Strategies
Hyperliquid ETH Intraday 15-Minute Mean-Reversion to VWAP, LONG/SHORT (Single-Instrument HYPERLIQUID Perp, Pure OHLCV, Two-Sided Fade of Volatility-Stretched Dislocations, Flip-Via-Flat, Regime/Volatility-Gated, Fee-Gated, Fixed-Fractional Sizing — Mechanism Matched to ETH's Chop, Fills ALL THREE Top Gaps: Long-Short + HL Venue + Short Horizon, Pre-Registered Sizing Probe, Tail-Safe, Low-Parameter)
Outcome: Abandoned
EthHyperliquid15mVwapMeanReversionLongShort
Outcome Summary
EthHyperliquid15mVwapMeanReversionLongShort was the two-sided counterpart of the earlier long/flat ETH reversion book, designed to fade ETH's chop on both sides and fill three quota gaps simultaneously, carrying a pre-registered data-depth kill-switch in case HL's 15m history proved shallow. It did: only 70 days / 6,862 bars existed against an assumed ~3 years, so the kill-switch fired exactly as specified — and independently, the strategy was a disaster, losing 18.6% with a -9.66 Sharpe and a 0.46 profit factor because, despite a 56.5% win rate, its fades paid small and lost big (avg_win $382 vs avg_loss $1,075) while fees consumed 37.7% of gross and sizing breached the 100% gate at 129.9%. The reviewer abandoned it pre-optimization, reasoning that no parameter sweep can add years of history or convert a negative-expectancy, fee-saturated over-trading fade into edge. The preserved, now firmly established finding is to stop proposing sub-hourly HL strategies as data-walled and unvalidatable, and to use 4H instead when a shorter-than-daily HL cadence is wanted.
Hypothesis
Implementation
Long/short intraday 15-minute two-sided mean-reversion-to-VWAP strategy on ETHUSD.HYPERLIQUID, pure OHLCV. Computes a rolling volume-weighted mean (VWAP over 48 bars) and a stretch score = (VWAP - close)/ATR. Buys a stretched dip (score >= 1.75 ATR and price >= 0.6% below the mean) unless the 96-bar regime EMA has fallen >= 0.5% over the last 8 bars (strong downtrend), and shorts a stretched rip (score <= -1.75 ATR and price >= 0.6% above the mean) unless the regime has risen >= 0.5% over 8 bars (strong uptrend) — i.e. it fades counter-moves only against a neutral/range regime. Both gates require a 4-bar post-exit cooldown so the reversion target clears HL's ~0.09% round-trip fee without churn. Exits on reversion to the mean (close crossing back through VWAP in the position's favor), a 0.8% take-profit, a 2.5% stop-loss, or a 16-bar time stop. Flips are routed through flat (exit fully, then open the opposite side on a later flat bar), one fixed-fractional position (95% of equity notional) per entry with no dynamic resizing, leverage 1.0.
Backtest Review
- Sharpe
- -9.66
- Total return
- -59.65%
- Max drawdown
- 62.22%
- Trades
- 237
- Win rate
- 56.5%
- Profit factor
- 0.46
Mechanism is implemented as designed (two-sided VWAP fade, flip-via-flat, regime/cooldown gating, 237 trades with balanced long 128 / short 109 legs) and metrics_reliable=true — the code runs and trades both sides.
Useful confirmatory finding: the HYPERLIQUID sub-hourly data wall is real and bites at 15-min — this localizes the viable HL cadence to 4H+ (just confirmed deep) for future work.
DATA-DEPTH KILL-SWITCH FIRED: the hypothesis assumed ~3yr/~75k 15m bars but the data spans only 2026-03-16 to 2026-05-27 = 70 days / 6862 bars — the ~2-month sub-hourly wall. A single-regime ~2.5-month sliver cannot support a 3-window walk-forward + 15-day holdout, so optimization is not validatable.
Catastrophic performance: total_return -18.6%, Sharpe -9.66, Sortino -10.5, profit_factor 0.46, avg_trade_return -$251 (NEGATIVE). Monthly -32.8% (Apr), -36.8% (May).
The avg_win<avg_loss mean-reversion trap is severe: win rate 56.5% but avg_win $382 vs avg_loss $1075 (tail_ratio 0.22, omega 0.14) — fades pay small and lose big when price keeps trending, exactly the failure mode the hypothesis claimed to avoid.
Fees dominate: commission_pct_of_gross 37.74% (the 'fee-gated, not scalping' claim failed); avg_position_pct 129.9% breaches the pre-registered <=100% sizing gate.
Outcome Summary
A high win rate does not rescue a fade when avg_win is a third of avg_loss — the mean-reversion trap the hypothesis claimed to have fixed reappeared — and HL's sub-hourly (1m–15m) data wall (~2 months) makes 15-minute strategies structurally unvalidatable, so the viable shorter-than-daily HL cadence is 4H, paired with a mechanism that actually clears the ~0.09% round-trip.
The analyst abandoned it at the backtest-review gate, before optimization, on two independent disqualifiers: the hypothesis's own data-depth kill-switch fired (only 70 days / 6,862 bars existed, not the assumed ~3yr/75k — the confirmed ~2-month HL sub-hourly wall, making a walk-forward and holdout impossible), and, independently, the base strategy was a catastrophic negative-expectancy loser with fees devouring the book.
A long/short, single-instrument, OHLCV-only intraday 15-minute two-sided mean-reversion strategy on ETHUSD.HYPERLIQUID that fades volatility-stretched dislocations on both sides (buy stretched dips, short stretched rips) with regime/volatility and cooldown gating, flip-via-flat, leverage 1.0 — matched to ETH's chop and meant to fill the long-short, HL-venue, and short-horizon gaps at once.
It was a catastrophic net loser over 70 days / 237 trades (128 long, 109 short): -18.6% total return, Sharpe -9.66, Sortino -10.5, profit factor 0.46, avg_trade_return -$251 — and despite a 56.5% win rate it fell into the avg_win<avg_loss trap (avg_win $382 vs avg_loss $1,075, tail_ratio 0.22) with fees eating 37.74% of gross and avg_position_pct of 129.9% breaching the pre-registered sizing gate.
Backtest and paper results are hypothetical. Trading involves risk of loss.