Hello all,

– Revisited and significantly expanded the Trend/Reversal Analysis Report
– 8th episode of our YouTube video series QuantBeats, this time with Jiri Mrkva
– Invitation to Future Alpha conference
– Quantpedia Awards 2026 reminder
– 11 new Quantpedia Premium strategies
– 5 new related research papers
– 7 new backtests written in QuantConnect code
– and finally, 5 new blog posts on our Quantpedia blog

Most systematic trading strategies are pro cyclical by nature. They perform best when markets trend higher and volatility remains contained. During broad market expansions, equity risk premia, momentum and trend following approaches tend to generate stable positive returns.

This analysis demonstrates how crisis hedge strategies can be identified, evaluated and integrated into a model portfolio using the Quantpedia Pro framework.

For many investors, short-term interest rates are often treated as something the market “discovers.” In reality, the Federal Reserve has enormous control over how the front end of the yield curve evolves. While textbooks often portray the Fed’s policy rate as a flexible tool that reacts quickly to economic data, the actual behavior of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) looks very different. In practice, monetary policy tends to move in long, persistent cycles. The Fed spends years hiking rates, or years cutting them, and only rarely reverses direction quickly. For anyone trading rates, bonds, or rate-sensitive assets, this persistence matters. It means that the path of short-term interest rates over the next one to two years is often largely shaped by the Fed’s policy trajectory rather than by constantly shifting market expectations.

This observation has an important implication: the short end of the Treasury curve often behaves less like a forecasting market and more like a gradual reflection of the Fed’s policy cycle. When the Fed enters a tightening or easing phase, that trend tends to propagate through Treasury yields from one month out to roughly two years. In this article, we show that these policy-driven trends can be measured and used. By identifying whether the Fed is in a tightening, easing, or neutral phase, investors can improve their expectations about the near-term evolution of the yield curve. For fixed-income portfolio managers and macro traders, recognizing these policy regimes can help sharpen rate forecasts, improve duration positioning, and better manage risks tied to interest-rate movements.

This research examines the critical quantitative investment problem of systematic tactical allocation to international equity mandates—specifically Emerging Markets (EM) and Europe, Australasia, and the Far East (EAFE)—amidst conjectured macroeconomic regime transitions. The investigation is precipitated by observable deteriorations in USD hegemony, elevated geopolitical risk premiums, and protracted macroeconomic uncertainty. These factors collectively challenge the post-Global Financial Crisis paradigm of consistent US equity outperformance, suggesting a potential inflection point in relative returns and currency-adjusted Sharpe ratios.

The central research question is whether a statistically robust, signals-based framework can be engineered to systematically time exposure to EAFE equities, thereby capitalizing on these postulated regime shifts. We move beyond traditional, static mean-variance optimization by developing a dynamic model that integrates momentum variables to generate actionable, out-of-sample allocation signals.

Alternative ETFs sit at an unusual intersection of public-market accessibility and hedge-fund-style investment techniques. They package managed futures, merger arbitrage, and option-based income strategies into exchange-traded products, yet they remain thinly traded and relatively niche compared to mainstream equity or bond ETFs. This combination makes them intriguing: they offer exposure to alternative risk premia, and their limited liquidity raises possibilities to build short-term reversal strategies. 

Calendar strategies are often viewed as weak when assessed individually. Their annualized returns tend to be low, market exposure is limited, and trading activity is sparse. Compared to trend following or swing strategies, which can remain invested for extended periods, calendar strategies may appear inefficient at first glance. This impression, however, largely stems from evaluating these strategies outside of their intended context. Calendar strategies are not designed to operate as standalone trading systems. Their primary role is within a portfolio, where their structural properties become relevant rather than their individual performance metrics.