Calculated Risk 250 Overview

Calculated Risk 250 is the top tier of the Calculated Risk family and the most aggressive portfolio on this site. It holds Catalyst 300 at 40%, Global Navigator 300 at 35% and Triad at 25%, and rebalances back to those weights each January.

Three quarters of the portfolio sits in blocks that can reach 3x. Unlevered Triad, which is half the portfolio at the entry tier, is down to a quarter here. Maximum notional is 250%.

This tier is for investors who want leverage and understand what that means in a bad year. It is not a more efficient version of the lower tiers. It is a larger bet with a correspondingly larger worst case.

What the Name Means

The number is exact arithmetic, not a label.

Component	Weight	Maximum notional	Contribution
Catalyst 300	40%	300%	120%
Global Navigator 300	35%	300%	105%
Triad	25%	100%	25%
Total	100%		250%

That 250% is the notional maximum, reached when Smart Leverage is deployed, the average leveage is 136%.

Catalyst 300 reaches 3x through TQQQ and Global Navigator 300 through UPRO.

How the Leverage Works

Smart Leverage is a single mechanism, used by every leveraged strategy on this site. It sits dormant by default and arms only after the broad U.S. equity market has fallen at least 10% from its high. From armed, it deploys when the market's own momentum turns back up.

Leverage therefore arrives after a decline rather than at a high, when more of the fall has already happened. One drawdown event produces one deployment: after leverage comes off, a fresh 10% decline is required before it can arm again.

Both levered blocks here run that same mechanism off the same market trigger, so they deploy together rather than taking turns. The portfolio is unlevered most of the time, and during the windows when Smart Leverage is live it is levered across three quarters of its holdings at 3x. That is the correct mental picture of this tier: long stretches at 1x punctuated by periods of serious exposure.

At this level, leverage is the dominant risk. A conditional rule is not a safety net, and three times exposure on three quarters of a portfolio is a large position by any standard. Smart Leverage has a strong record, and a record is not a promise. Size this tier as though a deployment could go wrong, because eventually one will.

Why These Three Blocks

Catalyst 300 at 40%

The largest block and the main engine. Catalyst compounds faster than anything else available to this family, and the 3x variant compounds faster still.

Worth stating plainly: the 3x variant does not inherit the drawdown behavior of the 2x one. At the lower tiers, Catalyst 200 has historically matched unleveraged Catalyst's worst decline, because Smart Leverage was not deployed during that episode. Catalyst 300 has not matched it. The extra leverage shows up in the decline as well as in the return, and the numbers in the table below make that visible.

Global Navigator 300 at 35%

A second 3x block, at a weight more than double what the middle tier gives it and more than twice the entry tier's 2x version.

Global Navigator is the weakest of the three components on standalone risk-adjusted terms. It is here because it goes defensive on a dual momentum signal that is independent of Catalyst's macro regime read and Triad's sleeve momentum, so the three blocks do not all step aside on the same information. At 35% it is also doing real work on the return side, which is a change from the lower tiers where the same block is ballast-sized.

Triad at 25%

Triad is the stabilizer in every member of this family and the only block that never levers. Its weight is the dial that sets each tier: 50% at Calculated Risk 150, 35% at Calculated Risk 185, 25% here.

A quarter of the portfolio is the least ballast any tier in this family carries. Everything this tier gains over the others comes from that reduction and from the move to 3x blocks.

No passive sleeve

The crisis protection in these portfolios comes from the active blocks going defensive, not from a hedge sleeve. This blend takes that protection directly from Catalyst, Global Navigator and Triad rather than paying for a basket of diversifiers to deliver it.

Rebalancing

Calculated Risk 250 resets to 40/35/25 in January, and only in January. Between resets the weights drift with each block's returns, so a strong year for Catalyst 300 leaves it above 40% until the following January.

Drift matters more at this tier than at the others. A block that can triple its exposure during a deployment window can also grow its share of the portfolio quickly, and it stays grown until January.

Why the Record Starts in 2003

Catalyst's regime classification depends on market-implied inflation expectations, and that data series begins in 2003. Since Catalyst 300 is the largest component here, the portfolio's history begins there too.

The other blocks have much longer records on their own pages. Comparisons with strategies whose histories reach back to 1980 are comparing different eras as well as different designs, so the tables below hold every row to the same window.

Performance Highlights

Over the full available history, alongside its own components:

May 2003 through September 2026, net of trading friction:

	CAGR	Max Drawdown	Ulcer Index	UPI
Calculated Risk 250	+27.9%	-21.2%	3.95	6.67
Catalyst 300	+40.2%	-27.2%	5.75	6.72
Global Navigator 300	+21.6%	-20.2%	6.58	3.04
Triad	+14.6%	-8.6%	2.43	5.32
S&P 500	+11.3%	-51.0%	11.72	0.82

The third column is the Ulcer Performance Index: return above cash divided by how deep the portfolio went and how long it stayed there. Max Drawdown reports the worst single moment; UPI reports the experience of holding it. Higher is better.

This table says something the lower tiers' tables do not, and it is worth being direct about it.

At CR 150 and CR 185, the blend scores higher on risk-adjusted return than every one of its components. Here it does not. Catalyst 300 alone posts a slightly better UPI than the portfolio does, though at a decline several points deeper and with everything riding on one strategy.

That is what the top of a leverage ladder looks like. Diversification is still doing its job on the drawdown side, holding the blend's worst decline six points shallower than its main engine's, but it is no longer improving the risk-adjusted number. The reason to hold the blend rather than Catalyst 300 by itself is that three engines failing at different times is a more survivable way to carry this much exposure than one engine carrying all of it.

Against the index, this tier earns roughly two and a half times the annual return with a worst decline under half the index's. That comparison is real, and it should not be mistaken for safety. A 21% decline on a levered portfolio is a different experience from a 21% decline on an unlevered one, because the leverage invites you to size the position larger in the first place.

The family ladder

The same window, showing where this tier sits among its siblings:

May 2003 through September 2026, net of trading friction:

	CAGR	Max Drawdown	Ulcer Index	UPI
Quiet Compounding	+15.5%	-8.2%	2.17	6.41
Calculated Risk 150	+21.3%	-11.7%	2.86	6.89
Calculated Risk 185	+24.3%	-14.7%	3.28	6.90
Calculated Risk 250	+27.9%	-21.2%	3.95	6.67
S&P 500	+11.3%	-51.0%	11.72	0.82

Return climbs steadily up the ladder, drawdown climbs with it, and the risk-adjusted column barely moves: every tier lands between 6.2 and 6.8. CR 250 is not the best of them on that measure, and no tier meaningfully is.

Moving up the ladder buys more return in exchange for more pain at roughly a constant exchange rate. The right tier is the one whose worst decline you would actually hold through. For this one, that means being able to sit through a decline north of 20% on a levered portfolio without selling, and accepting that the worst decline ahead may be larger than the worst one behind.

Two cautions apply here with more force than anywhere else on this site. These records are backtested, and a heavily levered portfolio assembled from components chosen after their histories were known deserves real skepticism. And a single figure covering two decades says nothing about the order the returns arrived in, which is most of what an investor lives through. With 3x sleeves, order is everything.

Portfolio Characteristics

• The most aggressive portfolio here. Maximum 250% notional, reached during the windows when Smart Leverage is deployed.
• Two 3x blocks. Catalyst 300 through TQQQ and Global Navigator 300 through UPRO, together 75% of the portfolio.
• Minimal ballast. Triad at 25% is the least unlevered weight of any tier in this family.
• Conditional, not constant. Leverage deploys after a market decline rather than being carried permanently.
• Deeper declines than the lower tiers. The historical worst is roughly double the entry tier's, and the future worst could be larger still.
• Three independent engines. Macro regime positioning, dual momentum and rotational momentum, each reading different inputs.
• Annual rebalancing at the top level. Weights reset each January and drift in between, and drift runs further here than in the lower tiers.
• Substantial underlying turnover. The portfolio trades rarely; its components do not.
• Best suited to tax-deferred accounts. Component-level turnover generates short-term gains. In a taxable account, plan accordingly.
• Shorter history than most strategies here. The record begins in 2003 because of Catalyst's data dependency.
• Fully mechanical. Every allocation and every leverage decision follows from published rules with no discretionary override.

Who It's For

Calculated Risk 250 is designed for investors who want:

• The highest returns available here, and who have decided what that costs.
• Serious leverage applied after declines rather than carried at all times.
• Three independent engines rather than a single leveraged strategy carrying everything.
• A clear ceiling on total exposure, stated as arithmetic rather than described in adjectives.
• The tolerance to sit through a decline above 20% on a levered portfolio.

It is a poor fit for most investors, and that is not a disclaimer. Anyone who would sell during a decline deeper than the historical worst, who is investing money they will need within a few years, or who has not held a levered position through a bad market before should start lower. Calculated Risk 185 gives up a few points of return for a meaningfully shallower ride, Calculated Risk 150 keeps half the portfolio unlevered, and Quiet Compounding uses the same portfolio-of-strategies approach with no leverage anywhere.

A general caution about this family, and about this tier especially: leverage magnifies whatever happens next, including the parts nobody modeled. Size the position accordingly.

---

Past performance, including backtested results, is not indicative of future results. Backtested performance is hypothetical, does not reflect actual trading, and benefits from hindsight in the selection of strategy rules and component weights. Portions of the history rely on reconstructed proxy data for funds that did not exist for the full period. Leveraged exchange-traded funds, particularly 3x funds, carry risks well beyond those of their unleveraged counterparts, including path dependency and the effects of daily rebalancing. Investors should carefully consider their risk tolerance and consult with a financial advisor.

For the latest details, visit www.DualMomentumSystems.com