$3,300 of capital, 8 lines, none past the threshold.
One set of criteria, fixed in advance, applied to 8 markets. 4 killed, 4 unproven, none passing.
Where the 8 lines stand
| Line | t | Against the t*=2.0 bar | n | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Altcoin spotSignal from perpetual funding and open interest, position held in spot | 1.88 | — | unproven | |
| The closest to the bar and still short of it. $1,848.42 live across 8/20 slots. Stress test: drop the ten best trades and the whole thing turns negative — the return is concentrated in a few, so the exit mechanism outweighs the entry price. | ||||
| Taiwan short squeezeDirection after margin-suspension and short-to-margin events | 1.67 | — | killed | |
| All three variants dead: strongest cell t=1.67, weakest 0.05. No capital committed, data pages deferred. | ||||
| US equity fadeMean reversion after a single-day spike | 1.40 | — | unproven | |
| I audited my own backtest: 13.25x came down to 2.26x. All three overstatements pushed the same way, none the other. $1,316.64 live. | ||||
| Futures / CFD fadeFading order flow, four instruments across four sessions | 0.79 | 53 | unproven | |
| A week earlier t=1.52 at n=30; five trading days later 0.79 at n=53. The shadow replay over the same window rose to 2.59 instead. The split was resolved on 2026-08-27: entry latency accounts for 82% of it and cost for 18%, and the latency accumulates in one direction within a window. The fix shipped on 2026-08-27 and is not yet accepted — acceptance reads latency in seconds, not profit. | ||||
| Solana meme ladderShort-horizon rotation with laddered scaling | — | no test needed | — | killed |
| No test needed: six days of expectancy between -13% and -18%, not one day positive. $0 committed, data not retained. | ||||
| Polymarket makingReward-driven market making, 20 days live before withdrawal | — | no test needed | — | killed |
| Every daily P&L was positive and the wallet barely moved: +$78.86 on paper against +$6.36 realised, the -$72.50 difference sitting in inventory. A 60-second markout on a book that trades single digits an hour is noise rather than profit — the whole statement was on the wrong time scale. | ||||
| Sports divergenceDivergence between the de-vigged fair price and the prediction-market book, taken and held to settlement | — | no test needed | 15 | unproven |
| Never traded with real money, 15 paper entries. Theoretical net EV +2.09% against +12.45% realised — the gap is luck at n=15 rather than edge, and the former is what belongs in the ledger. Separating a 60% CLV hit rate from 50% needs n~152, roughly 100 days at this line’s signal density. | ||||
| Trading-bot SaaSSell the tool instead of trading it | — | no test needed | — | killed |
| Dead on the commercial side: 33 payment attempts totalling $1,201, every one timed out and cancelled, revenue $0. Eight recorded technical failures as well, three of them the same bug class — a check passing for the wrong reason. | ||||
n is shown only where the sample is final; where it is not, the cell stays empty rather than carrying an estimate. The Taiwan line takes the strongest of its three variants — killing a line on its most favourable number is more honest than killing it on its worst.
There is nothing new in Wall Street. There can't be, because speculation is as old as the hills.
The criterion: which way t moves
The threshold was fixed in advance at t* = 2.0, and what it judges is the direction rather than the level: add sample to a real signal and t rises, add sample to noise and t falls. All 8 panels share one pair of axes, so they compare directly.
t runs 0 to 3 on the vertical axis and sample size n runs 20 to 64 on the horizontal, shared across all 8 panels; the red dashed line is the 2.0 threshold. 7 panels have no track — 2 hold a single reading, 1 have a test statistic but no series recomputed by sample size, and 4 were never t-tested (the dashed-outline panels). Empty stays empty; no line gets invented to complete the picture. The only track that crosses the threshold is the futures line's shadow replay, which holds no money at all. The tracks come from this note (in Chinese).
Notes
- 檢查因為錯誤的理由而通過:同一種病的九個變體
當時的六條線、一個 SaaS、外加這個站自己,九個案例都是同一種病:檢查通過了,但通過的理由是錯的。最凶的是最後一個:壞掉的不是被檢查的東西,是檢查的標準本身,所以那個 100 分不代表任何事。
- 實現報酬是理論的六倍,而該登的是理論那個
15 注紙上追蹤,實現淨 ROI +12.45%,理論淨 EV 只有 +2.09%。差額是 n=15 的運氣。這條線從未下過真錢,判準是收盤價值不是賽果,而它 9/15 的命中率在單尾二項檢定下 p=0.30,不顯著。
- What actually breaks when you run a bot on a prop firm evaluation account
Market data died for 7 days because the trading account blew up. A UI toggle silently dropped our API stop parameters. A retired systemd unit kept trading.
- 20 days of Polymarket reward market making: $78.86 on paper, $6.36 in the wallet.
20 days live on $1,295.95. The statement said +$78.86; the wallet moved +$6.36. The missing $72.50 sat in inventory, and the mid marks were measured 21.6% high.
- 出場規則換一下,同一批交易從 −86% 變 +3%
三條獨立的線在三個市場得到同一個結論:出場設計的影響遠大於進場條件。期貨線換停損位置讓每筆從 +9.3 點掉到 +0.9,幣圈兩個出場機制並用反而比單用更差,Solana 那條的出場規則之間差 89 個百分點。但最賺的那個出場在現實中填不到。
- 我窮舉了 80 種出場,沒有一種贏過原本那個
把出場與進場空間掃過約 80 格,沒有一格贏過現行的出場機制。而一個什麼都沒搜到的搜尋,反而沒有多重檢定問題。最後回頭才發現:影響最大的那個旋鈕,從第一次定下之後就再也沒有被掃過。
- 兩個都錯的環節,拼成一條完整的因果鏈
一條線的資料收集停了 26 天沒人發現。我的第一份根因分析裡有兩個環節是錯的,而它們拼起來聽起來完全成立。拆穿它的第一次查證給出假陰性,真相在沒人想到要看的輪替日誌裡。
- Your backtest win rate is 60%. Live is 51%. It isn't costs.
Costs explained 18% of the gap between our replay and the live account. Entry delay explained 82%, and it accumulated: 5 seconds late on the first trade, 82 on the fifth.
- 我以為它過了,多五天資料後沒過
真倉 t 從 1.52 掉到 0.79(n 由 30 增至 53),影子回放同期升到 2.59。實測價差顯示成本只解釋落差的 10.2%;2026-08-27 更新:主因是進場延遲(82%),而延遲是窗內單向累積的。
- 我的回測說 13.25 倍,稽核完剩 2.26 倍
自己稽核自己的回測,13.25 倍打回 2.26 倍。三處高估:停牌標的被當成可以交易、改名的股票被算了兩次、回落只在平倉那天更新。三處全部朝「策略看起來更好」的方向偏。
- 五個資料瑕疵,沒有一個讓策略看起來更差
八天、66,550 個幣、320,491 筆價格快照,找到五個資料問題。每一個都讓策略看起來比實際更好,沒有一個是反過來的。其中一個把「中段進場 +175%」翻成 −71%,另一個讓同一個特徵從負訊號變成 1.9 倍的正訊號。
- 一個算損益給人看的函式,讓賣出持倉這件事沒有發生
2026-08-16 的線上事故:CSV 多了一欄但表頭沒跟著換,讀檔炸掉,而那個讀檔的函式只是用來算損益給人看的。它掛在交易關鍵路徑上,於是平倉在記憶體發生、在磁碟沒發生,現貨從沒賣掉,心跳停了 88 分鐘,發現的人是使用者。
- 我的 alpha 小於這些股票的日常波動
台股兩條線全部判死。機制是真的、毛 alpha 也是真的,但摩擦吃掉 31%,淨 alpha 的月聚類 t 只剩 1.67。而交易抓到的 +3.04% 只等於 1.16 個典型單日振幅、0.33 個標準差 —— 同一批股票隨機挑九天,有 29.3% 的機會就贏過它。
Contract data
The signal source behind the altcoin spot line, published in full: daily funding rate and open interest for 718 Binance perpetual contracts, one page each. 29 of them have been delisted — most market sites delete the page once a contract is gone, these stay, and that is the part of this data set which is hard to replace.
Index of all 718 (in Chinese) · The 29 delisted (in Chinese) · Last day in the database 2026-08-10. Not live quotes, and no signals. Where each contract's funding and open interest stop is printed on that contract's own page — no single date holds for all 718.
What is never published
Parameters, thresholds, holding times, stop placement, open position names and live signals are never published; method, falsification results and every closed trade are. The boundary and the reasoning behind it are on the method page, and a build gate enforces it.