Strategies
Dollar-Neutral Cross-Sectional Momentum SPREAD, Long-Short Market-Neutral (BINANCE USD-M, 8 Majors, MONTHLY Long Top-2 / Short Bottom-2 by Relative Strength — Dollar-Neutral So Max-Drawdown Is Bounded by the Momentum SPREAD (~20-30%), NOT the 50%+ Market Beta That Floor-Killed Every Long-Only Momentum Variant; Monthly Cadence Keeps the 4-Leg Fee Below the Spread, 2-Parameter)
Outcome: Abandoned
DollarNeutralMomentumSpreadLS
Outcome Summary
DollarNeutralMomentumSpreadLS was the session's final attempt to fit the deployed momentum signal under the 50% drawdown floor, this time structurally by going dollar-neutral (long top-2 / short bottom-2 of the majors, monthly) so that net beta near zero would supposedly bound drawdown to the momentum spread's volatility. The construction was genuinely market-neutral (beta 0.11), but the outcome was the opposite of the thesis: a -96.35% return and 97.62% max drawdown, with a 0.685 profit factor and -$488/trade expectancy. The cause was the overlooked flaw of shorting the lowest-momentum crypto majors — unbounded squeeze risk — which produced impossible monthly swings and destroyed the account by late 2024 while running 107% leveraged gross. The analyst abandoned it as a catastrophic falsification, noting it reproduced the same unbounded-short-squeeze failure that killed the directional short basket (-79%) earlier in the session, and that tuning could only shift the blowup rather than fix it.
Hypothesis
Implementation
Dollar-neutral cross-sectional momentum SPREAD, long-short market-neutral on 8 BINANCE USD-M majors (BTC/ETH/SOL/BNB/XRP/ADA/AVAX/LINK, 1-DAY bars). MONTHLY it ranks the 8 by trailing relative strength (return over momentum_lookback days), goes LONG the top-2 and SHORT the bottom-2, equal notional per leg, so net market exposure ~0 and drawdown is bounded by the momentum spread's volatility (~20-30%) rather than crypto beta. Captures the full top-minus-bottom momentum premium. Only 4 legs rebalanced monthly to keep fees far below the spread. Pure-price, no supp data, no ticks. 2 core parameters: momentum_lookback, names_per_side.
Verification Results
Reopen the flipped leg on the next rebalance, or skip the orders_open guard for the reopen half of a flip (the close is reduce-only and won't conflict).
Flip path (a name crossing winner->loser in one rebalance) closes-then-reopens on the SAME bar, but _open_leg's `if self.cache.orders_open(iid): return` guard can see the just-submitted reduce-only close order and skip the new opposite leg, leaving that name flat until next month and momentarily un-balancing dollar-neutrality. Empirically not biting — sandbox shows balanced 16 long / 15 short, beta 0.04 — so latent risk, not an active break.
Analyst: judge on the full multi-year backtest; confirm measurable sample.
Marginally negative, inconclusive one-year sandbox: total_return -2.79%, avg_trade_return_pct -0.382%, PF 0.929, Sharpe -0.14 (CI [-1.75, 1.48] straddles zero). NOT the L17 code-defect signature — reads as a thin/absent spread over one window, not a bug. Trade count 31 is structurally low (monthly cadence by design); needs the full multi-year window (incl. 2022) to test the beta-removal thesis and clear the measurability floor.
Backtest Review
- Sharpe
- 0.32
- Total return
- -96.35%
- Max drawdown
- 97.62%
- Trades
- 213
- Win rate
- 46.5%
- Profit factor
- 0.68
Genuinely market-neutral construction (beta 0.11, correlation 0.07) and low-turnover monthly cadence as designed
Well-sampled (213 trades) so the catastrophic verdict is decisive
Core thesis FALSIFIED: max_drawdown 97.62% (CI to 99.99%) and total_return -96.35% — a near-total wipeout, versus the claimed ~20-30% bounded drawdown
Decisive net loser: profit_factor 0.685, avg_trade_return_pct -2.77%, expectancy -$488/trade
Short legs detonate: impossible monthly swings (+1818% 2021-10, -213% 2024-01, -152% 2024-11, -1023% 2024 annual) from unbounded short-squeeze losses on bottom-momentum majors
avg_position_pct 107% — runs leveraged gross, not the benign dollar-neutral spread claimed; returns go to 0.0 after late 2024 (account destroyed)
Outcome Summary
Removing net market beta does not bound the tail of a crypto long-short book, because shorting the lowest-momentum names carries unbounded short-squeeze risk — a violent reversal in a 'loser' can cost the short several hundred percent, so dollar-neutrality guarantees neither low drawdown nor a positive edge.
It was abandoned at backtest-review (verdict: abandon) because the core thesis was falsified — the short legs carried unbounded short-squeeze risk, so beaten-down 'loser' majors that violently reversed produced impossible monthly swings (+1818% in 2021-10, -1023% for 2024) that wiped out the account, and avg_position_pct of 107% showed it ran leveraged gross rather than the benign spread claimed.
It reused the proven cross-sectional relative-strength momentum signal in a dollar-neutral long-short form — monthly long the top-2 and short the bottom-2 of 8 USD-M majors — on the thesis that removing market beta would bound max drawdown to the momentum spread's ~20-30% volatility (below the 50% floor) while a minimal 4-leg monthly cadence kept fees under the spread.
It achieved genuine market-neutrality (beta 0.11, correlation 0.07) but was a catastrophic net loser: over 2,397 days and 213 trades it returned -96.35% with a 97.62% max drawdown (CI to 99.99%), profit factor 0.685, avg_trade_return_pct -2.77%, expectancy -$488/trade, and returns collapsed to zero after late 2024.
Backtest and paper results are hypothetical. Trading involves risk of loss.