Original Research Lead hypothesis built on the published 'high-volume return premium' (Gervais, Kaniel and Mingelgrin 2001, Journal of Finance 56(3): stocks whose trading volume over a day or week is unusually high relative to their own recent history earn higher returns over the following ~20 trading days, and unusually low-volume stocks earn lower returns; confirmed across 41 countries by Kaniel, Ozoguz and Starks 2012, JFE). The mechanism is the visibility/attention effect (Miller 1977, Merton 1987): a volume shock makes a stock visible to more investors, enlarging its investor base and demand, while a quiet stock drifts out of view. The effect is about VOLUME, not the price move, so the design neutralises the price move by excluding the formation-week return extremes. This is a mechanism the factory has never tested on equities: the only prior 'high-volume return premium' run was a single-asset ETH spot timing rule. It is also not one of the USEQ families that keep dying here (price reversal, OPEX/TOM calendars, cross-asset lead-lag, ETF pairs). UNIVERSE (point in time, survivorship-aware): at each rebalance, the S&P 500 members AS OF THAT DATE (FactoryStrategy.universe_at()/index_member() over sp500_membership.parquet, former members included where bars exist; candidates via `python -m src.data.listings sp500 --start 2006-01-01 --end <run end> --with-data`), that have at least 60 completed sessions of 1-DAY bars and a last close >= $5. SPY.USEQ is the primary bar clock (it sets the rebalance calendar) and is NEVER traded. Residual bias, stated honestly: Yahoo has no bars for some acquired/bankrupt former members, and those names are absent from the cross-section. Backtest window starts 2006-01-01 to keep the bar load tractable (~5,200 sessions x ~650 names). Execution: decisions are taken on the SPY session close and fill at the NEXT session's open on USEQ (next_open_fill, supported). No stops are needed for the risk route (see exit_logic); there are no intrabar or exchange-resting stop requirements. COST ARITHMETIC: USEQ round trip is ~0.02-0.05% (spread + impact, zero commission). GKM report a high-minus-low volume spread of roughly 0.5-1.0% over 20 days in their sample, smaller for large caps and probably smaller after 2006. I predict a 0.5% leg spread per 20-session period. That gives about +0.25% per trade averaged over long and short legs, versus at most 0.05% round-trip cost, so 5x the cost. Turnover is near 100% of each side per rebalance (volume shocks do not persist), so cost per period is about 2 x 0.04% = 0.08% of gross against an expected 0.25% book return per period. PRE-REGISTERED EVIDENCE COUNT (lesson L238: trades on the same date are not independent): about 260 distinct rebalance periods over 2006-2026 (about 210 in development, about 50 in the holdout), each with 30 legs. The unit of evidence is the period, not the ~7,800 leg trades. PRE-REGISTERED COMPARATOR (lesson L217): the incremental claim is that the volume rank adds expectancy over a random long/short pick from the same return-filtered PIT pool. That comparator's expected period return is ~0. The analyst should read the per-period book return and its HAC t-statistic, not the leg count. Separately reported: the long-leg and short-leg mean 20-session market-adjusted returns. Lesson L230 warns that the two sides of an effect can differ, and the literature finds the high-volume (long) side the stronger.