← All strategies

Sentinel

Scheduled contributions into a leveraged Nasdaq ETF, with a standing hedge.

Something stands guard over the position the whole time it is held.

XIRR
40.8%
Max drawdown
−59.8%
Rebalance
Monthly contributions
Measured over
11.8y

Measured on contributions, so the return is an XIRR and is not comparable with the CAGR of the lump-sum strategies. Money contributed after a fall earns the recovery, which flatters any single figure. Read the drawdown alongside it.

Right nowAS OF 2026-10-09
ROLL
Roll the hedge
the standing hedge has drifted far enough out of the money that the rule calls for a new one
BUY
Scheduled contribution due
stepped up while the ETF sits below its recent high

This is the only strategy here measured on contributions, so its return is an XIRR and is not comparable with the CAGR figures on the other pages.

Figure 1Account value against contributions
$2k$1.6M$3.2M$4.7M20152018202120242026
SentinelCash paid in
Fig. 1$370,000 paid in over 11.8 years of monthly contributions, ending at $4,742,719. Both lines are actual dollars, not rebased, because the deposits are the point of comparison. This curve is marked daily, so the drawdown below is the real peak-to-trough figure rather than a sampled one. Hypothetical backtest of a published mechanical ruleset. Past results are not a forecast.
The rulesAccumulation, hedged

Contributions go in on a schedule and step up when the ETF is well off its recent high, so more capital arrives at lower prices without anyone deciding to buy the dip. A protective put is held the entire time. The hedge widens and lengthens as the account grows, because far-dated protection gets cheaper per unit the larger the position it covers. In this backtest the hedge paid for itself, which is the unusual part.

This strategy is not part of the model portfolio. It runs on monthly contributions rather than a lump sum, so blending its return against the others would count deposited cash as performance.

The hedge

What the hedge actually changed

XIRRMax drawdown
Without the put40.39%−80.5%
With the put40.82%−59.8%

Same contributions, put removed. The protection cut 20.7 points off the worst fall while adding 0.43 points of return. A hedge that pays for itself is the unusual part, and it is the reason this strategy is published at all. Unhedged, this is the underlying ETF with no cash buffer, and that is what its drawdown reflects.

What this costs

A 60% drawdown happened, and will happen again

The worst peak-to-trough fall in this backtest was 59.8%. That is the number that decides whether a strategy is holdable, and it matters more than the return, because a strategy abandoned at the bottom returns nothing at all. This curve is marked daily, so the drawdown below is the real peak-to-trough figure rather than a sampled one.

Backtested and hypothetical, over one historical window, with the benefit of hindsight. Costs, taxes and slippage are modelled only where the module notes say so. Nothing here is advice, and no result is a forecast.