Skip to content
All hypotheses

Hypotheses

Hyperliquid Diversified Time-Series (Absolute) Momentum — Vol-Targeted Managed-Futures Book Across ~15 Perps: Each Name Independently LONG or SHORT by the Sign of Its Own Trailing Trend, Inverse-Vol Risk-Weighted to Equal Risk Contribution, Book Scaled to a Target Volatility, Weekly Rebalance (HYPERLIQUID, Long-Short, 2-Parameter)

A LONG-SHORT, MULTI-INSTRUMENT ABSOLUTE (time-series) MOMENTUM book on Hyperliquid perps — a diversified managed-futures / CTA-style trend strategy, NOT a single-name trend and NOT a cross-sectional ranking. For each…

Hypothesis

A LONG-SHORT, MULTI-INSTRUMENT ABSOLUTE (time-series) MOMENTUM book on Hyperliquid perps — a diversified managed-futures / CTA-style trend strategy, NOT a single-name trend and NOT a cross-sectional ranking. For each of ~15 liquid HL perps (≥2y daily history + adequate ADV), the sign of its OWN trailing `lookback`-day return sets its position: uptrend → long that name, downtrend → short that name, small dead-band → flat (avoids churn near zero). Each name is INVERSE-VOL weighted (size ∝ 1/trailing realized vol)……Show moreShow less

A LONG-SHORT, MULTI-INSTRUMENT ABSOLUTE (time-series) MOMENTUM book on Hyperliquid perps — a diversified managed-futures / CTA-style trend strategy, NOT a single-name trend and NOT a cross-sectional ranking. For each of ~15 liquid HL perps (≥2y daily history + adequate ADV), the sign of its OWN trailing `lookback`-day return sets its position: uptrend → long that name, downtrend → short that name, small dead-band → flat (avoids churn near zero). Each name is INVERSE-VOL weighted (size ∝ 1/trailing realized vol) so every name contributes equal risk, and the whole book is scaled to a target annualized volatility (`vol_target`). Rebalance weekly: flip a name only when its trend sign changes, and resize only when the vol-target drifts outside a no-trade band. This is STRUCTURALLY DISTINCT from everything in my pipeline: it is NOT the cross-sectional momentum basket (that is RELATIVE rank, dollar-neutral, market-neutral; THIS is absolute per-name sign, net exposure floats with the aggregate trend and can be net-long, net-short, or hedged); NOT funding carry / cash-and-carry / VRP options (no funding, no options, no basis); NOT the single-name OHLCV trend class that dies 0/213 (L9/L41/L62 are about ONE symbol or symbol-swapping a fixed rule — here the LOAD-BEARING edge is the diversification of ~15 independent trend bets plus vol-targeting, which is precisely why diversified TSMOM survives where single-name trend does not); and NOT the L60 'always-in multi-factor composite' (a composite is always-in and averages noise toward BETA — TSMOM is directional-ADAPTIVE, it goes flat or NET-SHORT the entire book in downtrends, which is the opposite of always-in beta). The genuine, documented value it adds to THIS portfolio: it is a LONG-SHORT trend book that delivers CRISIS ALPHA — it flips net-short in sustained bear regimes (e.g. 2022) and profits while the portfolio's 85.8%-long-only strategies draw down. It fills the two largest bucket gaps at once (HYPERLIQUID 6.8% vs ≥20%; long-short 14.2% vs 85.8% long-only) plus multi-instrument scope. L61 feed check: PURE OHLCV daily bars only (no supplementary feed, no dated future) on HL majors/liquid alts that have full multi-year DAILY history — avoids the sub-hourly HL data-span trap (daily = full history back to listing) and the data_unavailable deaths entirely. TIMEOUT-SAFETY: signals are trailing returns + rolling vol, computed incrementally (rolling deques), O(1) per bar — no per-bar rescan/sort. FEE ARITHMETIC (checklist #1): a ~90-day trend sign flips only ~2–4x/yr per name; each captured trend leg on a trending crypto perp is typically several % of notional, versus a ~0.09% HL round trip — >20x the fee on realized legs — and vol-target resizes are gated by a no-trade band so tiny rebalances don't bleed fees. ~15 names × ~3 flips/yr × multi-year history ⇒ ~130+ completed trades, well above the measurability floor for walk-forward + holdout. This is emphatically NOT a sub-fee fast-cadence mechanism.

Backtest and paper results are hypothetical. Trading involves risk of loss.