Cited by 2Financial Markets and Investment StrategiesStock Market Forecasting MethodsBlockchain Technology Applications and Security

Profitability and Data-Snooping Tests of Four Technical Trade Strategies for Cryptocurrency Pair BTC/USDT and ETH/USDT in Cryptocurrency Markets During 2022–2023

Open access
Li, Wei, Wang, Xinwan, Wang, Zigan, Yang, Mengxin·2023·Journal of Accounting and Finance

Abstract

We provide a comprehensive investigation into the profitability of technical trading methods applied to the cryptocurrency pairs BTC/USDT and ETH/USDT. By employing rigorous evaluations and incremental examinations, we address the pervasive issue of data-snooping bias that often plagues the evaluation of trading strategies. Our empirical results indicate the lack of profitable technical trading strategies in both the analysis sample and prediction sample periods, even after rigorous adjustments for data snooping. These findings highlight the difficulties associated with selecting profitable technical trading strategies in the dynamic and volatile cryptocurrency market. Market participants, including individual traders, institutional investors, and regulatory bodies, should take note of our findings when making investment decisions based on technical analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.33423/jaf.v23i4.6453

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 3 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Finding

    The paper finds no profitable technical trading strategies in the examined sample and prediction periods after adjusting for data snooping.

    “Our empirical results indicate the lack of profitable technical trading strategies in both the analysis sample and prediction sample periods, even after rigorous adjustments for data snooping.”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    For ETH/USDT, the MACD strategy fails to generate profits in both the in-sample and out-of-sample periods.

    “This optimal strategy yields an annualized return of -24.076%, a Sharpe ratio of -0.413, and a maximum drawdown of 71.128%.The strategy does not have outstanding performance in the in-sample period as its average annualized return is insignificant and can not reject the null hypothesis.”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    For BTC/USDT, the MACD strategy fails to generate profits in both the in-sample and out-of-sample periods.

    “The strategy fails to generate profits in both the in-sample and out-of-sample periods, indicating a lack of effectiveness in the approach.”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    For ETH/USDT, the RSI strategy proves ineffective in generating profits in both periods.

    “Ultimately, the strategy proves ineffective in generating profits within the organization and outside the office, suggesting a lack of effectiveness.”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified
  • Finding

    For BTC/USDT, the Bollinger Bands strategy fails to generate profits in both the in-sample and out-of-sample periods.

    “However, this strategy did not demonstrate exceptional performance in both the in-sample and out-of-sample periods, as its average annualized return was insignificant and it failed to reject the null hypothesis.”
    Quote in the paperNot yet classified

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Adjusted out-of-sample profit contradicts the paper's central conclusion

    Major

    The abstract says no profitable strategies were found in the prediction period after data-snooping adjustments. Table 6 instead reports a 102.083% out-of-sample annualized return for a BTC/USDT MACD strategy, with reality-check and stepwise p-values below the stated 5% threshold.

  • Whole-sample profitable count conflicts with the best strategy's adjusted test

    Major

    In Table 2's daily Sharpe-ratio column, the best strategy has a stepwise p-value of 0.939, above the paper's 5% threshold. Yet that column reports an average of 2.928 profitable strategies under the same performance criterion.

  • Moving-average crossover direction reverses within the methods

    Minor

    The introductory EMAC description labels a short average crossing below a longer one as an upward disruption. Its later double-moving-average rule instead goes short when the short average moves below the long average.

  • MACD parameter grid does not explain the reported 12 variants

    Minor

    The specified ranges give three fast lengths, three slow lengths, and four signal lengths: 36 combinations before applying the paper's fast-less-than-slow condition, or 32 after it. Table 6 reports 12 strategies.

  • Bollinger Bands grid specifies more variants than reported

    Minor

    Periods 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, and 30 combined with three stated devfactor values yield 18 configurations. Table 5 reports 15 strategies.

5 of 5

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, W., Wang, X., Wang, Z., & Yang, M.
Affiliations
Tsinghua University (CN)
Venue
Journal of Accounting and Finance
Published
2023-10-13
Volume
23
Issue
4
ISSN
2158-3625 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4387669589
Cited by
2
References
23
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1
FWCI
0.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Accounting and Finance (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Stock Market Forecasting Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
Keywords
technical trading, cryptocurrency market, data snooping bias, trading strategy profitability, Bitcoin, Ethereum, technical analysis, cryptocurrency trading

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read (extract-v2) on 2026-09-25.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review