I. Background and testing motivation
Recently, as the crypto market's attention to liquidity incentive strategies (such as 'Blue Points') has increased, the frequency of user participation in trading operations has significantly risen. However, the loss issues arising from high-frequency trading have become a key factor limiting profits. This article systematically analyzes the causes of trading losses based on actual test data, considering different time periods, trading platforms, and market environment variables, and proposes optimization strategies to provide participants with actionable operational guidelines.
II. Analysis of the correlation between time periods and trading losses.
1. Low loss characteristics during early morning hours
Testing conducted during the early morning hours (a time with fewer participants) shows that trading losses are positively correlated with transaction amounts:
- $2000 per transaction: Losses stabilize in the range of $0.02-$0.05, and volatility is below 2%.
- $3000 per transaction: Losses rise to $0.4-$0.5, and volatility expands to 10%-15%.
- $5000 per transaction: Losses surged to $2.5-$4, and some transactions experienced abnormal slippage due to insufficient liquidity depth.
2. High loss phenomena during peak periods
Testing at 9 AM (peak activity period for domestic users) indicates that liquidity shrinkage leads to significant increases in losses:
- $3000 per transaction: Losses skyrocketed to $2.5, nearly 5 times higher than during the early morning hours.
- Market behavior explanation: A large number of users concentrating operations leads to on-chain congestion, while the immediate replenishment capacity of market maker liquidity pools declines, further amplifying price impact costs.
Conclusion: **Prioritize conducting high-frequency trading of small amounts (≤$2000) during the early morning hours to effectively control loss rates.**
III. Comparison of trading platforms: Binance Wallet Aggregator vs. Cetus
1. Potential issues with Binance Wallet Aggregator
- Balance refresh delay: After transactions are completed, the balance on the interface updates with a lag (about 3-5 seconds), leading users to misjudge the available funds.
- Transaction failure rate: About 8% of transactions fail during testing due to node congestion or price shifts, requiring resubmission, which indirectly increases time and gas costs.
2. Direct trading advantages of Cetus
- Stability: Directly calling on-chain liquidity pools through the Cetus interface, the transaction success rate approaches 100%, and response speed improves by over 30%.
- Loss controllability: Real-time slippage prediction functionality aids in optimizing trading paths, reducing measured loss volatility to 1%-3%.
Pending verification issues: Whether Cetus transactions are included in Blue Points statistical rules needs to be confirmed after 24 hours of data synchronization.
- IV. Technical optimization suggestions for operational details
1. Time interval management
- Forced delay mechanism: Even with manual operations, each buy-sell cycle must be separated by at least 2 seconds to avoid blockchain packing conflicts.
- Script assistance: Consider using automated tools (such as custom scripts) to ensure interval stability, but be wary of contract risks.
2. Market trend assessment
- K-line assisted decision-making: Observe 5-minute K-line charts before trading, prioritizing entry during upward trends (MA5 > MA10) or sideways fluctuations, avoiding spike risks in downward trends.
- Liquidity monitoring: Use on-chain data dashboards (such as DEX Screener) to track changes in liquidity pool depth in real-time, avoiding instant slippage caused by large withdrawal orders.
V. Community feedback and personal strategy adjustments
1. Polarization of community response
- Positive feedback: Most users recognize the data-driven conclusions from actual testing, believing they provide quantitative support for high-risk strategies.
- Controversial points: Some comments question the long-term sustainability of trading operations and emphasize the compliance risks of market manipulation.
2. Personal strategy iteration
- $SKYAI position adjustment: Pause high-frequency trading operations and shift to a daily investment mode to reduce the impact of short-term volatility on the psychological account.
- Underlying logic: The fundamental conditions of the project have not undergone significant changes (the technological iteration of AI + on-chain protocols continues), and the long-term valuation model remains attractive.
VI. Risk warning and future plans
1. Core risks
- Regulatory uncertainty: Liquidity incentive strategies may face platform rule adjustments or regulatory scrutiny.
- Systematic volatility: Under extreme market conditions (such as black swan events), the failure probability of high-frequency trading strategies significantly increases.
2. Subsequent plans
- Cetus verification phase: Synchronize Blue Points data 24 hours later to confirm the effectiveness of cross-platform transactions.
- Dynamic parameter model: Develop a loss prediction tool based on historical data for automated strategy matching of amounts, time periods, and platforms.
VII. Summary and recommendations
At the current stage, the risk-reward ratio of Blue Points trading still has room for optimization. By choosing time periods (early morning), controlling amounts (≤$2000), switching platforms (Cetus), and trend tracking with a four-dimensional strategy, losses can be minimized. For risk-averse investors, it is recommended to shift to $SKYAI dollar-cost averaging or Bitcoin accumulation strategies to balance short-term speculation with long-term value capture.
(The data in this article are valid until May 2025, and the operational suggestions are for reference only and do not constitute investment advice.)
---
Author's note: The essence of technical analysis is dynamic gaming. This article will continue to track the effectiveness of strategies and publish iterative versions. Rational discussions are welcome, meaningless attacks are not.