Strategies

This hypothesis traded continuation after a DOGE perp-premium z-score shock: long for 24h, flat about 93% of the time. The pre-registered base passed backtest review with 138 trades at 1.28% average per trade, but its Sharpe was only 0.54, the result depended on a few large winners, and the reviewers suspected phantom MTM swings in the engine. The optimizer then moved entry_z to 1.13, well below the pre-registered shock level, and that configuration blew up (-75%, 99.6% drawdown). The holdout returned Sharpe -0.85 and PBO was 0.61, so after one iteration the analyst abandoned the strategy as overfit.

The hypothesis bet on continuation after SOL's rejected probes of a multi-week high, based on a pre-study showing the effect on 9 of 10 perps. After one iteration, the backtest cleared costs easily (2.72% per trade over 145 trades, beta 0.23), and the backtest review sent it to optimization. The optimized 54h/28d version reached a walk-forward OOS Sharpe of 1.17 but lost on the 2025-2026 holdout (Sharpe -1.09 on 14 trades), and PBO came in at 0.587. The analyst abandoned it as overfit, because the returns were concentrated in 2021 and the unoptimized parameters also decayed in 2025-2026.

IefMonthEndIndexExtensionLong tested a documented month-end Treasury index-extension flow by holding IEF for the last three sessions of each month. The 256-trade backtest confirmed a positive per-trade edge of about 0.21% of notional, and the strategy was sent to optimization, where it posted an apparently strong Sharpe of 2.0. The analyst traced those headline statistics to a suspected USEQ daily-returns artifact. From the realized ledger they found a Sharpe of about 0.46, heavy modeled impact, drawdown and leverage above the pre-registered limits, and 7 losing years. The run was abandoned after 2 iterations. The mechanism was not falsified, and the analyst flagged an engine review of the USEQ mark-to-market, Reg-T enforcement and impact calibration.

LinkFundingDemandContinuation bet that top-quintile LINK funding signals continued leveraged demand and held a fixed 5-day long, flat about 71% of the time. With its pre-registered parameters it returned +106% over 136 trades with a 1.90% average trade, but the Sharpe of 0.60 was not significant, drawdown was 44%, and PF and win rate fell short of the pre-test. The optimizer drifted to a much looser entry threshold with higher sizing and was liquidated at -100%. The holdout Sharpe of -0.69 on 64 trades was a hard failure, so the analyst abandoned it after one iteration as overfit. The analyst also flagged a suspected MTM artifact in daily_returns (paired -X/+X swings while flat) for engine review; that concern has not been verified.

UsLargeCapEarningsGapContinuationLS traded post-earnings drift on 20 US large caps, entering at the close after a high-volume overnight gap of roughly 3 sigma or more and following the gap's direction. The optimization on record looked promising: 58.65% return, Sharpe 1.28 over 148 trades, 4.20% average per-trade return, a passed holdout (Sharpe 1.52) and PBO 0.27. It did not pass the programme-wide FDR check, however, and nearly all trades were long (133 of 148). On iteration 8 the code failed the Layer 3 sandbox backtest by running past the 300s limit, and the run was abandoned before any analyst or risk verdict.

AdaSpotCapitulationTailBounce24h tested a capitulation-liquidity bounce on ADA spot: buy after an extreme 24h selloff relative to ADA's own 90-day distribution and exit after a fixed 24h. Across two iterations it showed a strong in-sample edge (PF 1.63-1.90, 1.46-2.37% per trade, beta ~0.03) and clean walk-forward statistics (OOS Sharpe 0.96, PBO 0.32). The 20-month holdout, however, had essentially zero edge (26 trades, -0.04% per trade, holdout Sharpe 0.016), and performance faded year by year into 2026, so the analyst abandoned it as no_edge (edge decay) and noted it also failed deflated Sharpe and programme FDR. The analyst also flagged suspected, unverified MTM daily-return artifacts (a terminal-day -11%/-19% print and paired -X/+X days) for engine review.

This strategy tested whether an XRP perp trend signal that uses only US-session hourly returns beats ordinary trailing-return momentum. The first backtest doubled capital, but nearly all of that came from one Nov-Dec 2024 long, with Sharpe 0.39 and a 35% drawdown. Optimization cleared the hard gates (OOS Sharpe 0.66, PBO 0.46, holdout +0.31), but the edge was statistically indistinguishable from noise, the last 1.6 years lost money, and the pre-registered falsification test against TSMOM was never shown to pass. The analyst abandoned it after one iteration as no_edge, the third failed expression of the same session-decomposition mechanism.

AdaOkxTenDayChannelBreak12hClock tested whether a 10-day channel breakout on ADA's OKX perpetual keeps drifting in the breakout direction for about 12 hours. Its second iteration fixed an earlier sizing defect and reproduced the pre-study's per-trade drift (+0.63% against a predicted +0.61%), but the Sharpe was only 0.20 with a CI straddling zero, and 2023, 2024 and 2026 lost money. Optimization moved the rule away from a true breakout (entry_level 0.66, channel_bars 154), tripled turnover, and produced a -15.9% realized ledger; it also failed the overfit and OOS-Sharpe hard floors, with holdout Sharpe 0.061. The analyst abandoned it as no_edge, and separately flagged paired and unreversed daily MTM prints for engine review; that flag did not change the verdict.

EthOkxSuperTrendFlipChandelier moved the SuperTrend flip to 4H ETH on OKX, with a chandelier exit and an explicit flat state, and passed backtest review to optimization after a +170.9% first backtest. That result was fragile, with Sharpe 0.60, PF 1.17 and a 53% drawdown. Optimization tightened the bands, which more than doubled turnover and led to a -81% realized return, and the holdout came back at Sharpe -0.43. The analyst abandoned it after 2 iterations as no_edge, noting a suspected MTM marking artifact behind the passing robustness stats and that the SuperTrend flip family on ETH has now failed in two forms.

DogeRangeFilterEmaFlipLS adapted an FMZ/DonovanWall Range Filter plus EMA50/200 continuation idea to DOGE 1H, using ATR-scaled stops and trailing exits. Its first backtest cleared the fee floor (1.03% per trade over 455 trades, +117%), but Sharpe was only 0.41, drawdown was 33.9%, and all the profit came from stressed-volatility periods, so the backtest review sent it to optimization. Optimization raised position size and turnover until impact consumed 97% of gross, PF fell to 1.003 and drawdown reached 61%, and the holdout came in at Sharpe -0.446 on 176 trades. The analyst abandoned it as no_edge after one iteration; pre-registered Variant B (no EMA gate) was never scored, and paired daily-return artifacts in the MTM series were flagged for engine review but not verified.

EthVolumeConfirmedMomentumLS_OKX traded ETH 4H momentum only when a volume surge confirmed it. Its default-parameter backtest was reasonable: 460 trades, 0.88% per trade against a 0.20% floor, a 14.5% drawdown and near-zero beta, but Sharpe was only 0.71 and its confidence interval straddled zero. Optimization freed the locked risk_pct and loosened the volume gate, producing a config that nearly wiped out equity and posted a -0.47 Sharpe on the 459-day holdout. The analyst abandoned it as overfit after one iteration. The analyst also noted that it duplicated a promoted Binance sibling and flagged the optimizer's parameter selection and suspected MTM artifacts for pipeline review.

The strategy traded ETC perpetuals on 4H trends and only took positions when breadth across five majors confirmed a market-wide regime. The initial backtest cleared fees easily at 1.11% per trade, but its risk-adjusted edge was thin (Sharpe 0.28, PF 1.14) and it lost money in 2023-2025. The analyst still sent it to optimization, where it failed the holdout (Sharpe -0.16 on 52 trades) and the overfitting check (PBO 0.53). The analyst abandoned it after one iteration as no_edge, and separately flagged suspicious paired loss-then-gain days in the optimized daily series for engine review.

LinkTakerAggressionShiftContrarian traded against spikes in the LINK USD-M taker long/short volume ratio, using a fixed 48h hold. Its first backtest looked promising at the trade level (+105%, 0.67% per trade, beta about 0.01), but its statistics were weak, its profits sat in high-volatility regimes and 2026 was -27.5% YTD. After optimization it failed four hard validity floors (overfit, OOS Sharpe -0.15, PBO 0.62, holdout Sharpe -0.13) and also failed programme FDR, so the analyst abandoned it as no_edge after one iteration. Separately, the analyst noted paired -X%/+X% daily mark-to-market swings on open-position days as a possible engine artifact; the mechanism was not checked and the analyst flagged it for engine review.

FilRetailCrowdingContrarianTrendGateLS4H traded FIL 4H trends only when retail positioning was against the trade. It passed backtest review with a 0.745% per-trade edge well above fees, and the reviewer flagged tail concentration and weak recent years. Optimization passed the validity gates (no cliffs, PBO 0.20, WF OOS Sharpe 1.12) but lowered full-period Sharpe to 0.33 and left holdout Sharpe at 0.009. After one iteration the analyst abandoned it for edge decay since mid-2025. The analyst also flagged repeating paired daily MTM moves as a possible engine artifact that still needs to be checked.

EtcBreadthConfirmedTimeSeriesMomentumLS traded ETC perp momentum only when breadth across six major perps agreed with ETC's trend direction. The first backtest cleared fees easily at 1.79% per trade, but it had Sharpe 0.29 and depended heavily on one 2021 trade. Backtest review still sent it to optimization. The 3-phase optimization flagged walk-forward overfitting (IS 0.93 vs OOS 0.48) and produced a negative holdout Sharpe of -0.16, and the analyst abandoned it after one iteration as no_edge that decayed after 2022. The analyst also flagged the optimized daily mark-to-market series for engine review because of paired -X/+X days on consecutive dates.

SpyWeeklyMajorityMinorityWealthSelector tested an agent-based-model claim: on SPY, choosing weekly between trend-following and trend-fading by their trailing realised scores could earn money. After 5 iterations, the full-history backtest (1993-2023, 810 trades) returned just +1.49% with profit factor 1.004 and a Sharpe CI that straddled zero, and any gains were confined to high-volatility periods. The analyst abandoned it at backtest review as no_edge (premise_falsified), so optimization, analysis and risk review were never reached. The analyst also flagged recurring paired large daily MTM swings for engine review as a possible impact/MTM folding artifact (unverified), but noted it did not change the verdict.

TwoMacdStoGridEthOkx ported geraked's 2MACDSTO expert advisor to OKX ETH perpetuals on 4H bars, pairing a two-MACD, stochastic pullback entry with no-stop trailing exits and a 50-level equal-size averaging grid. Across 3 iterations it never passed verification. The sandbox backtest was liquidated on 2020-06-02 at -100%, with one trade losing about 29x starting capital. QA traced this to grid sizing that ignored unrealized losses and to the lack of any basket stop, and the strategy was abandoned before the backtest-review, optimization, analyst and risk stages.

DhlaosEthOkxGridLS tried to port the DHLAOS EA, an Andean Oscillator plus prior-day high/low sweep reversal system with a 1.1x, 50-level grid and no hard stop, from AUDUSD 5m to ETHUSDT.OKX 5m perpetuals at 10x. Over 3 iterations the code implemented only the entry signal: should_exit() always returned False, no grid legs were ever submitted, and position size was inflated by the leverage multiplier. The sandbox showed one trade liquidated after 66 days for a -100% return. QA Layer 4 rejected it as a hypothesis mismatch, also warning that even a faithful 1.1x/50-level no-stop grid on a 10x ETH perp is a textbook blow-up profile, and the run was abandoned before backtest, optimization or analyst review.

This strategy was meant as a faithful, survivorship-free test of market-state-gated 6-month momentum on crypto spot: hold the top 3 of a frozen 2020 top-10 universe each month, or sit in USDT when BTC's 12-month return is not positive. The code used fixed-length ring buffers and rebalanced only once a month, to avoid the sandbox timeouts seen in earlier runs. Even so, all 3 iterations failed Layer 3 verification, with the sandbox backtest going past the 300s limit, and the run was abandoned. No backtest, optimization, analyst or risk review ever produced results, so the hypothesis itself remains untested.

SectorSpdrLowVolBottom3MonthlyLong adapted the QuantConnect/Quantpedia 'Volatility Effect in Stocks' idea to the 11 Select Sector SPDR ETFs. It held the 3 lowest-volatility sectors each month at about 33% of equity each, with no leverage, shorts or regime gates. The hypothesis flagged the risk of sandbox timeouts, and the code used fixed-size deques with running sums. Even so, after 3 iterations the strategy still ran past the 300s limit in the Layer 3 sandbox backtest and was abandoned in a verification loop. It never produced a backtest, so its economic edge was never measured.

CommodityEtfRankExtremeTsmomLS adapted a Quantpedia/QuantConnect commodity momentum strategy to four USEQ commodity ETFs, with each leg held only when the name's own 12-month trend sign agreed. The design asked for O(1) per-bar work because of earlier sandbox timeouts, and the code used fixed-length deques and running sums. Even so, after 3 iterations the strategy still exceeded the 300s Layer 3 sandbox limit on a 2400-day GLD window and was abandoned in the verification loop. It never reached backtesting, optimization, analyst review or risk review, so no performance metrics exist.

The strategy was built to test whether Bouchaud et al.'s 'fundamentalist' 5-year mean-reversion term adds anything to a 6-month trend signal, trading a 10-ETF asset-class panel long/flat on USEQ daily bars with a k=0 control. The hypothesis's own pre-study already suggested it would not (Sharpe 0.32 vs 0.33 without the value term). The code used incremental O(1) indicators and weekly batched decisions. Even so, all 3 iterations timed out in the Layer 3 sandbox backtest (over 300s on ~2400 days of SPY data), and the run was abandoned before any engine backtest, optimization or analyst verdict.

LinkBybitDonchianMidlineExitLS applied the FMZ Donchian channel rules (break the 50-bar range to enter, exit at the midline) to LINK perpetuals on Bybit, long and short, flat about half the time. The mechanism ran as specified (50% exposure, 89 long and 78 short trades, beta 0.01), but the full-history backtest showed negative expectancy: -0.446% per trade, PF 0.886, Sharpe -0.21 and a -15.6% total return. After 3 iterations, the backtest-review analyst abandoned it as no_edge/negative_expectancy, confirming QA's earlier smoke-test concern, so optimization, analysis and risk review were never reached. A possible end-of-backtest marking artifact was flagged for the engine but did not affect the decision.

SectorSpdr12m1MomentumTop3Bottom3LS adapted QuantConnect's small-portfolio momentum strategy to the nine original sector SPDRs, going long the top-3 and short the bottom-3 by 12-1 month return with a monthly rebalance on the zero-commission USEQ venue. Over 3 iterations the code never passed verification, because each Layer 3 sandbox backtest ran past the 300s wall-clock limit on the ~20,000-bar window. The run was abandoned in a verification loop, so no backtest, optimization, analyst or risk stage produced results, and the momentum hypothesis was never tested.