This paper offers a detailed investigation of switchback designs in A/B testing, which alternate between baseline and new policies over time. Our aim is to thoroughly evaluate the effects of these designs on the accuracy of their resulting average treatment effect (ATE) estimators. We propose a novel "weak signal analysis" framework, which substantially simplifies the calculations of the mean squared errors (MSEs) of these ATEs in Markov decision process environments. Our findings suggest that (i) when the majority of reward errors are positively correlated, the switchback design is more efficient than the alternating-day design which switches policies in a daily basis. Additionally, increasing the frequency of policy switches tends to reduce the MSE of the ATE estimator. (ii) When the errors are uncorrelated, however, all these designs become asymptotically equivalent. (iii) In cases where the majority of errors are negative correlated, the alternating-day design becomes the optimal choice. These insights are crucial, offering guidelines for practitioners on designing experiments in A/B testing. Our analysis accommodates a variety of policy value estimators, including model-based estimators, least squares temporal difference learning estimators, and double reinforcement learning estimators, thereby offering a comprehensive understanding of optimal design strategies for policy evaluation in reinforcement learning.