正在加载美国股市状态…
➜
如何开始
只需几分钟即可完成完整系统设置。
打开快速入门指南 →
公开目录 · DEVIOLAB

策略目录

探索算法策略、比较表现,并查看每个模型的完整历史。
每个算法策略都对应一个真实的交易代理(Trading Bot),由 DevioLab 团队基于历史数据测试创建。它可用于受支持平台(包括 Binance)的 API 自动交易,也可仅作为 Signal Bot,通过 Telegram 和电子邮件发送通知。
2 · 代码
⌕
筛选
所有已选条件共同生效
行业与分组筛选
交易所可用性
A · Agilent Technologies Inc. (4) AAOI · Applied Optoelectronics Inc. (5) AAPL · Apple Inc. (7) ABBV · AbbVie Inc. (4) ABNB · Airbnb Inc. (4) ABT · Abbott Laboratories (4) ACGL · Arch Capital Group Ltd. (4) ACN · Accenture PLC Class A (4) ADBE · Adobe Inc. (3) ADI · Analog Devices Inc. (4) ADM · Archer-Daniels-Midland Company (4) ADP · Automatic Data Processing Inc. (4) ADSK · Autodesk Inc. (4) AEE · Ameren Corporation (4) AEP · American Electric Power Company, Inc. (4) AES · The AES Corporation (3) AFL · Aflac Incorporated (4) AIG · American International Group, Inc. (4) AIZ · Assurant Inc. (4) AJG · Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (4) AKAM · Akamai Technologies Inc. (4) ALAB · Astera Labs, Inc. (7) ALB · Albemarle Corporation (4) ALGN · Align Technology Inc. (4) ALL · The Allstate Corporation (4) ALLE · Allegion plc (4) ALNY · Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (4) AMAT · Applied Materials Inc. (7) AMCR · Amcor plc (4) AMD · Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (7) AME · AMETEK, Inc. (4) AMGN · Amgen Inc. (2) AMP · Ameriprise Financial Inc. (4) AMT · American Tower Corporation (4) AMZN · Amazon.com Inc. (7) ANET · Arista Networks Inc. (4) AON · Aon plc Class A (4) AOS · A. O. Smith Corporation (4) APA · APA Corporation (4) APD · Air Products and Chemicals Inc. (4) APH · Amphenol Corp. (4) APO · Apollo Global Management Inc. (4) APP · AppLovin Corporation (4) APTV · Aptiv PLC (4) ARE · Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. (4) ARES · Ares Management Corp. (4) ARM · Arm Holdings plc ADR (7) ASML · ASML Holding N.V. NY (7) ASTS · AST SpaceMobile Inc. (6) ATO · Atmos Energy Corporation (4) AVGO · Broadcom Inc. (7) AVY · Avery Dennison Corporation (4) AWK · American Water Works Company, Inc. (4) AXON · Axon Enterprise, Inc. (4) AXP · American Express Company (4) AZO · AutoZone, Inc. (4) BA · Boeing Co/The (4) BABA · Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. ADR (6) BAC · Bank of America Corp. (4) BALL · Ball Corporation (4) BAX · Baxter International Inc. (4) BBY · Best Buy Co., Inc. (4) BDX · Becton, Dickinson and Company (4) BE · Bloom Energy Corp. (5) BEN · Franklin Templeton Inc. (4) BF.B · Brown-Forman Corp. (4) BG · Bunge Global SA (4) BIIB · Biogen Inc. (4) BK · The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (4) BKNG · Booking Holdings Inc. (4) BKR · Baker Hughes Company (4) BLDR · Builders FirstSource Inc. (3) BLK · BlackRock Inc. (4) BMNR · BitMine Immersion Technologies, Inc. (5) BMY · Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (3) BNY · Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (3) BR · Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. (4) BRK.B · Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Class B (4) BRO · Brown & Brown Inc. (4) BSX · Boston Scientific Corp. (3) BX · Blackstone Inc. (4) BXP · BXP, Inc. (4) C · Citigroup Inc. (4) CAH · Cardinal Health Inc. (4) CARR · Carrier Global Corp. (4) CASY · Casey's General Stores, Inc. (4) CAT · Caterpillar Inc. (4) CB · Chubb Limited (4) CBOE · Cboe Global Markets Inc. (4) CBRE · CBRE Group Inc. (4) CCEP · Coca-Cola Europacific Partners PLC (4) CCI · Crown Castle Inc. (4) CCL · Carnival Corporation Ltd. (4) CDNS · Cadence Design Systems, Inc. (4) CDW · CDW Corporation (3) CEG · Constellation Energy Corporation (4) CF · CF Industries Holdings, Inc. (4) CFG · Citizens Financial Group Inc. (4) CHD · Church & Dwight Co., Inc. (4) CHRW · C.H. Robinson Worldwide Inc. (4) CHTR · Charter Communications Inc. (4) CI · The Cigna Group (4) CIEN · Ciena Corporation (4) CINF · Cincinnati Financial Corporation (3) CL · Colgate-Palmolive Co. (4) CLX · The Clorox Company (4) CMCSA · Comcast Corp. (4) CME · CME Group Inc. (4) CMG · Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. (4) CMI · Cummins Inc. (4) CMS · CMS Energy Corporation (3) CNC · Centene Corp. (4) CNP · CenterPoint Energy, Inc. (4) COF · Capital One Financial Corp. (4) COHR · Coherent Corp. (7) COIN · Coinbase Global Inc. (3) COO · The Cooper Companies, Inc. (3) COP · ConocoPhillips (4) COR · Cencora Inc. (4) COST · Costco Wholesale Corporation (4) CPAY · Corpay Inc. (4) CPRT · Copart, Inc. (4) CPT · Camden Property Trust (4) CRCL · Circle Internet Group Inc. (5) CRDO · Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd (8) CRH · CRH plc (4) CRL · Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (4) CRM · Salesforce, Inc. (4) CRWD · CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. (4) CSCO · Cisco Systems Inc. (4) CSGP · CoStar Group, Inc. (4) CSX · CSX Corporation (4) CTAS · Cintas Corporation (4) CTSH · Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. (3) CTVA · Corteva Inc. (4) DELL · Dell Technologies Inc. (6) EWY · iShares MSCI South Korea ETF (6) FLNC · Fluence Energy, Inc. (7) GS · The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (6) HOOD · Robinhood Markets Inc. (7) IBM · International Business Machines Corporation (6) INTC · Intel Corporation (6) IREN · IREN Limited (7) LITE · Lumentum Holdings Inc. (6) META · Meta Platforms Inc. (7) MRVL · Marvell Technology, Inc. (6) MSFT · Microsoft Corporation (7) MSTR · Strategy Inc. (7) MU · Micron Technology Inc. (7) NFLX · Netflix Inc. (8) NOK · Nokia Corporation Sponsored ADR (7) NVDA · NVIDIA Corporation (7) PLTR · Palantir Technologies Inc. (7) PYPL · PayPal Holdings, Inc. (6) QQQ · Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (6) RKLB · Rocket Lab Corporation (4) SKHY · SK hynix Inc. ADR (3) SMCI · Super Micro Computer Inc. (6) SMH · VanEck Semiconductor ETF (4) SNDK · Sandisk Corp. (4) SOXS · Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bear 3X Shares (3) SPCX · Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (3) TSLA · Tesla, Inc. (6) TSM · Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. ADR (5) USAR · USA Rare Earth, Inc. (3)
所选策略概览

CDNS · Cadence Design Systems, Inc.

Stock Universe · 全球股票市场
USD · NASDAQ · XNGS · United States
CDNS 0 +2393.03% 1TRAD-JBL1
DevioLab 推荐 · Core 1 iDevioLab 主要推荐:更加防御、平稳且稳定的配置,重点控制风险和回撤。
DevioLab 推荐 · Core 2 iDevioLab 更激进的推荐:接受更高风险和更深回撤,以换取潜在更高回报。
30交易
90.0%胜率
+14.75%平均交易
+208.10%最佳交易
-8.97%最差交易
+394.5%年化
策略分析档案 · 753ed0e5e424b0b8

CDNS · CDNS Algorithmic Strategy Analysis: High Win Rate and Right-Skewed Payoff Profile on a 15-Minute Framework

This analytical evaluation examines the core algorithmic trading strategy for CDNS stock, evaluated across a 7.03-year backtesting history from September 2019 to September 2026. Operating on a 15-minute bar frequency, the strategy achieves a DevioLab score of 84.14, earning the top rank for the ticker. Over a total sample size of 30 completed trades, the strategy delivers a cumulative return of +2393.03 percent with an exceptional 90 percent win rate (27 winning trades against 3 losing trades) and a high profit factor of 6.88. Maximum historical drawdown remains contained at 9.70 percent. However, quantitative examination reveals a highly skewed payoff structure: the average trade return of +14.75 percent contrasts sharply with a median trade return of +5.38 percent, driven by a best trade of +208.10 percent and a concentration where the top three winning trades generate 61.39 percent of gross cumulative profit. Additionally, 25 of the 30 completed trades executed after June 1, 2024, demonstrating that historical trade completion has been heavily concentrated in recent market cycles.

分析日期: 29.09.2026. 策略数据单独更新。
阅读完整分析

Strategy profile

The CDNS quantitative trading model represents a core algorithmic strategy engineered for equity trading in Cadence Design Systems (CDNS). Holding the rank of number one for the symbol with a DevioLab score of 84.14, the strategy operates using a 15-minute intraday bar interval to monitor price dynamics while executing an ultra-selective multi-week swing or position holding framework. Over the complete sample period spanning September 16, 2019, through September 25, 2026—a duration of approximately 7.03 years—the model generated a cumulative closed-trade return of +2393.03 percent, translating to an annualized figure of 394.54 percent under compounding conditions. The logic is structured to serve as the algorithmic core for automated trading bots, trading robots, or trading agents requiring strict signal filters and minimal trade turnover. A total of 30 completed trades were logged over the entire dataset, reflecting a highly conservative trigger rate designed to capture extended macro trends while ignoring minor intraday market noise.

Trading rhythm and position duration

Despite utilizing a 15-minute execution interval, the strategy operates as a low-frequency, long-duration position model rather than a high-frequency or scalping algorithm. Across the full 7.03-year observation window, the strategy recorded only 30 completed trades, which equates to an average trade frequency of 4.27 trades per year or 1.30 trades per active month. Position durations exhibit a wide dynamic range between typical trades and extreme trend-following outliers. The average holding duration stands at 1563.19 hours, or approximately 65.1 days, whereas the median holding duration is substantially lower at 348.0 hours, or exactly 14.5 days. This structural gap indicates that while typical trades settle within two to three weeks, a subset of winning trades is permitted to run uninterrupted for several months. The temporal distance between trade exits averages 45.48 days, with a median spacing of 30.99 days. For deployment within automated trading agents, this spatial cadence implies long periods of passive position holding interspersed with occasional tactical adjustments.

Quality of historical results

The strategy demonstrates robust statistical quality driven by a high win rate combined with a strong profit factor of 6.88. Out of 30 historical trades, 27 closed with positive returns, yielding a 90.0 percent hit rate against only 3 losing trades. However, a deeper examination of the payoff curve reveals a asymmetric distribution. The average trade performance of +14.75 percent diverges significantly from the median trade performance of +5.38 percent. This disparity is explained by the strategy's peak winner, which achieved a single-trade gain of +208.10 percent. Furthermore, the three largest winning trades collectively account for 61.39 percent of the strategy's total gross profits. This concentration indicates that while the strategy reliably harvests modest baseline gains on standard trades, a majority of its net total performance relies on capturing rare, runaway trend expansions. The profit factor of 6.88 reflects that historical gross profits outweighed gross losses by nearly seven to one, supported by strict loss containment on failed entries.

Risk, drawdown and losing behavior

Risk management metrics show historical discipline across the observed dataset. The peak-to-trough maximum drawdown recorded during the 7.03-year history was capped at 9.70 percent, a remarkably low figure relative to the cumulative return of +2393.03 percent. The largest single loss across all trades was limited to -8.97 percent, demonstrating that losing trades were truncated before causing structural capital erosion. The strategy experienced a maximum consecutive winning streak of 22 trades, while its maximum losing streak was restricted to just 2 consecutive trades. This asymmetry between win sequences and loss sequences minimized prolonged equity drawdowns. The tight coupling between a maximum trade loss of -8.97 percent and a overall portfolio drawdown of 9.70 percent confirms that drawdown events were largely driven by isolated trade exits rather than compounding losses across multiple simultaneous failures.

Behavior through time and yearly stability

Analyzing annual statistical outputs highlights a pronounced temporal concentration of closed trades in the latter portion of the backtest window. In 2023, the model closed 2 trades, both of which were profitable, producing a 100 percent win rate and a combined return sum of +227.98 percent, heavily boosted by long-duration position cycles. In 2024, trade activity increased to 6 completed trades, yielding 4 wins and 2 losses (66.67 percent win rate) with a cumulative gain of +52.05 percent. In 2025, performance accelerated with 12 completed trades, achieving a 100 percent win rate and a cumulative return sum of +94.34 percent. In 2026, through September 25, the model completed 10 trades with 9 wins and 1 loss (90.0 percent win rate), generating +68.00 percent. The data show that 30 out of 30 recorded trades completed between 2023 and 2026, while the years from 2019 through 2022 generated negligible closed trade events, reflecting either open long-term positions or strict signal filtering during earlier market regimes.

Recent period since 2024-06-01 versus full history

The performance window beginning June 1, 2024, represents the primary driver of total sample trade density. Out of 30 total historical trades completed since September 2019, 25 trades closed on or after June 1, 2024. During this recent window, the strategy accumulated a combined closed-trade return of +181.20 percent. The concentration of 83.3 percent of all completed trades within this recent multi-year span demonstrates that recent price behavior on CDNS aligned frequently with the model's entry and exit criteria. Comparing the recent sample to the broader dataset shows consistent win rate stability and steady capital accrual, confirming that the strategy's core performance parameters have remained effective during recent market environments.

Strengths and limitations

The primary strength of the strategy lies in its risk-adjusted trade profile, characterized by a 90.0 percent win rate, a 6.88 profit factor, and a historical maximum drawdown restricted to 9.70 percent. The ability to limit losing streaks to two trades while generating a 22-trade win streak provides operational equity stability. Conversely, the strategy exhibits two clear analytical limitations. First, the total trade sample is sparse, consisting of only 30 completed trades over 7.03 years, which increases statistical uncertainty compared to high-frequency models. Second, gross profit generation is heavily right-skewed, with the top three winning trades contributing 61.39 percent of gross gains and a best single trade of +208.10 percent creating a substantial buffer above the median trade gain of +5.38 percent. Automated trading robots executing this logic must remain in position long enough to capture rare tail-event winners to replicate historical performance.

DevioLab analytical conclusion

With a DevioLab score of 84.14 and a top ranking for CDNS, this algorithmic strategy presents a compelling model of high-conviction, low-frequency trend extraction. By combining a 15-minute bar resolution with long average holding periods of over 65 days, the system filters out market volatility while capitalizing on sustained directionality. The high win rate of 90.0 percent and constrained maximum drawdown of 9.70 percent demonstrate effective risk management. Quantitative operators deploying this logic into automated trading agents should account for the low trade frequency of 4.27 trades per year and the strong reliance on top-tier outlier trades, recognizing that historical success has depended on patience during non-trending phases and uncompromised exposure during macro trend expansions.

Data scope and methodology

All metrics reported in this analytical review are derived strictly from historical backtesting data for the CDNS strategy across the evaluation period from September 16, 2019, to September 25, 2026. Statistics are calculated exclusively from 30 completed closed trades. The 15-minute timeframe refers to the price chart resolution used for signal calculation. Performance percentages reflect simulated gross historical returns of the strategy logic and do not incorporate external factors such as live execution slippage, broker commission schedules, order queue dynamics, or live account compounding adjustments. Historical backtest performance provides quantitative insight into model mechanics but does not guarantee future operational results.

完整策略分析