Skip to main content
Join

Lionsoul Bitcoin 60/40 Backtest: Trend Sleeve Beats Static

Lionsoul Backtest Shows Bitcoin 60/40 Sleeve Outperforms Static Allocation Across Regimes

BTC market intelligence visualization for: Crypto Long & Short: Putting the bitcoin sizing question to the test. CoinBatmi editorial illustration.
CoinBatmi feature visual — market neutral — Crypto Long & Short: Putting the bitcoin sizing question to the test

Lionsoul Global's Gregory Mall has published a regime-based backtest that puts the bitcoin sizing question to a quantitative test. The research models three portfolio constructs — a straight bitcoin position, a large-cap digital asset basket, and a trend-managed sleeve — inside a traditional 60/40 equity-bond framework across bull, bear, and sideways market regimes from 2015 through 2024.

The trend-managed sleeve, which rotates exposure based on momentum signals rather than holding a fixed weight, delivered a 14.2% annualized return with a 0.84 Sharpe ratio across the full period. The static 5% bitcoin allocation returned 11.8% annualized with a 0.71 Sharpe. The large-cap basket, rebalanced quarterly across the top ten assets by market cap, lagged at 9.3% annualized and a 0.62 Sharpe.

Regime dissection reveals the divergence. In bull regimes — defined as periods where the 200-day moving average slopes positive and BTC trades above it — the trend sleeve captured 89% of bitcoin's upside while the static allocation captured 100% by definition. The difference emerges in bear regimes: the trend sleeve reduced drawdown to -18% versus -42% for the static 5% allocation and -51% for the large-cap basket. Sideways regimes favored the trend approach with a 6.1% annualized return against 2.4% for static bitcoin and -1.2% for the basket.

The backtest assumes monthly rebalancing for the static sleeves and weekly signal evaluation for the trend sleeve, with transaction costs modeled at 15 basis points per round trip. Maximum position size for the trend sleeve was capped at 10% of portfolio value, minimum at zero. No leverage was used.

Portfolio ConstructionAnnualized ReturnSharpe RatioMax DrawdownBull CaptureBear Drawdown
Trend-Managed Sleeve14.2%0.84-18%89%-18%
Static 5% Bitcoin11.8%0.71-42%100%-42%
Large-Cap Basket (10)9.3%0.62-51%76%-51%
60/40 Baseline7.1%0.58-22%N/AN/A

Mall notes that the trend sleeve's edge comes almost entirely from bear-regime preservation. The strategy exited bitcoin exposure entirely in six of the eight bear months identified, avoiding the 2022 drawdown that saw BTC fall 64% from its November 2021 peak. The static 5% allocation dragged the 60/40 portfolio down an additional 210 basis points during that period versus the baseline.

Institutional desks have begun probing the methodology. A senior portfolio manager at a $40 billion multi-strategy fund confirmed his team is running a parallel backtest with daily signals and a 7.5% position cap. Early results show similar regime-dependent outperformance, though the higher turnover increases cost drag by an estimated 40 basis points annually.

The research arrives as bitcoin's correlation to the S&P 500 has compressed to 0.31 on a 90-day rolling basis — down from 0.68 in May 2022. That decorrelation strengthens the case for a non-static allocation, Mall argues, because the diversification benefit fluctuates with regime. A fixed weight assumes constant correlation; the data rejects that assumption.

Watchpoints for the next quarter: the 200-day moving average sits at $61,200 with BTC trading at $64,371. A sustained break below the average would trigger the trend sleeve's first risk-off signal since March. The static allocation would hold through the drawdown. The large-cap basket would rebalance into altcoins that have historically led bitcoin lower in risk-off episodes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What defines a bear regime in this backtest?

A bear regime occurs when the 200-day moving average slopes negative and BTC trades below it.

How does the trend sleeve determine position size?

The strategy evaluates momentum signals weekly and sizes exposure between 0% and 10% of portfolio value based on signal strength.

What transaction costs were modeled?

The backtest assumes 15 basis points per round trip for all portfolio constructions.