity (node count) | 3,976 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Rebalance corridor width | 10.00% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Rebalance frequency | none | 2026-10-11 |
| Concentration (Herfindahl index, out-of-sample, as Composer reports it) | 0.18 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Ticker universe (assets the logic can hold) | show[ "BIL", "BND", "BSV", "BTAL", "DBC", "ERX", "FAS", "GLD", "HYG", "IEF", "IEI", "LQD", "PSQ", "QQQ", "QQQE", "SH", "SHV", "SHY", "SOXL", "SPXL", "SPY", "SQQQ", "SVXY", "TECL", "TECS", "TIP", "TLT", "TMF", "TMV", "TQQQ", "UGL", "USDU", "UUP", "UVXY", "VGIT", "VGLT", "VIXM", "VIXY", "VOOG", "VOOV", "VOX", "VTV", "XLK", "XLP", "XLY" ] | 2026-10-11 |
| Alpha vs SPY, out-of-sample (out-of-sample) | 0.14 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Beta vs SPY, out-of-sample (out-of-sample) | 0.69 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Correlation (R) vs SPY, out-of-sample (out-of-sample) | 0.37 | 2026-10-11 |
| Remixes (copies) | 28 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Watchers | 29 | 2026-10-11 |
| Community review status | ACTIVE | 2026-10-11 |
| Backtest length | 3,200 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Out-of-sample length | 851 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, backtest period (annualized) (backtest) | 89.90% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, backtest period (cumulative) (backtest) | 345k% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, out-of-sample period (annualized) (out-of-sample) | 28.54% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, out-of-sample period (cumulative) (out-of-sample) | 133.67% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, trailing 1 day (out-of-sample) | 0.03% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, trailing 1 month (out-of-sample) | 3.43% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, trailing 1 week (out-of-sample) | 0.26% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, trailing 1 year (backtest) | 8.73% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, trailing 1 year (out-of-sample) | 8.71% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, trailing 2 weeks (out-of-sample) | 0.52% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Return, trailing 3 months (out-of-sample) | 2.19% | 2026-10-11 | |
| SPY annualized return over the backtest window (backtest) | 13.94% | 2026-10-11 |
| Calmar ratio, backtest period (backtest) | 5.76 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Calmar ratio, out-of-sample period (out-of-sample) | 1.83 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Maximum drawdown, backtest period (backtest) | -15.60% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Maximum drawdown, out-of-sample period (out-of-sample) | -15.61% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Sharpe ratio, backtest period (backtest) | 2.18 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Sharpe ratio, out-of-sample period (out-of-sample) | 1.04 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Sortino ratio, backtest period (backtest) | 6.61 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Sortino ratio, out-of-sample period (out-of-sample) | 2.22 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Standard deviation, backtest period (backtest) | 31.44% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Standard deviation, out-of-sample period (out-of-sample) | 27.32% | 2026-10-11 |
| Annualized turnover, backtest period (backtest) | 36.38 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Annualized turnover, out-of-sample period (out-of-sample) | 40.28 | 2026-10-11 | |
| Daily win rate, backtest period (backtest) | 57.69% | 2026-10-11 | |
| Daily win rate, out-of-sample period (out-of-sample) | 55.46% | 2026-10-11 |
Composer Technologies · Composer
Composer Technologies · Composer
