Backtested leveraged ETF strategy suggested by reddit user. Beaten S&P500 over 24 years period by approx 30%, still a lot of margin for optimization. I'd like to hear your opinion.

Hello, I posted this also on r/Daytrading .

As the title says I have backtested a strategy proposed by a reddit user that has recently removed the post, the title was:
"I'm a professional trader with average annualised returns of over 70% across the last decade, and this is my complete trading strategy & how I distribute funds across the 3 portfolios I run to make money in every market scenario. A simple rule based strategy that you can use to beat the market".

I was very intrigued about his strategy and I tried to backtest it to prove it or disprove it. I did not remember his exact rules, so I built it with pretty standard assumptions, which can easily be modified to optimise the strategy, however it seems to be already beating the S&P500 over the last 24 years ( not by much, and without incorporating capital gain taxes).

Here is how the strategy is set up:

We keep the majority of capital disinvested, and we enter positions that we further increment in case the underlying drops additionally from our entry point. Because he assumed so, the non deployed capital actually earns the risk free rate compounded daily. (I used historical FedFunds rates)

We target the 3x Lev S&P500 etf. We look over a 30 days horizon to spot the local maximum and enter the trade whenever the current price drops 10% from that local high. The first entry will be 20% of our capital, the condition to close the trade is when we realize a 20% profit.

If the 3x Lev S&P drops an additional 10% from our entry price, we enter with an additional 15% of our non invested capital, and so forth for a maximum of 5 entries which are structured as following:
first entry after 10% drop: 20% of portfolio
second entry after 10% drop from previous entry: 15% of portfolio
third entry after 10% drop from previous entry: 15% of portfolio
fourth entry after 10% drop from previous entry: 15% of portfolio
fifth entry after 10% drop from previous entry: 15% of portfolio

In the case we enter five times we will have deployed 80% of our portfolio, as the spxl is down approx 60% from the starting local high.

Long story short, this is the output from my code, which should be correct.

we start with 1000$ in January 2010 and we reach 7713$ on 20 Dec 2024.

As a benchmark the S&P500 grew from approximately 1100$ in January 2010 to 6114$ as of today.

I attach the graph (not the code, which is very long).

I'd like your opinion because I think this is actually very interesting (despite not going anywhere near the promised 70% annualised return) and it challenges the well known principles of efficient market hypothesis. I am a bachelor student and I'm considering proposing this as my thesis on emh and study how different paramters lead to different performances in relation to the underlying theory of weak efficiency. I'd like to hear some thoughts about it, what could be wrong, what is interesting and if it is worth studying it more in depths and optimizing the strategy by modifying certain parameters.

If you have any questions or suggestions please let me know. Thanks

https://preview.redd.it/f3463jj0rlje1.png?width=2032&format=png&auto=webp&s=a23b8894a7c480df015ff56b34c8021337f01f34