IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2607.06117.html

Relief-Gated Relative Rotation for QQQ-DIA Allocation: Globally Screened Relative States, Fixed Position Mapping, Incremental Interaction Admission, and Walk-Forward Validation

Author

Listed:
  • Zheli Xiong

Abstract

This paper studies Relief-Gated Relative Rotation (RGRR), a two-ETF rule that allocates between QQQ and DIA by mapping screened relative and macro states into a continuous QQQ weight. RGRR is economic rather than mechanical: it rotates between a growth-heavy sleeve and a Dow/value-heavy sleeve only when QQQ-DIA relative states are confirmed by rate, volatility, credit, or broad-market relief conditions. Candidate main effects and interactions are globally screened with horizon-specific HAC regressions and correlation de-duplication, then held fixed during walk-forward validation. Rolling out-of-sample validation re-selects only signal-family lambdas, not the signal universe or the position mapping. The final stack contains one main effect, nine second-order interactions, and two third-order interactions. Third-order terms must also improve rolling out-of-sample Sharpe versus the main plus second-order base and survive economic-family de-duplication. The final mapping uses a fixed bounded weight transformation and includes a 10 bps one-way turnover cost. Across the 2018, 2020, and 2022 out-of-sample starts, RGRR improves Sharpe versus 100% QQQ and 50/50 QQQ-DIA in every tested interval. It improves CAGR versus 50/50 in every interval, but beats 100% QQQ on CAGR only in the 2022 window. In 2018, RGRR earns an 18.33% CAGR and 0.94 Sharpe, versus 20.50% and 0.89 for QQQ and 16.69% and 0.86 for 50/50. In 2022, it earns a 15.19% CAGR and 0.87 Sharpe, versus 14.65% and 0.70 for QQQ. The evidence supports RGRR as a risk-adjusted relative allocation rule, not a pure return-dominance rule. Its main practical weakness is high turnover, ranging from 354% to 506% annualized.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheli Xiong, 2026. "Relief-Gated Relative Rotation for QQQ-DIA Allocation: Globally Screened Relative States, Fixed Position Mapping, Incremental Interaction Admission, and Walk-Forward Validation," Papers 2607.06117, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.06117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.06117
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. "On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
    2. Michael W. Brandt & Pedro Santa-Clara & Rossen Valkanov, 2009. "Parametric Portfolio Policies: Exploiting Characteristics in the Cross-Section of Equity Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(9), pages 3411-3447, September.
    3. John Y. Campbell & Samuel B. Thompson, 2008. "Predicting Excess Stock Returns Out of Sample: Can Anything Beat the Historical Average?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(4), pages 1509-1531, July.
    4. Hansen, Peter Reinhard, 2005. "A Test for Superior Predictive Ability," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 365-380, October.
    5. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 2015. "A five-factor asset pricing model," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 1-22.
    6. Ivo Welch & Amit Goyal, 2008. "A Comprehensive Look at The Empirical Performance of Equity Premium Prediction," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(4), pages 1455-1508, July.
    7. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zheli Xiong, 2026. "Continuous Timing Signals for Growth-Defensive Style Allocation: Factor Attribution, Risk Matching, and Out-of-Sample Evidence," Papers 2605.20636, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.
    2. Obaid, Khaled & Pukthuanthong, Kuntara, 2022. "A picture is worth a thousand words: Measuring investor sentiment by combining machine learning and photos from news," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 273-297.
    3. Doron Avramov & Si Cheng & Lior Metzker, 2023. "Machine Learning vs. Economic Restrictions: Evidence from Stock Return Predictability," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2587-2619, May.
    4. Hansen, Erwin, 2022. "Economic evaluation of asset pricing models under predictability," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 50-66.
    5. Huynh, Nhan, 2023. "Unemployment beta and the cross-section of stock returns: Evidence from Australia," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    6. Long, Huaigang & Zaremba, Adam & Zhou, Wenyu & Bouri, Elie, 2022. "Macroeconomics matter: Leading economic indicators and the cross-section of global stock returns," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    7. Chiang, I-Hsuan Ethan & Liao, Yin & Zhou, Qing, 2021. "Modeling the cross-section of stock returns using sensible models in a model pool," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 56-73.
    8. Barroso, Pedro & Detzel, Andrew, 2021. "Do limits to arbitrage explain the benefits of volatility-managed portfolios?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(3), pages 744-767.
    9. Xu, Hongyi & Katselas, Dean & Drienko, Jo, 2024. "A portfolio-level, sum-of-the-parts approach to return predictability," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    10. González-Sánchez, Mariano, 2022. "Factorial asset pricing models using statistical anomalies," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    11. Yu-Chin Hsu & Hsiou-Wei Lin & Kendro Vincent, 2017. "Do Cross-Sectional Stock Return Predictors Pass the Test without Data-Snooping Bias?," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 17-A003, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    12. Barroso, Pedro & Maio, Paulo, 2024. "The risk–return tradeoff among equity factors," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    13. Wolfgang Drobetz & Rebekka Haller & Christian Jasperneite & Tizian Otto, 2019. "Predictability and the cross section of expected returns: evidence from the European stock market," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(7), pages 508-533, December.
    14. Cotter, John & Eyiah-Donkor, Emmanuel & Potì, Valerio, 2017. "Predictability and diversification benefits of investing in commodity and currency futures," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 52-66.
    15. Bai, Jennie & Bali, Turan G. & Wen, Quan, 2021. "Is there a risk-return tradeoff in the corporate bond market? Time-series and cross-sectional evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(3), pages 1017-1037.
    16. Stephen A. Gorman & Frank J. Fabozzi, 2021. "The ABC’s of the alternative risk premium: academic roots," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(6), pages 405-436, October.
    17. Changeun Kim & Younwoo Jeong & Bong-Gyu Jang, 2025. "Interpretable Deep Learning for Stock Returns: A Consensus-Bottleneck Asset Pricing Model," Papers 2512.16251, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
    18. Fabian Hollstein & Marcel Prokopczuk, 2023. "Managing the Market Portfolio," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3675-3696, June.
    19. Dunbar, Kwamie, 2021. "Pricing the hedging factor in the cross-section of stock returns," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    20. Cong Wang, 2024. "Stock return prediction with multiple measures using neural network models," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.06117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.