Hypotheses

Test the article's single concrete mechanism: buy or sell a signed, lowest-variance PCA basket when its standardized-price spread deviates, then close on convergence. Adapt the FX example to LTC, BCH and ETC Hyperliquid perpetuals using synchronized 4-HOUR bars. These related proof-of-work assets provide a testable shared-factor basket without using BTC. Replace broker-lot allocation with equity-relative quantities that reproduce the spread's price sensitivity. Fit statistics using preceding observations, excluding the signal bar, and freeze the component and its normalization during each trade. These are explicit adaptations drawn from the article's exposure-balancing and separate-training-window extensions. Market orders execute at the completed signal bar's close. Execution is sequential, with compensating closures after incomplete entry; atomic execution is not assumed. No profitability claim from the source is adopted.

Adapt the article's single demonstration trading mechanism to DOGEUSD.HYPERLIQUID on 4-HOUR bars: follow the latest large return only when a reliable Hawkes fit indicates self-excitation and current intensity is unusually high. Preserve the causal event extractor, exponential kernel, deterministic maximum-likelihood fit and time-based exit. Add equity-relative sizing and an intrabar protective stop because the source demonstration omits protection. Entries execute at the signal bar's close. The branching ratio measures historical clustering; directional continuation is the hypothesis to test, not a mathematical consequence of Hawkes intensity. No source performance claim is accepted as evidence.

Adapt VLT_TRADER's smallest-range candle mechanism to LINK perpetuals using 4-HOUR bars. After a qualifying compression candle closes, arm buy-stop and sell-stop entries for subsequent intrabar breakouts. Interpret the source's ten points as ten instrument price increments. Explicitly correct its printed sell trigger from low plus ten points to low minus ten points, producing a symmetric downside breakout. Complete the excerpt's unspecified exits and sizing with volatility-based protection, a time exit and equity-relative risk. Stops are platform-matched intrabar orders under the supplied execution registry; offline exchange-hosted protection is not required. Only one net position is allowed.

Test the source's concrete RSI–moving-average reversal mechanism on LINKUSD.HYPERLIQUID using completed 4-HOUR bars, with completed daily bars as confirmation. Preserve symmetric long and short entries. Define the source's ambiguous divergence causally through opposing slopes of equally long price and RSI moving averages; this is an explicit adaptation, not a faithful reproduction of the indicator code. Bollinger bands on RSI remain descriptive and are not an additional entry filter. Complete the source's unspecified exits and sizing with an intrabar protective stop, oscillator-recovery exit, time limit, and equity-relative sizing. Submit market entries at the signal bar's close. No exchange-hosted protection, independent opposing positions, or selectable same-bar fill policy is required. Source performance claims are unverified; no pre-study was performed.

Test whether altcoins with unusually high downside market sensitivity earn compensation over subsequent eight-week holds. Use synchronized 4-HOUR bars for six Hyperliquid perpetuals, buying two high-downside-beta assets and shorting two low-downside-beta assets while neutralizing estimated unconditional market beta. This is a risk-premium hypothesis, not spread convergence or momentum selection. The library's discussion of asymmetric market risk motivated the proposal; the primary reference is [Ang, Chen and Xing, Downside Risk](https://www.nber.org/papers/w11824). Its equity evidence motivates a crypto experiment but does not establish crypto profitability. Entries and scheduled exits use market orders at completed signal-bar closes. Intrabar protective stops are platform-matched, as supported by the capability registry. No next-session fills, opposing positions on one instrument, exchange-hosted protection or selectable same-bar policy are required.

Test whether altcoins with unusually large recent upside outliers subsequently underperform otherwise eligible altcoins with smaller upside outliers. Trade a dollar-neutral long/short pair selected from four fixed Hyperliquid perpetuals using synchronized 4-HOUR bars aggregated into UTC daily closes. Inspiration: Bali, Cakici and Whitelaw document a negative relationship between extreme positive past returns and subsequent stock returns in [Maxing Out: Stocks as Lotteries](https://www.nber.org/papers/w14804). Applying this mechanism to these crypto perpetuals is an untested extension, not a reproduction or an established crypto result. Execute market orders at the signal bar's close. Protective stops trigger intrabar in the platform; exchange-hosted protection is not required. No preliminary performance study is used.

Trade LINK, AVAX and SUI Hyperliquid perpetuals long or short on synchronized 4-HOUR bars after a high-volume range breach fails on both the perpetual and the same coin's Binance spot market. Binance spot instruments are signal-only; all positions trade on Hyperliquid. This is an independently specified adaptation inspired by secretmorina's Post-Absorption VWAP Reversal Engine, not a faithful port: https://www.tradingview.com/script/j6iKZmCf-Post-Absorption-VWAP-Reversal-Engine-V1-6/. OHLCV rejection is an absorption proxy, not direct evidence of resting liquidity. Market entries execute at the confirmation bar's close; protective stops trigger intrabar in the platform. No next-session fills, exchange-hosted protection, opposing positions on one instrument or selectable same-bar policy are required. Use each asset's actual available common history, capped by Hyperliquid's approximately 5000-candle retrieval window; do not assume equal listing dates or a full 2.3 years for every asset.

Test whether persistent differences in spot volume-weighted closing pressure predict several days of relative performance. Trade FILUSD.HYPERLIQUID against NEARUSDT.BYBIT using synchronized 4-HOUR bars; Binance spot bars provide signals only. Buy the asset showing accumulation and short the asset showing distribution, with equal dollar notionals. Closing pressure is an OHLCV proxy, not observed aggressor flow. Submit market orders at the synchronized signal close; this uses the registry's faithful equivalent for next-bar-open execution on continuous markets. No atomic cross-venue execution or exchange-hosted protection is assumed.

Test whether demand for amplified crypto-market exposure overprices high-beta altcoins relative to low-beta altcoins. On synchronized 4-HOUR bars, buy two low-beta perpetuals and short two high-beta perpetuals from a fixed six-name universe, balancing estimated market beta and holding each basket for 28 days. This adapts the leverage-constraint premise of [Frazzini and Pedersen, Betting Against Beta](https://www.aqr.com/Insights/Research/Journal-Article/Betting-Against-Beta), encountered through the local knowledge library's AQR factor references. The paper's evidence does not establish an edge in crypto; that extension is this experiment's falsifiable premise. Execute market orders at the signal bar's close, the registry's faithful equivalent to next-bar-open execution on a continuous venue. Protective stops trigger intrabar through platform matching. No independent opposing positions on the same instrument, exchange-hosted protection, or selectable same-bar policy is required.

This is a cross-sectional return-seasonality strategy. Sources: Heston & Sadka (2008, JFE), and Keloharju, Linnainmaa & Nyberg (2016, JF), who find the effect in country indices, sectors and other asset classes. The universe is a FIXED, rule-defined panel of 18 US-listed ETFs that are in the USEQ catalog with long daily history: the 9 original Select Sector SPDRs (XLB, XLE, XLF, XLI, XLK, XLP, XLU, XLV, XLY; from 1998-12) and 9 country/region iShares (EWJ, EWG, EWU from 1996; EWZ, EWT, EWY from 2000; EFA 2001; EEM 2003; FXI 2004). Because these are ETFs, there is no point-in-time membership problem (L190). An ETF becomes eligible once it has at least min_years (5) complete calendar years of history. Signal for ETF i and upcoming month m: seasonal_excess = mean return of i in calendar month m over the last lookback_years years, minus its mean return in the other months of those years (the KLN seasonal-minus-non-seasonal form, which removes the ETF's general drift). On the last trading session of each month (from src/data/market_calendar.py, half-days included), rank the eligible ETFs. Go long the top_k and short the bottom_k, dollar-neutral. Each leg is sized by inverse 60-day volatility, and gross exposure is 100% of equity on the 2x Reg-T account. Orders fill at the month-end close. There is no next-session-open hook, so the strategy trades at that close and holds through the whole next month. Each leg also has a 15% intrabar protective stop (a platform-matched reduce-only stop_market). This mechanism has not been run in the corpus. Prior seasonality runs were single-asset day-of-week and turn-of-month timers on BTC, QQQ and SPY. The strategy is pure OHLCV with no BTC and no Binance.

Cross-sectional transplant of the factory's live FIL aggressor-burst continuation idea (FILUSDT.BINANCE 1H, live_stage) onto a different venue, different bar size and a different universe: 12 OKX USDT perpetual swaps with continuous 4-HOUR history since 2020 (ETC, BCH, DOT, LINK, ATOM, AAVE, UNI, XLM, ALGO, SUSHI, CRV, COMP). These are almost unused in the corpus (OKX is 2.5% of experiments), and the strategy is long-short, which is also under-represented (18.8%). Mechanism: a 4H bar that is simultaneously (a) an extreme return versus that coin's own trailing volatility, (b) a volume burst versus its trailing median volume, and (c) closes near its extreme marks one-sided aggressive flow: forced liquidations, stop runs, or information-driven takers. These moves are not absorbed within the bar. On mid-cap alts, where liquidity providers withdraw after such bars, the move tends to keep drifting for hours as late followers, liquidation chains and cross-venue arbitrage on Binance and Bybit catch up. The strategy follows the burst direction for a fixed 24h (6 bars), with an intrabar protective stop. It uses OHLCV only, needs no supplementary feed (L189), and is event-driven and flat most of the time. Each trigger is evaluated independently per coin. Execution: decisions happen on the 4H bar close, with a market order at that close. On a 24/7 venue that is the faithful equivalent of the next-bar-open fill, and this substitution is stated here. The stop is an intrabar protective stop: a reduce-only stop-market order matched inside the bar by the platform's simulated venue, which live trading mirrors. No exchange-resting order is required. Sizing: 10% of equity notional per position at leverage 1, at most 4 concurrent positions (max gross 40%), with one netted position per instrument. Fee arithmetic: OKX taker round trip is about 0.10%, plus about 0.05% modeled impact on mid-caps, so about 0.15% all-in. Extreme 4H bars of this type on these alts typically move 5-9%. If 15-20% of that continues over the next 24h, the gross capture is about 0.8-1.2% mean and the net capture is about 0.5% per trade. That is more than 3x the cost. Firing rate: about 6-10 qualifying bars per coin per year across all regimes (both up and down bursts qualify, so it is not bear-only), or about 80-120 trades per year across the basket and about 450-650 over the 2021-2026 history.

Dollar-neutral, multi-instrument, cross-sectional strategy on 13 OKX USDT perpetual swaps with daily history from no later than January 2021: ADA, LINK, DOT, ATOM, AVAX, UNI, XLM, TRX, BCH, ETC, AAVE, ALGO and SOL. I checked the catalog for these 13; each has 2,080-2,470 daily bars through 2026-10-05. NEAR, DOGE, XRP, LTC and FIL were left out because their OKX daily history starts 2026-09-24. The signal is the MAX effect, or lottery demand (Bali, Cakici & Whitelaw 2011, JFE). Grobys & Junttila (2021) and others document it in crypto. Coins with the largest single-day return over the recent window attract lottery-seeking, leveraged retail demand and are overpriced, so they underperform next week. Coins with the smallest recent maximum are neglected and outperform. Every rebalance_days days, at the daily close, the strategy ranks all 13 coins by MAX = the highest single daily close-to-close return over the last max_lookback days. It shorts the n_per_side highest-MAX coins and buys the n_per_side lowest-MAX coins, with equal notional on each side: gross exposure 1.0x equity, 0.5x long and 0.5x short, account leverage 1. The book is market-neutral by construction. This mechanism differs from the promoted Hyperliquid cross-sectional momentum rotation. Momentum ranks by the trailing cumulative return. MAX ranks by the right-tail extreme, which is only weakly correlated with that return, and it trades in the reversal direction. Venue choice: OKX has 2.5% of the corpus, against a ≥5% quota target. The strategy is long+short (18.7% of the corpus against a ≤55% long-only target) and multi-instrument. It uses no BTC and no supplementary feed (OHLCV only, per L189). Execution substitutions: orders are market orders at the rebalance bar's close. On a 24/7 venue this equals the next bar's open, which is the use_equivalent for next_bar_open_fill. The per-leg catastrophic stop is an intrabar protective stop: a reduce-only _submit_stop_market matched inside the bar by the platform's simulated venue. Live trading mirrors those fills, so no exchange-resting order is required. Netting accounts are fine: each instrument holds at most one net position.

Market-neutral relative-value trade between Arbitrum (ARB) and Optimism (OP), the two largest Ethereum optimistic-rollup tokens. They share the same business (Ethereum L2 sequencer revenue), the same holder base, the same narrative catalysts (EIP-4844 blobs, L2 fee wars, ETH beta) and similar token-unlock overhangs, so common factors drive most of their log price ratio. Name-specific flow shocks push the ratio away from its recent mean, and these tend to partly retrace within days. Examples are an unlock dump on one name, one-sided listing or airdrop rotation, and a liquidation cluster on one name. Primary leg: ARBUSDT.OKX (OKX USDT swap, history from 2023-03). Hedge leg: OPUSDT.BYBIT (Bybit linear perp, history from 2022-06). The strategy uses synchronized 4-HOUR bars and OHLCV only, with no supplementary feed. The engine charges funding where available, but funding is not a signal. Signal: s_t = ln(ARB_close) - beta * ln(OP_close), where beta is a rolling OLS hedge ratio over `lookback` bars, and z = (s_t - mean(s)) / std(s) over the same window. A stability gate allows trades only when the rolling correlation of 4H log returns over `lookback` bars is >= `min_corr`, meaning the twin relationship is intact. This gate separates the factory's surviving LTC–DOGE cross-venue spread from the failed BCH–LTC overreaction trade, which traded shocks without a stability condition. Venue choice: cross-venue scope is at 7.7% against a >=15% target, OKX and BYBIT are each at about 2.5-2.7% against >=5% targets, and long/short is at 18.7% (long-only is 81.3% against a 55% cap). Neither ARB on OKX nor OP on Bybit is concentrated in the corpus. Fills: orders are submitted at the signal bar's close, which is the 24/7 equivalent of a next-bar-open fill. Sizing: the ARB leg is `leg_notional_pct` (0.30) x equity x leverage (2.0), about 60% of equity. The OP leg is beta x the ARB notional, capped at 1.5x the ARB notional. Gross exposure is about 120% of equity at beta = 1, up to 150% at the cap. Only one spread position is held at a time, on netting accounts. Protective exits: a spread-level stop on |z| (evaluated on bar close) plus a time stop. Fee arithmetic: the ARB/OP ratio's daily realized volatility is roughly 2.5-3.5%. Entries at |z|>=2 on a ~10-day window correspond to ~5-8% ratio dislocations. Capturing half of that gives ~2.5-4% on the spread, or ~1.2-2% per leg-notional. Costs are ~0.10% RT on OKX and ~0.11% RT on Bybit per leg, plus ~0.05% impact, so the capture is more than 5x cost. Expected firing rate: 15-30 spread trades per year, about 45-90 over ~3.5 years of overlapping history.

Test whether temporary deterioration in an asset's own trading liquidity predicts subsequent relative recovery. Use synchronized 4-HOUR OHLCV bars for a fixed four-token DeFi basket: AAVE and UNI on Hyperliquid, CRV and SUSHI on Bybit. Buy the token with the greatest normalized illiquidity and short the token with the least, only after the former's liquidity begins improving. This is a multi-day liquidity-normalization experiment. Inspiration: [Market Microstructure Analytics](https://www.tradingview.com/script/34R4Mh5W-Market-Microstructure-Analytics/), consulted in the local library, supplies the Amihud proxy; no source code is copied. [Zhang and Li's cryptocurrency liquidity research](https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2431) documents a cross-sectional liquidity–return relationship, but does not establish this proposed timing rule. Execute market orders at completed signal-bar closes, with one net position per selected instrument and platform-matched intrabar protective stops.

Test symmetric failed-breakout reversals on NEAR, FIL and INJ perpetuals using synchronized 4-HOUR OHLCV bars. A high-volume excursion outside a previously established range followed by a close back inside identifies a potentially trapped breakout cohort. Trade against that failed auction for up to four days, targeting a substantial volatility-scaled move rather than a small venue spread. Orders execute at the completed signal bar's close; protective stops trigger intrabar through the platform. No exchange-hosted protection, selectable same-bar ordering, hedge mode or funding-income assumption is required. Funding is an economic cost sensitivity, not the proposed return source. Hyperliquid's 4h candle limit permits approximately 2.3 years at most; use each instrument's actual available history. Official funding mechanics: [Hyperliquid Funding](https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs/trading/funding).

Test whether sustained directional price pressure concentrated in unusually low-volume bars reverses over the following week. Trade a fixed four-asset Hyperliquid perpetual universe using synchronized 4-HOUR OHLCV bars, buying the strongest downside liquidity-fragility candidate and shorting the strongest upside candidate. Volume is an OHLCV liquidity proxy, not observed aggressor flow or proof of forced trading. Orders execute at completed signal-bar closes. Protective stops trigger intrabar through platform matching. Inspiration: Robot Wealth's discussion of constrained flows and slow convergence, https://robotwealth.com/finding-exploitable-edges-as-an-independent-trader/ ; the signal is an original, falsifiable adaptation rather than a reproduction. Use only the common historical coverage of the four instruments, subject to Hyperliquid's approximately 5000-candle limit.

Classification: (a) a concrete idea from an external source. Source: CICC 'FOF研究系列之八：基金择时、选股和风格轮动' (2018-08-21, via BigQuant wiki), section '基于基金配置动量效应的风格轮动策略'. The article trades size-style momentum. When the large-vs-small relative-strength (RS) indicator trends up, it favours the large-cap index (CSI 300). When RS trends down, it favours the small-cap index (CSI 1000). A long-short version holds the favoured style against the other, with an average hold of about one month. The article's first strategy (an FOF built from fund managers with stock-picking skill) cannot be tested here because we have no mutual-fund NAV or holdings data, so it is dropped. Two adaptations, stated explicitly. (1) Market: CNEQ holds only about 100 CSI 300 constituents. It is long-only and has no CSI 1000 or other small-cap index instrument, so the A-share pair cannot be built. The same large-vs-small rotation is tested on USEQ with SPY.USEQ (large cap) against IWM.USEQ (small cap). Both have decades of daily history, can be shorted on Reg-T margin and trade commission-free. (2) Signal: the article's leading input is the aggregate change in mutual-fund style allocation. It reports a 0.75 correlation with the style-index relative return (0.81 at a 60-day lead). That feed does not exist in our data, so the strategy uses the price-only RS trend that the fund signal tracks: RS = close(SPY)/close(IWM). This tests the style-momentum premise, not the fund-positioning signal, and any verdict should say so. Construction: dollar-neutral long/short, with each leg at 50% of equity (gross 1.0x). Decisions are taken on the daily close and fill at that close. Next-session-open fills are unsupported on USEQ, so the strategy does not claim the overnight gap. Dividends are not in PnL. Long+short, multi-instrument, session venue, no supplementary data.

A market-neutral cross-sectional momentum book on OKX USDT perpetual swaps, using daily bars and price data only. The universe is fixed in advance to the 11 OKX swaps whose daily catalog history starts in 2020: ADA, LINK, ATOM, DOT, UNI, AVAX, AAVE, BCH, ETC, XLM, TRX. Membership is fixed and every name is still listed today. That introduces survivorship bias, which is listed as a risk; no universe-membership feed is needed (L190). Every rebalance_days daily closes, rank eligible names by their log return over lookback_days, skipping the most recent skip_days (default 3) to strip out the 1-3 day reversal. Go long the top k names and short the bottom k, equal weight. Gross is 1.0x equity, split 0.5x long and 0.5x short, so dollar exposure is neutral. Positions are held to the next rebalance. The signal follows the crypto cross-sectional momentum factor in Liu, Tsyvinski & Wu (2022, Journal of Finance). Execution: under the use_equivalent rule for next_bar_open_fill, orders are market orders at the signal bar's close; on a 24/7 venue that price is the next bar's open. Each leg carries an intrabar protective stop: a reduce-only stop-market at 3.0x ATR(14) from entry, simulated by the platform, used as a tail-risk circuit breaker. No supplementary feeds are used.

Trade a dollar-neutral AAVE/UNI pair using synchronized 4-HOUR bars: AAVEUSD.HYPERLIQUID is primary and UNIUSDT.OKX is the hedge. Buy persistent accumulation that has not yet produced positive price performance, and short persistent distribution despite positive price performance; reverse the assets when their roles reverse. This tests delayed repricing of opposing participation signals, rather than generic price-ratio reversion or funding carry. Market orders execute at the signal bar's close; protective stops trigger intrabar in the platform. No exchange-hosted protection, independent opposing positions on one instrument, or selectable same-bar ordering is required. Volume-indicator inspiration: https://www.cryptohopper.com/blog/trading-101-volume-indicators-explained-193. The adaptation is original; OHLCV close location is a participation proxy, not observed aggressor flow.

Test a symmetric long-short reversal mechanism across LINKUSD.HYPERLIQUID, AAVEUSD.HYPERLIQUID and UNIUSD.HYPERLIQUID using synchronized 4-HOUR bars. Buy the trailing relative loser and short the relative winner only when both moves occurred on declining turnover. The premise is that weak participation permits temporary relative-price drift that subsequently reverses. This is a research prediction, not an established edge. Execute market orders at the signal bar's close; no next-open execution requirement is imposed. Use platform-matched intrabar protective stops. Historical eligibility starts only when all three instruments have sufficient actual observations; never backfill pre-listing periods or substitute instruments.

Trade BCHUSD.HYPERLIQUID against LTCUSDT.BYBIT on synchronized 4-HOUR bars. Test whether a large relative displacement following a shared directional move partially reverses after the initial sector repricing. This is cross-asset convergence, not same-coin venue arbitrage or funding carry. Enter with market orders at the completed signal bar's close; this is the registry's faithful equivalent to next-bar-open execution on continuous markets. Cross-venue fills are sequential, not atomic. Use only overlapping historical coverage, with no timeframe substitutions or forward-filled prices. Fees use the documented base taker rates: [Hyperliquid fees](https://hyperliquid.gitbook.io/hyperliquid-docs/trading/fees), 0.045% per fill, and [Bybit perpetual fees](https://www.bybit.com/en/help-center/article/?id=000001584), 0.055% per fill. No supplied library excerpt describes this mechanism sufficiently for a faithful source port.

Trade a dollar-neutral AVAX/ATOM pair on synchronized 4-HOUR Hyperliquid bars after an unusually large relative-price displacement begins reversing. The hypothesis tests temporary asset-specific selling or buying pressure within two established layer-one assets, rather than outright momentum or small same-coin exchange spreads. Volume is a pressure proxy, not proof of liquidations. Both legs execute as market orders after the completed signal bars; no next-open execution is required. Protective stops trigger intrabar in the platform's simulated venue. Parameters remain frozen after deployment. Use only the intersection of genuinely available histories, which Hyperliquid's approximately 5,000-candle limit bounds to about 2.3 years at this interval. No profitability pre-study was performed.

Trade AAVE versus UNI perpetuals using synchronized 4-HOUR bars. Test whether an unusually concentrated volume shock in one DeFi token temporarily dislocates its relative price from its peer, followed by multi-day convergence. Both spread directions are eligible. Execute market orders at the completed signal bar's close; no next-open guarantee, independent opposing positions on one instrument, or selectable same-bar policy is required. This is a fixed two-token research universe, not a historical sector-membership reproduction. Economic capture estimates below are hypotheses, not measured results.