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

交易策略与机器人

选择交易策略,并激活按其规则自动交易的机器人。
策略规定买入和卖出的规则。交易机器人通过受支持交易所的 API 执行这些规则。您也可以将所选策略用作信号机器人,通过 Telegram 和电子邮件接收通知。
筛选
选择 Core 1 以均衡起步,选择交易所并找到所需的交易代码。所有筛选条件共同生效。
行业与分组筛选
交易所?根据最新标准化结果,显示支持 USDT 现货交易的标的。再次点击已选交易所即可显示所有交易所。
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. (3) 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. (4) 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. (4) 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. (3) CVNA · Carvana Co. (4) CVS · CVS Health Corporation (4) CVX · Chevron Corp. (4) D · Dominion Energy, Inc. (4) DAL · Delta Air Lines, Inc. (4) DASH · DoorDash, Inc. (4) DD · DuPont de Nemours, Inc. (4) DDOG · Datadog Inc. Class A (4) DE · Deere & Company (4) DECK · Deckers Outdoor Corporation (4) DELL · Dell Technologies Inc. (7) DG · Dollar General Corp. (4) DGX · Quest Diagnostics Incorporated (4) DHI · D.R. Horton, Inc. (4) DHR · Danaher Corp. (4) DIS · The Walt Disney Company (4) DLR · Digital Realty Trust, Inc. (4) DLTR · Dollar Tree Inc. (4) DOC · Healthpeak Properties, Inc. (4) DOV · Dover Corporation (4) DOW · Dow Inc. (4) DPZ · Domino's Pizza, Inc. (4) DRI · Darden Restaurants, Inc. (4) DTE · DTE Energy Company (4) DUK · Duke Energy Corporation (4) DVA · DaVita Inc. (4) DVN · Devon Energy Corporation (4) DXCM · DexCom Inc. (4) EBAY · eBay Inc. (4) ECHO · EchoStar Corp. (4) ECL · Ecolab Inc. (4) ED · Consolidated Edison Inc. (4) EFX · Equifax Inc. (4) EG · Everest Group, Ltd. (4) EIX · Edison International (4) EL · The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (4) ELV · Elevance Health, Inc. (4) EME · EMCOR Group, Inc. (4) EMR · Emerson Electric Co. (4) EOG · EOG Resources, Inc. (4) EQIX · Equinix, Inc. (4) ERIE · Erie Indemnity Company (4) 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 (6) LITE · Lumentum Holdings Inc. (5) META · Meta Platforms Inc. (6) 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 (6) NVDA · NVIDIA Corporation (7) PLTR · Palantir Technologies Inc. (8) 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. (5) 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 (4) USAR · USA Rare Earth, Inc. (2)
所选策略概览

DLR · Digital Realty Trust, Inc.

Stock Universe · 全球股票市场
USD · NYSE · XNYS · United States
DLR 0 +3136.40% 1TRAD-QGM9
DevioLab 推荐 · Core 1 i每个交易代码(加密货币交易对或股票/ETF)都可能有多种策略,交易频率和风险各不相同。Core 1 是 DevioLab 为该标的选出的主要、最均衡策略,系统重点考虑风险和回撤控制,适合作为初始选择。您也可以查看下方交易记录和图表,自行选择更稳健或更激进的策略。
DevioLab 推荐 · Core 2 iCore 2 是 DevioLab 为该标的选出的更活跃、更激进策略,以更高风险和更深回撤换取潜在更高收益。同一标的可能有多种策略;请比较下方交易记录和图表,选择适合您的风格。
55交易
81.8%胜率
+7.07%平均交易
+42.81%最佳交易
-6.71%最差交易
+209.4%年化
策略分析档案 · 4644605ba6747b56

Quantitative Strategy Analysis: DLR · DLR 15-Minute Automated Logic Achieves 81.13% Historical Win Rate with 6.71% Maximum Drawdown

This quantitative study evaluates the top-ranked algorithmic trading strategy for DLR on the 15-minute timeframe. Over a 6.97-year evaluation window encompassing 53 completed trades, the strategy recorded an 81.13% win rate, a Profit Factor of 5.00, and a cumulative trade sum of +3136.40%. Designed as a low-frequency, position-style decision engine for automated trading bots, the logic maintains an average holding time of 735.59 hours (approximately 30.6 days) while limiting its maximum historical drawdown to 6.71%. The distribution of returns shows balanced profit contribution, with the top three winning trades generating only 21.73% of total gross profit. Performance remains stable across all calendar years from 2020 through 2026, reinforced by strong recent activity since June 1, 2024, yielding +126.35% across 15 completed trades.

分析日期: 19.10.2026. 策略数据单独更新。
阅读完整分析

Strategy profile

The algorithmic trading strategy designated for DLR operates on a 15-minute price bar interval within stock market assets. Ranked first for this asset on DevioLab with a proprietary score of 87.16, the strategy serves as decision logic suitable for automated trading bots and trading agents seeking disciplined market execution. Across a total evaluated history of 6.97 years—spanning from September 16, 2019, through September 4, 2026—the strategy registered 53 fully closed trades. Of these, 43 yielded positive returns while 10 ended in losses, establishing an overall win rate of 81.13%. The aggregate sum of closed trade returns across the full dataset reached +3136.40%, translating to an annualized performance metric of 209.44%. With a profit factor of 5.00, the strategy generated five units of gross profit for every unit of gross loss incurred. The quantitative profile highlights a highly selective systematic architecture that prioritizes trade accuracy and drawdown control over trade volume.

Trading rhythm and position duration

Despite utilizing a 15-minute intraday candle frequency to anchor its entry and exit rules, the strategy displays the temporal characteristics of a intermediate-term swing or position trading model. On average, the algorithm executes 7.60 trades per year, which equates to approximately 1.10 trades per active trading month. The average duration between trade exits is 45.90 days, with a median exit interval of 37.99 days. When positions are initiated by trading robots implementing this logic, they remain open for extended periods: the mean holding time stands at 735.59 hours (roughly 30.6 days), while the median holding time is 503.75 hours (approximately 21.0 days). This spatial divergence between a fine 15-minute sampling rate and multi-week holding times indicates that the underlying algorithmic filter requires precise intraday structural confirmations before entering, but relies on broader macroeconomic or equity trends to exit positions.

Quality of historical results

The statistical distribution of trade returns indicates high payout stability rather than dependence on statistical outliers. The average return across all 53 completed trades was +7.17%, while the median trade return reached +5.80%. The best individual trade achieved a gain of +42.81%, whereas the worst trade logged a loss of -6.71%. A crucial metric regarding return quality is the gross profit concentration: the strategy's three largest winning trades accounted for only 21.73% of total gross profit. In many automated trading strategies, a high cumulative gain is driven by one or two extreme statistical anomalies; here, the modest 21.73% concentration confirms that gains are distributed broadly across the 43 winning transactions. Combined with a 5.00 profit factor and an 81.13% win rate, the historical trade log reflects structural positive expectancy across varying market regimes.

Risk, drawdown and losing behavior

Risk management metrics for the DLR strategy demonstrate rigorous downside suppression throughout the 6.97-year backtest. The maximum peak-to-trough drawdown recorded was 6.71%, a figure that aligns almost perfectly with the single worst trade loss of -6.71%. This mathematical equivalence suggests that historical capital drawdowns were primarily composed of isolated losing trade events rather than compounding multi-trade losses. This observation is further corroborated by streak analysis: the strategy's longest historical losing streak was exactly 1 trade. Across all 53 executed positions, automated trading agents following this logic never experienced consecutive losing trades. Conversely, the longest winning streak reached 8 consecutive trades. The combination of an 81.13% win rate, a maximum drawdown of 6.71%, and a single-trade maximum loss streak establishes a low-risk profile in historical simulation.

Behavior through time and yearly stability

An examination of the yearly performance breakdown reveals unbroken annual consistency from 2020 through 2026. In 2020, the strategy completed 10 trades with an 80.00% win rate, producing a cumulative return sum of +92.03%. In 2021, trade volume remained steady at 10 trades, achieving a 90.00% win rate and a +41.54% return sum. During the 2022 market period, the strategy executed 7 trades with a 71.43% win rate and a +37.35% return sum. In 2023 and 2024, the algorithm delivered identical trade counts and win rates—8 trades and 87.50% win rates in both years—generating return sums of +69.23% and +65.72%, respectively. In 2025, performance logged 5 trades with a 60.00% win rate (+23.29% sum), followed by 2026, which recorded 5 trades with an 80.00% win rate (+50.97% sum). Every completed calendar year generated positive net trade sums, demonstrating that the strategy's edge was not limited to a single favorable market phase.

Recent period since 2024-06-01 versus full history

Performance in the recent window beginning June 1, 2024, provides a robust sample to evaluate current strategy efficacy. Between June 1, 2024, and the conclusion of the dataset on September 4, 2026, the strategy closed 15 trades, accumulating a combined trade return of +126.35%. This sample represents 28.30% of all historical trades executed over the entire 6.97-year history, indicating a modest increase in trade frequency during recent market conditions compared to the long-term baseline of 7.60 trades per year. The average return per trade in this recent window remained consistent with long-term expectations, contributing over a third of the total annualized strategy output. The ongoing execution of profitable trades without elevated drawdowns indicates that the algorithmic parameters have maintained structural alignment with market behavior since mid-2024.

Strengths and limitations

The primary statistical strengths of this strategy include its high historical hit rate (81.13%), an exceptional profit factor (5.00), a strictly controlled maximum drawdown (6.71%), and an unbroken annual profitability record. Furthermore, the low profit concentration among top winners (21.73%) ensures the edge is systematic rather than accidental. Conversely, primary analytical limitations stem from the low total trade frequency: 53 completed trades over nearly seven years represents a relatively small sample size, which can widen confidence intervals around expected future outcomes. Additionally, the average holding time of 735.59 hours requires trading bots and human operators to accommodate multi-week open position exposure, which may involve overnight capital locks and exposure to broader macroeconomic events between 15-minute decision signals.

DevioLab analytical conclusion

Taking into account all quantitative dimensions, the DLR strategy represents an exemplary model of high-selectivity trend capture. Earning a DevioLab score of 87.16 and the top ranking for asset DLR, the logic successfully converts 15-minute price data into multi-week positioning strategies characterized by an 81.13% win rate and minimal historical drawdowns. The complete absence of consecutive losing trades across seven years of backtesting highlights superior trade selection logic for deployment in automated trading systems. While operators must account for extended position durations and a low annualized trade count (7.60 trades per year), the strategy's statistical architecture offers a highly disciplined framework for risk-managed exposure to DLR.

Data scope and methodology

The metrics presented in this analysis are derived exclusively from historical backtested data for asset symbol DLR on a 15-minute time interval covering the period from September 16, 2019, to September 4, 2026. All profit percentages, holding times, drawdowns, and trade counts reflect closed simulated positions generated by the strategy logic. The statistics do not account for live order execution slippage, broker commissions, exchange fees, borrowing costs, or capital liquidity constraints. Historical simulated results do not guarantee or predict future performance. This study is intended strictly for quantitative research and educational evaluation of algorithmic trading decision engines and does not constitute financial or investment advice.

完整策略分析