Strategies
VolSpike ATR-Band Breakout, Frozen-Rule Venue and Universe Transfer to OKX: follow a 4H bar whose volume exceeds the SUM of the prior 7 bars (RSI 20-80, wick filter), symmetric 2.5-ATR intrabar stop / target, long-short, on 16 pre-2021 OKX USDT swaps none of which were in the Bybit panel (OKX 4H, flat ~97% of the time per name)
Outcome: Backtesting
VolSpikeAtrBandOkxPanel
VolSpike ATR-Band Breakout, Frozen-Rule Venue and Universe Transfer to OKX: follow a 4H bar whose volume exceeds the SUM of the prior 7 bars (RSI 20-80, wick filter), symmetric 2.5-ATR intrabar stop / target,…
Hypothesis
The corpus is saturated: candle patterns, NR7, OI-flush, funding carry, momentum confluence, calendar and lead-lag ideas have all been tried many times. So this proposal takes a promoted rule that has never left its venue and gives it a fresh, frozen-rule breadth test on a disjoint universe, as L228 recommends. The test is on OKX (3.6%, under the >=5% target) and is long-short (24% of the corpus). The pre-study checked event counts and both arms separately before proposing (L230, L237, L238). Three ideas I measured and discarded: turtle-soup and key-reversal variants on a 20-name Bybit panel (negative), weekend-shock reversal (negative) and market-wide breadth washouts (t < 1.8, negative in 2022).
Implementation
FMZ 488520 (ianzeng123) VolSpike ATR RSI strategy with ATR bands, the frozen rule set of the promoted Bybit panel, run independently on 16 OKX USDT swaps (LTC primary + DOT, UNI, BCH, NEAR, FIL, TRX, LINK, ADA, XRP, AVAX, SUSHI, CRV, COMP, SAND, AXS) on closed 4H bars. Signal: volume > sum of the previous vol_spike_bars volumes, 20 < RSI(14, Wilder) < 80, bullish bar with upper-wick/body <= 2 -> long, bearish bar with lower-wick/body <= 2 -> short (zero body -> 0.0001). Stop/target at close -/+ atr_band_mult*ATR(14, Wilder) (target = tp_to_band_ratio x band distance), resting as reduce-only STOP_MARKET + LIMIT orders that trigger intrabar. Same-direction signal re-arms stop/target from the new bar, no add; opposite signal reverses with one order sized |position| + new exposure after the exits are cancelled. 10% of equity notional per leg, one netted position per instrument. Execution substitution: Pine strategy.entry at next bar open -> market order at the signal bar's close (24/7 venue). Same-bar stop/target touches resolve by the engine's adaptive OHLC ordering (not selectable).
Verification Results
Optional: in _try_reversal, if the capped size cannot cover |position|, send a plain close instead (and enter on a later signal). Or raise leverage so 16 x 10% fits.
Sizing is 10% of equity x leverage 1.0 per leg, across 16 legs. If more than about 9 legs are open at once, margin_capped_size in _submit_entry_instrument shrinks new orders. A capped REVERSAL order (|position| + new exposure) may then be shrunk below the existing position. That leaves a residual old-direction position, which _place_protection then protects with stop/target levels computed for the new direction. A stop placed on the wrong side would be crossed or rejected. The developer says high concurrency is rare (~97% flat time per name), so this should not distort the measurement.
None needed for measurement. The new exits could be placed in on_order_canceled, as the reversal path already does.
A same-direction re-arm cancels the old reduce-only stop/target and places the new ones straight away, without waiting for the cancel confirmation. For a moment the old and new exits can both be working. In the backtest/paper simulated venue the cancel applies at once, so there is no effect on measurement.
Check whether the optimizer budget (TPE over 2 tunables) fits about 20 min per full backtest.
The sandbox needed 1250 s for 14,340 bars and was flagged runtime_review_required. Per-bar work is incremental: the RMA state uses a stamp cursor, and the order-cache scan per leg is small. Most of the cost is probably the 16-leg engine itself. This is a resource concern, not a correctness one.
The pre-study's edge is concentrated in 2023-2026, and 2020-2022 were negative or flat on few trades. The short arm (+1.9%) carries the result while the long arm is +0.3%, and the short arm lost in the 2020-21 bull. The analyst should look at per-arm and per-year results and at concentration across names on the full backtest. Each 4H stop sits about 5-7% away, so the fees (~0.10% round trip) are small next to the move. The question is regime dependence, not fees.
Backtest and paper results are hypothetical. Trading involves risk of loss.