Strategies

This Research Lead hypothesis tested whether the peer-relative down-shock rebound, already promoted on ASX and TSX miners, also works on a 23-name Japanese large-cap panel. The code was judged faithful: long-only, a 5-session hold and about 7.4% of equity per leg. On the development period, though, the edge was about the size of the modelled spread and impact: 0.072% net per trade, PF 1.05, Sharpe 0.13, with gains confined to 2021-2022 and losses in stress windows such as COVID 2020. The analyst abandoned it at backtest review on iteration 1 before any optimization; the rejection covers only this Tokyo panel, not the miner versions.

HyperliquidCorrelationContagion tested whether rising common-factor synchronization across six Hyperliquid alt perps predicts the factor's direction continuing over the next three days. The first backtest was mildly positive (+17.3%, Sharpe 0.13, profit factor 1.34), but its 18 positions came from just three basket episodes, and stops ended trades after 4-20 hours rather than the 72-hour maximum hold. Backtest review approved optimization, but after 2 iterations the run was closed at analyzing as underpowered, with 4 episodes in 2.6 years and none in the holdout. The closure was framed as inconclusive rather than a rejection of the idea, and it suggested a wider universe, longer history or a variant trigger for any new hypothesis.

Deleveraging-Confirmed Idiosyncratic Down-Shock Rebound on Hyperliquid, BTC-Beta-Hedged: long an HL alt perp + short beta-weighted BTCUSD.HYPERLIQUID at the close of a UTC day whose BTC-residual return is <=-2 sigma AND whose Binance USD-M open interest (coin units) fell >=5% the same day, fixed 3-day clock, 10% per leg, max 6 concurrent (55-name point-in-time HL panel, 1-DAY)

TsxMinerIdioDownShockRebound repeated the promoted ASX peer-residual down-shock rule on an 8-name TSX miner panel, buying after a stock fell far more than its peers and holding 5 sessions. The baseline was positive but weak: 337 trades, +0.64% per trade, Sharpe 0.37 and an 18.9% drawdown, above the 15% limit. It still went to optimization, where out-of-sample (Sharpe 0.52, t 1.17) and holdout (Sharpe 0.44 on 105 trades) results were consistent but not statistically significant. After one iteration the analyst recommended promotion on inconclusive-but-consistent evidence, and the strategy is now in paper trading; the open questions are profit concentrated in 2020, survivorship bias and peer-excess at about half the raw return.

This original hypothesis moved peer-relative shock absorption with a fixed exit clock into ASX gold miners, a market the factory had barely traded. The baseline rule made a modest 18.6% over 288 trades (Sharpe 0.34), and its peer-excess edge was thin and fading after 2022, but backtest review approved optimization. The optimized rule improved the full-history and holdout figures and kept the falsification diagnostic positive, so the analyst recommended promotion despite weak pooled OOS significance, unstable hold lengths and losses in the calm regime. After one iteration the strategy reached paper trading, where its evidence is still not statistically proven.

Korean Preferred-Share Discount Snap-Back: buy a KRX preferred share at the next open after its log price ratio to the same company's common share falls <=-2 sigma below its 120-session mean, exit when the ratio z-score is back to >=0 or after 20 sessions (17 pref/common pairs, KREQ 1-DAY, long-only event panel, common shares are signal-only)

This strategy tested whether the absorbed-flush rebound rule, already promoted on Bybit and Hyperliquid perps, also works on 24 old-alt Binance spot names with no leverage and twice the round-trip cost. The backtest was positive on average (439 trades, 1.40% net per trade, +71.6% total, Sharpe 0.48), but the drawdown of 22.7% broke the pre-registered 20% limit. Profit was concentrated in 2023-2024 and in MKR, and the Sharpe confidence interval included zero. After a single iteration, the run was abandoned at analysis as underpowered: inconclusive rather than a refutation of the idea.

The Research Lead proposed a BTC-hedged short on weekend alt-pump reversals across a 24-name Hyperliquid panel, replicating a promoted Bybit strategy. The pre-study showed +0.76% net per pair-trade, but most of those events came before these Hyperliquid perps were listed on 2023-05-12. On the tradeable sample of 123 positions over 40 event weeks, the strategy was flat to negative: profit factor 0.998, Sharpe 0.03, and pumped alts slightly outperforming BTC instead of reverting. The analyst abandoned it at Backtest Review for negative expectancy after one iteration, so optimization, analyst review and risk review never ran. The verdict applies only to this Hyperliquid version, not to the promoted Bybit one.

This strategy carried the frozen Bybit flush-absorption rule over to 15 Hyperliquid alt perps that the Bybit panel did not trade. The baseline matched the Bybit sibling's economics (PF 1.70, 2.02% per trade), and after a narrow optimization of range_mult and close_loc, pooled walk-forward OOS was significant (Sharpe 1.38, t 2.46), so the analyst recommended promotion. Two caveats remain: profit is concentrated in a few stressed-market dates, and both 2026 and the holdout were flat to slightly negative. The strategy is now in paper trading.

UsSemiShockTokyoDiffusionLS tested whether large SMH moves carry into six Japanese semiconductor names over the next three Tokyo sessions, trading both directions. Backtest Review sent it to optimization: the strategy returned 149% in JPY with a 0.54% mean net trade, well above the cost floor, though drawdown was 43%. After 2 iterations, the analyst found that the pre-registered short arm, the check against the universe's survivorship bias, failed badly in the holdout while the long arm alone made the profit. The analyst ruled the premise falsified for this six-name symmetric design, and optimization was also rejected for breaking the drawdown limit.

This was an original Research Lead hypothesis: a BTC-hedged, market-neutral panel that buys Bybit alts after an idiosyncratic 2-day drop of at least 2.5 sigma relative to BTC and holds for a fixed few days. It passed backtest review with +26.3% over 185 trades but weak risk-adjusted numbers (Sharpe 0.45), and profit was concentrated in 2022 and 2024. Optimization moved to a stricter threshold (2.84) and a 4-day hold, which gave PF 1.93, a 6.3% drawdown and a positive but non-significant holdout (Sharpe 0.95, t 1.28). The analyst promoted it after one iteration and it is now in paper trading. Its statistical significance is still inconclusive, with survivorship bias, funding carry and regime clustering noted as open risks.

SpotForceAnomalyContinuation tested whether exceptional spot price-volume pressure predicted continuation in SNX and CRV perpetuals. The supplied backtest lost 17.82% across 366 closed positions, while the decisive development-period review reported a 13.59% loss across 287 closed positions. Backtest review abandoned the strategy after one iteration because after-cost expectancy was negative and no evidence-supported repair was established. Optimization and later reviews were not reached, and the decision drew no conclusion about the held-back period.

BybitFlushAbsorptionPanel tested a long-only, three-day rebound trade after unusually wide down days that recovered into the upper part of their range. Backtest review recommended optimization, and the analyst reported final results of 71.16% return, Sharpe 1.056 and 269 trades with 9.95% maximum drawdown. Pooled OOS evidence cleared the registered significance hurdle, but the 55-trade holdout remained inconclusive and robustness warnings persisted. The analyst recommended promotion with low confidence, and the pipeline ended in paper_stage.

The strategy sought to capture ETH/BTC rotation through daily ratio trends and opposing perpetual positions. After two iterations, review confirmed matching entry and exit timestamps across 82 completed paired episodes. Despite positive full-history headline metrics, development-period review found negative portfolio expectancy and trade returns below the fee-aware floor. It was abandoned before optimization, rejecting the tested implementation without drawing conclusions about relative-value trend trading generally.

This LTC/BCH strategy sought to capture daily spread dislocations through opposing perpetual positions held for multi-week convergence. Across three iterations, the implementation adopted a frozen entry equilibrium to address exits caused by a moving rolling mean. Although aggregate portfolio returns were positive, the review found mean net leg return of -0.673% below the 0.15% venue floor and paired-episode profit factor of only 1.046. It was abandoned at backtest review before optimization; the decision did not reject pairs trading generally or establish conclusions about the withheld period after 2025-06-16.

The Research Lead moved a forum three-soldiers/three-crows stop-and-reverse strategy, which claimed a 77% win rate on BTC, to ETHUSDT.OKX 15m bars, with numeric wick limits and a stepped profit lock. The pattern fired about as often as predicted (~185 positions a year). Even so, the full-history backtest lost 99.5% over 1,493 trades with a Sharpe of -0.87, and the average loss was larger than the average win. Backtest Review abandoned it after one iteration because the per-trade edge was negative even before fees, in both directions and in every year. Optimization, analyst and risk stages were never reached.

HyperliquidSignedInterceptReversal adapted the published signed-intercept rule literally for four-hour TRX, ADA and ICP perpetuals and underwent two iterations. The supplied backtest returned -15.71% with a -0.329 Sharpe across 1,169 closed positions. The decisive development-period review used a separate 858-position sample and recommended abandonment for negative expectancy after costs and returns below the fee-aware floor, with no supported implementation repair. The run ended before optimization or risk review, without drawing conclusions about the withheld period after 2026-04-07.

HyperliquidTripleStopBrickAgreement tested a four-hour stop-and-brick adaptation across APT, ICP and CRV with volatility-based sizing. After one iteration, the supplied backtest showed -1.804% return and Sharpe -0.271 across 73 closed positions, while the review cited a different, also losing 46-position result. The reviewer abandoned it before optimization because expectancy was negative and no supported repair was apparent. No conclusion was drawn about withheld holdout results or untested parameter regions.