cryptotradehead
7.1k Publications
cryptotradehead
Signaler
Bloquer l’utilisateur
backtesting, analyse, how to use AI for trading - can you be a good trader?
Ouvert au trading
Trade fréquemment
4.8 an(s)
7 Suivis
2.6K+ Abonnés
5.0K+ J’aime
Publications
Portefeuille
Tous
Citations
Article
GTC is up +77.85% - I tested both ways to trade itTODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +77.85%
SCR: +25.94%
MOVR: +21.44%
MEGA: +21.32%
SYN: +18.16%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +77.85%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $SCR $MOVR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC is up +77.85% - I tested both ways to trade it
TODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +77.85%
SCR: +25.94%
MOVR: +21.44%
MEGA: +21.32%
SYN: +18.16%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +77.85%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $SCR $MOVR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC: +77.85%
SCR: +25.94%
MOVR: +21.44%
MEGA: +21.32%
SYN: +18.16%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +77.85%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $SCR $MOVR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
4
24-HOUR SNAPSHOT
BTC/USDT: 84,908.50 USDT (+1.68%)
SOL/USDT: 119.74 USDT (+1.43%)
BNB/USDT: 772.62 USDT (+0.59%)
ETH/USDT: 2,711.23 USDT (+0.88%)
Funding on BTC/USDT is +0.0020% per 8h.
Context, not a call: I do not post entries or targets. Everything I trade is logged and published after the fact, wins and losses both.
Covered above: $BTC $SOL $ETH
#Binance #Crypto #Futures #BTC #Altcoins
24-HOUR SNAPSHOT
BTC/USDT: 84,908.50 USDT (+1.68%)
SOL/USDT: 119.74 USDT (+1.43%)
BNB/USDT: 772.62 USDT (+0.59%)
ETH/USDT: 2,711.23 USDT (+0.88%)
Funding on BTC/USDT is +0.0020% per 8h.
Context, not a call: I do not post entries or targets. Everything I trade is logged and published after the fact, wins and losses both.
Covered above: $BTC $SOL $ETH
#Binance #Crypto #Futures #BTC #Altcoins
BTC/USDT: 84,908.50 USDT (+1.68%)
SOL/USDT: 119.74 USDT (+1.43%)
BNB/USDT: 772.62 USDT (+0.59%)
ETH/USDT: 2,711.23 USDT (+0.88%)
Funding on BTC/USDT is +0.0020% per 8h.
Context, not a call: I do not post entries or targets. Everything I trade is logged and published after the fact, wins and losses both.
Covered above: $BTC $SOL $ETH
#Binance #Crypto #Futures #BTC #Altcoins
1
HOW I TESTED IT
Momentum inverted in 2026. The obvious fix: watch recent performance, and flip to the opposite rule when momentum stops paying.
I tested that over six different lookback windows. The best one returned +1.783% per rebalance against a +1.737% baseline - a difference indistinguishable from noise. Every other window was worse. None repaired 2026.
The reason is simple: by the time trailing performance tells you the regime flipped, you have already taken the losses that told you.
THE NUMBERS
Baseline: +1.737%/reb
Best adaptive rule: +1.783%/reb
Difference: noise
Best fix for 2026: still -0.66%
Adaptive rules feel like the answer to regime change. They are usually just a slower version of the same bet, with the losses already paid for the signal.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $SOL $BTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
HOW I TESTED IT
Momentum inverted in 2026. The obvious fix: watch recent performance, and flip to the opposite rule when momentum stops paying.
I tested that over six different lookback windows. The best one returned +1.783% per rebalance against a +1.737% baseline - a difference indistinguishable from noise. Every other window was worse. None repaired 2026.
The reason is simple: by the time trailing performance tells you the regime flipped, you have already taken the losses that told you.
THE NUMBERS
Baseline: +1.737%/reb
Best adaptive rule: +1.783%/reb
Difference: noise
Best fix for 2026: still -0.66%
Adaptive rules feel like the answer to regime change. They are usually just a slower version of the same bet, with the losses already paid for the signal.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $SOL $BTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
Momentum inverted in 2026. The obvious fix: watch recent performance, and flip to the opposite rule when momentum stops paying.
I tested that over six different lookback windows. The best one returned +1.783% per rebalance against a +1.737% baseline - a difference indistinguishable from noise. Every other window was worse. None repaired 2026.
The reason is simple: by the time trailing performance tells you the regime flipped, you have already taken the losses that told you.
THE NUMBERS
Baseline: +1.737%/reb
Best adaptive rule: +1.783%/reb
Difference: noise
Best fix for 2026: still -0.66%
Adaptive rules feel like the answer to regime change. They are usually just a slower version of the same bet, with the losses already paid for the signal.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $SOL $BTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
3
Article
GTC is up +95.01% - I tested both ways to trade itTODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +95.01%
MOVR: +32.46%
SCR: +25.25%
MEGA: +23.35%
SYN: +17.48%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +95.01%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $SCR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC is up +95.01% - I tested both ways to trade it
TODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +95.01%
MOVR: +32.46%
SCR: +25.25%
MEGA: +23.35%
SYN: +17.48%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +95.01%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $SCR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC: +95.01%
MOVR: +32.46%
SCR: +25.25%
MEGA: +23.35%
SYN: +17.48%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +95.01%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $SCR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
2
If a signal carried any directional information at all, the results would vary between configurations. Some would beat the cost line. None did. That is not weak edge that needs tuning - it is zero edge being charged an entry fee.
Here is what that came from.
I tested 378 moving-average strategies. Every one lost exactly what it cost to trade.
Two signal families, four timeframes, EMA and SMA, with and without a trend filter, long-only and short-only. 378 combinations in total, all with real fees and real measured slippage applied.
The round-trip cost of a trade is 0.240% of position size. The average result per trade, across every single configuration, landed between -0.361% and -0.401%.
That is the cost, and nothing else.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
If a signal carried any directional information at all, the results would vary between configurations. Some would beat the cost line. None did. That is not weak edge that needs tuning - it is zero edge being charged an entry fee.
Here is what that came from.
I tested 378 moving-average strategies. Every one lost exactly what it cost to trade.
Two signal families, four timeframes, EMA and SMA, with and without a trend filter, long-only and short-only. 378 combinations in total, all with real fees and real measured slippage applied.
The round-trip cost of a trade is 0.240% of position size. The average result per trade, across every single configuration, landed between -0.361% and -0.401%.
That is the cost, and nothing else.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
Here is what that came from.
I tested 378 moving-average strategies. Every one lost exactly what it cost to trade.
Two signal families, four timeframes, EMA and SMA, with and without a trend filter, long-only and short-only. 378 combinations in total, all with real fees and real measured slippage applied.
The round-trip cost of a trade is 0.240% of position size. The average result per trade, across every single configuration, landed between -0.361% and -0.401%.
That is the cost, and nothing else.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
31
Article
GTC is up +57.89% - I tested both ways to trade itTODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +57.89%
MOVR: +33.75%
ALICE: +28.60%
MEGA: +27.03%
NOM: +16.94%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +57.89%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC is up +57.89% - I tested both ways to trade it
TODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +57.89%
MOVR: +33.75%
ALICE: +28.60%
MEGA: +27.03%
NOM: +16.94%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +57.89%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC: +57.89%
MOVR: +33.75%
ALICE: +28.60%
MEGA: +27.03%
NOM: +16.94%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +57.89%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
47
HOW I TESTED IT
I swept 40 symbols and found three that looked profitable. I called them validated and put them live.
Then I tested the exact same settings on 751 days of price history the search had never touched. All three reversed. Not marginally - completely.
Three survivors out of 40 is roughly what pure chance produces at that sample size.
THE NUMBERS
In-sample result: +1.74
Out-of-sample result: -208.72
Days of untouched data: 751
Symbols that survived: 0 of 3
Searching hard enough through random data will always produce a winner. The out-of-sample test is the only thing that tells you whether you found an edge or just found noise wearing a costume.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $ETH $BNB
#Binance #Futures...
HOW I TESTED IT
I swept 40 symbols and found three that looked profitable. I called them validated and put them live.
Then I tested the exact same settings on 751 days of price history the search had never touched. All three reversed. Not marginally - completely.
Three survivors out of 40 is roughly what pure chance produces at that sample size.
THE NUMBERS
In-sample result: +1.74
Out-of-sample result: -208.72
Days of untouched data: 751
Symbols that survived: 0 of 3
Searching hard enough through random data will always produce a winner. The out-of-sample test is the only thing that tells you whether you found an edge or just found noise wearing a costume.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $ETH $BNB
#Binance #Futures...
I swept 40 symbols and found three that looked profitable. I called them validated and put them live.
Then I tested the exact same settings on 751 days of price history the search had never touched. All three reversed. Not marginally - completely.
Three survivors out of 40 is roughly what pure chance produces at that sample size.
THE NUMBERS
In-sample result: +1.74
Out-of-sample result: -208.72
Days of untouched data: 751
Symbols that survived: 0 of 3
Searching hard enough through random data will always produce a winner. The out-of-sample test is the only thing that tells you whether you found an edge or just found noise wearing a costume.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $ETH $BNB
#Binance #Futures...
59
A strategy is not a fact about markets, it is a fact about a period. Anyone showing you a backtest without the year-by-year breakdown is hiding the years that did not work.
Here is what that came from.
Momentum made +5% per trade in 2024. In 2026 the exact same rule loses money.
Same universe, same ranking rule, same holding period, five different years.
2024 and 2025 carried the whole strategy. 2026 is the worst year of the five - a 25% win rate over roughly nine months.
Buying the strongest coins and shorting the weakest has stopped working this year. Doing the opposite would have returned +1.47% per rebalance at a 69% win rate.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $SOL $BTC $ETH
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
A strategy is not a fact about markets, it is a fact about a period. Anyone showing you a backtest without the year-by-year breakdown is hiding the years that did not work.
Here is what that came from.
Momentum made +5% per trade in 2024. In 2026 the exact same rule loses money.
Same universe, same ranking rule, same holding period, five different years.
2024 and 2025 carried the whole strategy. 2026 is the worst year of the five - a 25% win rate over roughly nine months.
Buying the strongest coins and shorting the weakest has stopped working this year. Doing the opposite would have returned +1.47% per rebalance at a 69% win rate.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $SOL $BTC $ETH
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
Here is what that came from.
Momentum made +5% per trade in 2024. In 2026 the exact same rule loses money.
Same universe, same ranking rule, same holding period, five different years.
2024 and 2025 carried the whole strategy. 2026 is the worst year of the five - a 25% win rate over roughly nine months.
Buying the strongest coins and shorting the weakest has stopped working this year. Doing the opposite would have returned +1.47% per rebalance at a 69% win rate.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $SOL $BTC $ETH
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
74
Article
GTC is up +48.02% - I tested both ways to trade itTODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +48.02%
MOVR: +34.56%
ALICE: +24.11%
MEGA: +20.82%
NOM: +16.80%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +48.02%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC is up +48.02% - I tested both ways to trade it
TODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +48.02%
MOVR: +34.56%
ALICE: +24.11%
MEGA: +20.82%
NOM: +16.80%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +48.02%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC: +48.02%
MOVR: +34.56%
ALICE: +24.11%
MEGA: +20.82%
NOM: +16.80%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +48.02%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
4
Being long and short at the same time means the market's direction cancels out. What is left is whether the winners keep beating the losers - which is a real question, not a bet on the market going up.
Here is what that came from.
After 378 failures, one strategy finally passed the test that killed all the others.
Rank 45 perpetuals by 5-day return. Long the top 5, short the bottom 5, hold 15 days, rebalance. Equal weight, dollar-neutral.
The out-of-sample control is the one that had destroyed everything before it: fix the settings on old data, then run them on data the search never touched. In-sample +1.711% per rebalance, out-of-sample +1.801%. The mean held.
It also survives costs far worse than real: still +0.48% per rebalance even at a 1.50% round trip, six times what Binance actually charges.
Part of a public experiment:...
Being long and short at the same time means the market's direction cancels out. What is left is whether the winners keep beating the losers - which is a real question, not a bet on the market going up.
Here is what that came from.
After 378 failures, one strategy finally passed the test that killed all the others.
Rank 45 perpetuals by 5-day return. Long the top 5, short the bottom 5, hold 15 days, rebalance. Equal weight, dollar-neutral.
The out-of-sample control is the one that had destroyed everything before it: fix the settings on old data, then run them on data the search never touched. In-sample +1.711% per rebalance, out-of-sample +1.801%. The mean held.
It also survives costs far worse than real: still +0.48% per rebalance even at a 1.50% round trip, six times what Binance actually charges.
Part of a public experiment:...
Here is what that came from.
After 378 failures, one strategy finally passed the test that killed all the others.
Rank 45 perpetuals by 5-day return. Long the top 5, short the bottom 5, hold 15 days, rebalance. Equal weight, dollar-neutral.
The out-of-sample control is the one that had destroyed everything before it: fix the settings on old data, then run them on data the search never touched. In-sample +1.711% per rebalance, out-of-sample +1.801%. The mean held.
It also survives costs far worse than real: still +0.48% per rebalance even at a 1.50% round trip, six times what Binance actually charges.
Part of a public experiment:...
4
HOW I TESTED IT
Funding is the payment between long and short holders of a perpetual. Positive means longs pay shorts, which is the usual state of a market where most people are betting up.
Across 34,431 prints, BNB averages NEGATIVE funding - shorts pay longs - and only 22% of its prints are positive. BTC, ETH and DOGE are all positive.
So holding a long BNB perp is paid to exist, where a long BTC perp pays rent.
THE NUMBERS
BNB funding: -0.0042%
Prints positive: only 22%
BTC / ETH / DOGE: positive
Events measured: 34,431
It is far too small to build a strategy on - 0.0042% against 8-hour price swings of 2.36%. But if you are already holding a position, the direction of funding is not the same on every coin, and most people assume it is.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB $BTC $ETH
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
HOW I TESTED IT
Funding is the payment between long and short holders of a perpetual. Positive means longs pay shorts, which is the usual state of a market where most people are betting up.
Across 34,431 prints, BNB averages NEGATIVE funding - shorts pay longs - and only 22% of its prints are positive. BTC, ETH and DOGE are all positive.
So holding a long BNB perp is paid to exist, where a long BTC perp pays rent.
THE NUMBERS
BNB funding: -0.0042%
Prints positive: only 22%
BTC / ETH / DOGE: positive
Events measured: 34,431
It is far too small to build a strategy on - 0.0042% against 8-hour price swings of 2.36%. But if you are already holding a position, the direction of funding is not the same on every coin, and most people assume it is.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB $BTC $ETH
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
Funding is the payment between long and short holders of a perpetual. Positive means longs pay shorts, which is the usual state of a market where most people are betting up.
Across 34,431 prints, BNB averages NEGATIVE funding - shorts pay longs - and only 22% of its prints are positive. BTC, ETH and DOGE are all positive.
So holding a long BNB perp is paid to exist, where a long BTC perp pays rent.
THE NUMBERS
BNB funding: -0.0042%
Prints positive: only 22%
BTC / ETH / DOGE: positive
Events measured: 34,431
It is far too small to build a strategy on - 0.0042% against 8-hour price swings of 2.36%. But if you are already holding a position, the direction of funding is not the same on every coin, and most people assume it is.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB $BTC $ETH
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
4
Article
GTC is up +44.36% - I tested both ways to trade itTODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +44.36%
MOVR: +34.80%
ALICE: +25.04%
MEGA: +22.60%
NOM: +17.96%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +44.36%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC is up +44.36% - I tested both ways to trade it
TODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +44.36%
MOVR: +34.80%
ALICE: +25.04%
MEGA: +22.60%
NOM: +17.96%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +44.36%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC: +44.36%
MOVR: +34.80%
ALICE: +25.04%
MEGA: +22.60%
NOM: +17.96%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +44.36%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $MOVR $ALICE
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
10
HOW I TESTED IT
During a fast drop, Binance rejected my stop-loss with error -2021: the market had already moved past the trigger price before the order landed.
My code did not handle that rejection. The position stayed open with no stop, and because the bot's own state never recorded it, the next signal opened another position on top. Three times.
Intended risk was 3 USDT. Actual loss was 11.75 USDT.
THE NUMBERS
Intended max loss: -3.00
Actual loss: -11.75
Positions stacked: 3
Time elapsed: 6 seconds
A backtest assumes your stop-loss always exists. Live, it is an order that can be refused. The gap between those two assumptions is where real money goes.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
HOW I TESTED IT
During a fast drop, Binance rejected my stop-loss with error -2021: the market had already moved past the trigger price before the order landed.
My code did not handle that rejection. The position stayed open with no stop, and because the bot's own state never recorded it, the next signal opened another position on top. Three times.
Intended risk was 3 USDT. Actual loss was 11.75 USDT.
THE NUMBERS
Intended max loss: -3.00
Actual loss: -11.75
Positions stacked: 3
Time elapsed: 6 seconds
A backtest assumes your stop-loss always exists. Live, it is an order that can be refused. The gap between those two assumptions is where real money goes.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
During a fast drop, Binance rejected my stop-loss with error -2021: the market had already moved past the trigger price before the order landed.
My code did not handle that rejection. The position stayed open with no stop, and because the bot's own state never recorded it, the next signal opened another position on top. Three times.
Intended risk was 3 USDT. Actual loss was 11.75 USDT.
THE NUMBERS
Intended max loss: -3.00
Actual loss: -11.75
Positions stacked: 3
Time elapsed: 6 seconds
A backtest assumes your stop-loss always exists. Live, it is an order that can be refused. The gap between those two assumptions is where real money goes.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
2
HOW I TESTED IT
The typical trade in this system loses 1.535 USDT. Nearly two out of three trades are losers.
It is profitable anyway, because the winners are much larger than the losers. The mean trade is positive while the median is clearly negative.
It is also the opposite shape to the martingale I tested, which won 96% of the time and still lost 519.83 USDT.
THE NUMBERS
Win rate: 35.6%
Median trade: -1.535 USDT
Mean trade: +0.036 USDT
Total, 3,209 trades: +116.29 USDT
Losing most of the time is survivable. Losing big once is not. Judge a system by the size of its losses, never by how often it wins.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $XRP $LTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
HOW I TESTED IT
The typical trade in this system loses 1.535 USDT. Nearly two out of three trades are losers.
It is profitable anyway, because the winners are much larger than the losers. The mean trade is positive while the median is clearly negative.
It is also the opposite shape to the martingale I tested, which won 96% of the time and still lost 519.83 USDT.
THE NUMBERS
Win rate: 35.6%
Median trade: -1.535 USDT
Mean trade: +0.036 USDT
Total, 3,209 trades: +116.29 USDT
Losing most of the time is survivable. Losing big once is not. Judge a system by the size of its losses, never by how often it wins.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $XRP $LTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
The typical trade in this system loses 1.535 USDT. Nearly two out of three trades are losers.
It is profitable anyway, because the winners are much larger than the losers. The mean trade is positive while the median is clearly negative.
It is also the opposite shape to the martingale I tested, which won 96% of the time and still lost 519.83 USDT.
THE NUMBERS
Win rate: 35.6%
Median trade: -1.535 USDT
Mean trade: +0.036 USDT
Total, 3,209 trades: +116.29 USDT
Losing most of the time is survivable. Losing big once is not. Judge a system by the size of its losses, never by how often it wins.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $XRP $LTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
Article
GTC is up +60.71% - I tested both ways to trade itTODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +60.71%
ALICE: +34.31%
MOVR: +28.28%
MEGA: +24.70%
SYN: +17.50%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +60.71%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $ALICE $MOVR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC is up +60.71% - I tested both ways to trade it
TODAY'S TOP GAINERS
GTC: +60.71%
ALICE: +34.31%
MOVR: +28.28%
MEGA: +24.70%
SYN: +17.50%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +60.71%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $ALICE $MOVR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
GTC: +60.71%
ALICE: +34.31%
MOVR: +28.28%
MEGA: +24.70%
SYN: +17.50%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like GTC's +60.71%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $GTC $ALICE $MOVR
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #GTC #CryptoData
164
This is genuinely different from a useless signal - there is information here. But to use it you would need to know the regime in advance, which is the same circular problem that kills everything else.
Here is what that came from.
Funding rate predicts where price goes. It just changes which direction, by year.
I sorted every funding print into quintiles and measured the forward 72-hour return of the highest versus the lowest.
In bear markets, high funding preceded WORSE returns - crowded longs getting squeezed. From 2024 onward it preceded BETTER returns - momentum.
The signal is real. The sign is not stable. Average it across all years and you get -0.08%, below the 0.240% it costs to trade.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $ETH $DOGE
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
This is genuinely different from a useless signal - there is information here. But to use it you would need to know the regime in advance, which is the same circular problem that kills everything else.
Here is what that came from.
Funding rate predicts where price goes. It just changes which direction, by year.
I sorted every funding print into quintiles and measured the forward 72-hour return of the highest versus the lowest.
In bear markets, high funding preceded WORSE returns - crowded longs getting squeezed. From 2024 onward it preceded BETTER returns - momentum.
The signal is real. The sign is not stable. Average it across all years and you get -0.08%, below the 0.240% it costs to trade.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $ETH $DOGE
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
Here is what that came from.
Funding rate predicts where price goes. It just changes which direction, by year.
I sorted every funding print into quintiles and measured the forward 72-hour return of the highest versus the lowest.
In bear markets, high funding preceded WORSE returns - crowded longs getting squeezed. From 2024 onward it preceded BETTER returns - momentum.
The signal is real. The sign is not stable. Average it across all years and you get -0.08%, below the 0.240% it costs to trade.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $ETH $DOGE
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
This is tail capture, not income. Realistically it does nothing in calm markets and pays during sharp selloffs. Expecting it to earn every month is how people quit a strategy right before it works.
Here is what that came from.
Two thirds of my strategy's profit came from one year. That is not an edge, it is an event.
The headline number was +134.12 USDT from short breakouts. Then I split it by year.
2022 - the year of the LUNA collapse and the FTX failure - produced 88.54 of it. Strip that year out and four years of trading returned 45.59 USDT, most of it from 2025.
2026 so far is flat.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $LTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
This is tail capture, not income. Realistically it does nothing in calm markets and pays during sharp selloffs. Expecting it to earn every month is how people quit a strategy right before it works.
Here is what that came from.
Two thirds of my strategy's profit came from one year. That is not an edge, it is an event.
The headline number was +134.12 USDT from short breakouts. Then I split it by year.
2022 - the year of the LUNA collapse and the FTX failure - produced 88.54 of it. Strip that year out and four years of trading returned 45.59 USDT, most of it from 2025.
2026 so far is flat.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $LTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
Here is what that came from.
Two thirds of my strategy's profit came from one year. That is not an edge, it is an event.
The headline number was +134.12 USDT from short breakouts. Then I split it by year.
2022 - the year of the LUNA collapse and the FTX failure - produced 88.54 of it. Strip that year out and four years of trading returned 45.59 USDT, most of it from 2025.
2026 so far is flat.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BTC $LTC
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
2
Article
MOVR is up +51.01% - I tested both ways to trade itTODAY'S TOP GAINERS
MOVR: +51.01%
ALICE: +41.14%
GTC: +34.28%
MEGA: +22.47%
OPN: +17.11%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like MOVR's +51.01%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $MOVR $ALICE $GTC
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #MOVR #CryptoData
MOVR is up +51.01% - I tested both ways to trade it
TODAY'S TOP GAINERS
MOVR: +51.01%
ALICE: +41.14%
GTC: +34.28%
MEGA: +22.47%
OPN: +17.11%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like MOVR's +51.01%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $MOVR $ALICE $GTC
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #MOVR #CryptoData
MOVR: +51.01%
ALICE: +41.14%
GTC: +34.28%
MEGA: +22.47%
OPN: +17.11%
Every account on this app will show you this list. Here is the part they skip.
I backtested both ways of trading a move like MOVR's +51.01%: buying the breakout, and fading it on the assumption it reverts. Both lost money. Not narrowly - they lost roughly the transaction cost, 0.240% per round trip, which is what a signal carrying no information looks like once you charge it fees.
A large 24-hour move tells you something already happened. It does not tell you what happens next, and the data says so in both directions.
Part of a public experiment: every strategy I test gets published, working or not.
Movers above: $MOVR $ALICE $GTC
#Binance #Altcoins #Futures #MOVR #CryptoData
5
HOW I TESTED IT
I backtested a martingale system - add to losers, close when it recovers. 75 of 78 trades were winners.
It still lost 519.83 USDT, because the three losing trades gave back more than all 75 winners made combined.
Peak margin on those trades reached 4x the entire account.
THE NUMBERS
Win rate: 96%
Winning trades: 75 of 78
Net result: -519.83
Worst 3 trades combined: -1,098.53
Win rate is the easiest number to make look good and the least informative one to report. Anyone showing you a win rate without the size of the losses is showing you the half of the picture that flatters them.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
HOW I TESTED IT
I backtested a martingale system - add to losers, close when it recovers. 75 of 78 trades were winners.
It still lost 519.83 USDT, because the three losing trades gave back more than all 75 winners made combined.
Peak margin on those trades reached 4x the entire account.
THE NUMBERS
Win rate: 96%
Winning trades: 75 of 78
Net result: -519.83
Worst 3 trades combined: -1,098.53
Win rate is the easiest number to make look good and the least informative one to report. Anyone showing you a win rate without the size of the losses is showing you the half of the picture that flatters them.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
I backtested a martingale system - add to losers, close when it recovers. 75 of 78 trades were winners.
It still lost 519.83 USDT, because the three losing trades gave back more than all 75 winners made combined.
Peak margin on those trades reached 4x the entire account.
THE NUMBERS
Win rate: 96%
Winning trades: 75 of 78
Net result: -519.83
Worst 3 trades combined: -1,098.53
Win rate is the easiest number to make look good and the least informative one to report. Anyone showing you a win rate without the size of the losses is showing you the half of the picture that flatters them.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $BNB
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
7
Article
I measured real execution costs with 48 controlled trades. One number decides everything.I measured real execution costs with 48 controlled trades. One number decides everything.
I stopped assuming what trading costs and measured it: 48 controlled round trips, entering and exiting immediately, recording the actual fill against the reference price.
Fee was constant at 0.04% per side. Slippage was not - ETH filled at essentially zero, while DOGE cost 50 to 100 basis points per round trip.
On a 150 USDT position, a round trip costs 0.36 USDT before the market moves at all.
WHAT IT MEANS
Any strategy must clear 0.240% of position size per trade just to break even. Most published setups never mention this number, which is why most published setups lose money.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $ETH $DOGE
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
I measured real execution costs with 48 controlled trades. One number decides everything.
I measured real execution costs with 48 controlled trades. One number decides everything.
I stopped assuming what trading costs and measured it: 48 controlled round trips, entering and exiting immediately, recording the actual fill against the reference price.
Fee was constant at 0.04% per side. Slippage was not - ETH filled at essentially zero, while DOGE cost 50 to 100 basis points per round trip.
On a 150 USDT position, a round trip costs 0.36 USDT before the market moves at all.
WHAT IT MEANS
Any strategy must clear 0.240% of position size per trade just to break even. Most published setups never mention this number, which is why most published setups lose money.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $ETH $DOGE
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
I stopped assuming what trading costs and measured it: 48 controlled round trips, entering and exiting immediately, recording the actual fill against the reference price.
Fee was constant at 0.04% per side. Slippage was not - ETH filled at essentially zero, while DOGE cost 50 to 100 basis points per round trip.
On a 150 USDT position, a round trip costs 0.36 USDT before the market moves at all.
WHAT IT MEANS
Any strategy must clear 0.240% of position size per trade just to break even. Most published setups never mention this number, which is why most published setups lose money.
Part of a public experiment: 5,063 USDT to 1,000,000 USDT, every result published - including the ones that make me look bad.
Run on $ETH $DOGE
#Binance #Futures #Backtesting #TradingBot #CryptoData
2
Connectez-vous pour découvrir plus de contenu
Rejoignez la communauté mondiale des adeptes de cryptomonnaies sur Binance Square
⚡️ Suviez les dernières informations importantes sur les cryptomonnaies.
💬 Jugé digne de confiance par la plus grande plateforme d’échange de cryptomonnaies au monde.
👍 Découvrez les connaissances que partagent les créateurs vérifiés.
Adresse e-mail/Nº de téléphone
Sujets d’actualité
NEARFallsToAround$4.70Down14%
376 vues
11 mentions
🚨 $NEAR — FROM ETF HYPE TO A 14% SLAP IN THE FACE.
NEAR has dropped toward $4.70, giving back a big chunk of its recent run after briefly trading above $5.50. The selloff also came as NEAR Intents disclosed a security incident tied to its cross-chain infrastructure, with reported losses around $3.8M. The underlying NEAR blockchain itself was not reported as compromised.
Here’s the part traders should care about:
$4.69–$4.74 is now the key support zone.
Hold it, and this could simply be a violent retest after the September breakout.
Lose it?
The next downside references sit closer to $4.58, then ~$4.30.
And the irony?
The new Bitwise NEAR ETF was still seeing positive inflows around launch week.
So this isn’t a simple “nobody wants NEAR” story.
It’s a battle between:
fresh institutional access
vs.
post-rally profit-taking + security fear.
$NEAR doesn’t need hype right now. It needs $4.70 to hold. 👀
#NEARFallsToAround$4.70Down14% #EvernorthPlansNasdaqListingOct8 #SECProposesCryptoCustodyFramework #IMFApproves$139MDisbursementToElSalvador #AnthropicTargetsIPOAsSoonAsMidNovember
KimHotbae
·0 mentions J’aime
·203 vues
EthereumFoundationLaunchesZkAPIOnMainnet
0 vues
5 mentions
EvernorthPlansNasdaqListingOct8
491 vues
47 mentions