I ANALYZED 221 CONTRACTS WITH AI AND FINALLY FOUND THE ONLY WAY TO TRADE THEM

ORIGINAL TITLE: "I'M USING AI TO GET A 100% CHANCE OF A BURNER

Original by Wei馱|Skanda (X:@thecryptoskaanda)

TL; DR:

1. By studying the more than 220 Binance contractual currency, hundreds of manipulative event samples, 60+ data dimensions, we have found a possible positive EV trading strategy for "demon coins"

2. Data proof: both predictive start-up and "top touch" are not feasible

3. The only feasible strategy: to be empty in the event of a surge or retreat and to strictly enforce the release of the silo

4. THE ONLY VALID INDICATOR: NUDITY K

5. Early entry, short silos, fast running

Here is the text:

this week's report @coinglass com actually points to two issues:

First, Binance, Binance, also Binance @binance

Second, the fact that the amount of the contract is traded has been made clear:

The issue of gambling has in fact become a consensus of users across the industry。

Even if I say so, I'm sure it'll be a fight。

Even though I'm saying it's probably going to get me。

But since it's gambling, don't pretend to invest in value

It's a big deal。

It's a great game of high volatility。

And Binance's contract coin, it's in this boring marketIt's real, it's real, it's real, it's realAlpha。

A LOT OF THE BIG CONFUCIANS HAVE BEEN SCOLDING THE MONEY, SAYING IT'S "NEGATIVE EV" AND IT'S JUST MAKING THE FIELD LESS AND LESS PICKLES。

The reality, however, is that the money that enters the market, as well as the money that goes into the trade, is almost itself one of the few now in the secondary market that is known as a considerable incremental source of finance。

And it has several key features:

Not quantified。

Take direction。

With fluctuations。

You go to the traditional market, you win all kinds of insides of Hill and Wall Street。

You're here to trade in magic coins. You just have to win a contract house that's not necessarily much more professional than you。

Here's the problem:

How do we find the rule of dealing with the contract, and thus achieve hunger

I TOUCHED THE DOORWAY WITH THE AI+ PERSONAL EXPERIENCE。

Of course, the title is necessarily the title party。

Or you wouldn't have come in

First, let's find out what a magic coin is

What I'm talking about here is not a simple, fast-growing coin. In essence, what I'm talking about here is "demon coin," which is a kind of mark:

The spot control rate is almost 96%
There's a Binance contract. It's not as important as it's available
Usually by off-site funding, violent bands can be pulled at short notice, generating massive mobility and rivalry
Finalization of spot delivery and complete harvesting process by triggering multiple liquidations and profiting from the counterparty rate

Frankly, it's a manipulative art。

The handlers need to understand the contract at the same time, cross what is available, chain, operate and even human。

Two. It's not invincible

Many people think it's invincible

But the truth is very different. Division

In the whole game, the actual participants were:

Plankton
Mouse's barn
Battery
Trading platform and trading platform insurance fund
Other whales

Mantis capture, and the yellowbird is not simply "one-sided beating of the family."

First of all, Shan itself is often funded。

WHETHER IT'S A $15 MILLION FINANCER OR A "SCRAMBLING" MM, IT'S ONLY SELF-FINANCING, AND IT'S IN SECOND-TIER MARKETS, AND IT'S OFTEN JUST A WATER TRUCK。

There is a cost to the ration。

The game is for profit, not for behavioral art。

So he doesn't have enough leverage to pull it off。

He'll face a lot of real problems:

What if they don't follow
What if the Easter is following, but not in the right direction, not in the right rhythm
What if there's a bigger whale specializing in snipers
EVEN IF THERE'S NO PROBLEM, WHAT IF THE CUT-OFF PLATFORM INSURANCE FUND TRIGGERS ADL

Then you probably won't be able to take a penny of your money

So there's a very simple iron rule for the magic coin:

I will continue to pull, smash and harvest as long as the profits of the rivals that can now be taken out are greater than the input I have put into the game。
On the contrary, throw away。

It's rough, but it's a framework for a chain of decisions

iii. "Scientific" starting with the experiment

Since the question is, "How to make a deal," I'm trying to digitize this。

1) How do tools work

The problems of the Modden era, of course, are in the Modden way。

I took up one of @karpathy's ideas about Autoresearch Loop. If you give clear objectives, constraints and experimental methodology, angent will run down until the data remain intact。

LLM uses Opus 4.6。

My 20-x Claude Max, running the mission is still on。

On the sandbox, I took a idle iMac as a remote experimenter

Use Tailscale to remote control VSCode from Windows workstations。

this piece of data, no doubt, was the most useful part of the study

@AlbertCoinGlass gave an API to the study。

LINE K, ORDER BOOK, OI, FUND RATE, LIQUIDATION, ALL AVAILABLE。

Besides, I used:

Binance API
Skill Hub
Etherscan V2 API to record the history chain

Which data

I finally sorted out 12 major categories, 60+ subdivisions, including:

Funding Rate
OI
Multispace ratio (broad/ large/ hold/ account)
taker
Blast
Order book
Transfer on the chain
K-LINE

THE INITIAL SELECTION OF CURRENCIES, INCLUDING $RIVER, $STO, $MMT, IS 16 OF WHICH I JUDGE BY EXPERIENCE

IV. Phase one: I wanted to predict the "premonition of the tractor" at first

And then I'm going to use one of the most fantasizing but usually the easiest assumptions: predicting the premonitions of a tractor

"THERE MUST BE A SIGNAL BEFORE THE MAGIC COIN IS MANIPULATED. FOR EXAMPLE, FR ANOMALIES, OI PILES, CHAIN VARIATIONS. FIND THESE SIGNALS, SET THEM UP EARLY AND PRINT THE MONEY."

It turns out it's the fastest way to lose money

I didn't have a very strict definition of "manipulation."。

IT'S JUST A FEW OF THE MOST OBVIOUS "DISCRETIONAL EVENTS" THAT WERE MANUALLY INTERCEPTED FROM THE K LINES OF $RIVER, $STO, $MMT, AND THEN THE COMMONALITY OF THESE EVENTS WAS SOUGHT, THEN EXTENDED TO ANOTHER 16 TO FORM A COLLECTION OF EXPERIMENTS。

In order to prevent alignment, Autoresearch made a strict time-slash:

Early data training
late data to holdout (persistence)
holdout is completely invisible at the training stage

The experimental method is harsh:

Start with the extreme value of a single signal, like the cost rate

AND THEN A LITTLE BIT MORE AND A LITTLE MORE, AND THEN A LITTLE MORE, UNTIL THE F1 GOES UP。

Results:

TRAINING SET F1 PULLED 0.72。

Looks like it's gonna be。

One on holdout, almost completely disabled, F1 falls around 0.1。

That means:

We can't make it by predicting when it happens

The problem is, you're thinking the opposite

After the failure of the first edition, I realized a fundamental question:

It is not because it meets certain targets that it becomes a magic coin。

It's because it's a demon's coin, and that's why the indicators are characteristic。

This logic is in fact very consistent with your senses。

If the plate rots, there's always a demon coin going crazy alone。

It never makes sense. It's only about one thing:

Do you have a John

So we can't predict when the coin will start。

The true directions are:

When it's started, identify "this is the currency, it's working" and then find a trade strategy based on this state。

So I completely changed my mind。

This time I began to define the "discretion cycle" strictly:

This complete process counts as a run-off cycle in a short period of time when a fast pull is achieved。

And the next thing we're going to do is we're going to:

How much? How much? How much
After locking the cycle, how do you trade it

I'LL GIVE THEM ALL TO AI TO FIND OUT FOR MYSELF。

The sample has also been expanded:

16 coins, mark 415 drive cycles
And then it went up to 55 "coins" that fit market recognition
Final marked 1447 cycles

The sample didn't look like a fortune teller at last, and then I started rolling over

Six editions of strategy

V1: HIGH POSITION EMPTY

The first version of the strategy gives us the idea of a "high-level space."。

Respond to Sharpe + 0.72。

Sounds okay。

one run holdout, training and testing are not a universe at all。

The problem is:

I've got too little discipline, and Opus has defined himself as "high."。

I've been doing double interferometry experiments for the Great Jumper all day

V2: DON'T SLAP YOUR HEAD, IT GETS WORSE

SO, V2, I PUT A DIRECT LIMIT:

Don't hit your head
Each indicator must be supported by data
It's a different style

Like a blast, a blow, a blow, a blow

I wanted it to look for a different "songprint."。

And it gave me one very scientifically:

-0.28 Sharpe。

And then I let Opus explain to me the decision logic of V1 and V2

I suddenly realized that both versions of the strategy were essentially doing the same thing:

Touch the top。

It's no different than a lot of hard-carrying-rate "Fountainers."。

THE DIFFERENCE IS THEY'RE MANUALLY HANGING ON THE TREE, I'M AUTOMATICALLY HANGING ON THE TREE WITH AI。

That's when I realized:

Not too advanced。

It's the wrong idea

Note: There are many strategies considered here, but the question is:

Although some of them are clearly moving when they start, such as "manufacturing back-cleansing" is a common feature, the question is the same: how do we distinguish the direction of entry

Do more after the "top" or fall in the zone, then die. But this "false positive" signal is difficult to pre-valid and does not distinguish between manipulation and non-manipulation, so it's not feasible

VII. V3: FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE ESTATE

Back to the decision-making framework:

First profit

It is certain that he will move in the direction of the least resistance in order to reduce losses。

What do you mean

When it's heavy, let the market crash, even after
I can't break it, I can't catch up
It doesn't have to cost a lot
It's either burned or blown

So there must be a point:

He thinks it's over。

After that, the estate would let the market fall。

There's no value for money because of rehab。

So we really should be looking, not the top。

It's this:

Discard count。

Then, the logic of transaction and loss is designed around this point to avoid being swept away by ordinary bouncers, without losing in the wrong direction。

The results of the experiment were extremely beautiful:

LOGICAL 1H LINE
TWO CONSECUTIVE HOURS K-LINE ENTITY CRASHES 5%
With a 3% stoppage of movement
AVERAGE PNL IS ALSO +3% OR MORE

But the question is:

Sharpe 15+, and the perfect test passed。

If you're stupid, you know something's wrong

VIII.V4: TARGETING "FACTFUL DISK"

AFTER V3, I BEGAN TO SUSPECT A FEW THINGS。

First, it's probably overworked, and the current experiment does not really define the "manipulation currency" itself, but only trains on the 55-dollar calendar。

Second, there may be problems even with the completion test itself。

So this time I changed my mind:

It's based on real transaction costs。

I'm trying to recover the costs of "real billing" by matching the depth of the order book, the history of the money rates in the run-up。

The results are straightforward:

This strategy is not profitable at all。

The reason is simple:

The order book is extremely low
The slide point is often direct, 2%
You can't actually drive a $200 bacterial barn

And then I realized two other bigger problems。

1) How do I know where to start

I DON'T KNOW THE FUTURE K-LINE IF I'M IN REAL BUSINESS。

HOW DO I KNOW WHERE TO START WITH "1H SUPPORT POSITION"

It turns out there's a hole

AI IS THE PEAK IN THE 1H K LINE AFTER THE CURRENT POSITION, WHICH IN TURN CALCULATES THE COLLAPSE。

this is standard look-ahead biasI don't know。

And, frankly, it's taking the future data to help make decisions now。

Of course it makes money。

But in reality you don't have this hanger。

2) The order book depth and senses are highly different

I FIGURED OUT THE AVERAGE ORDER BOOK DEPTH WAS ABOUT 70K。

But all those who have played with demon coins know that when they're "demons," the trade is huge。

It's completely different from the feeling。

Then there are only two possibilities:

The order book depth median is wrong
I've defined the drive cycle as too broad and too loud

Then I chose fromSecond questionDo it:

Redefined the manipulation cycle。

I asked the data to find it myself:

What kind of pull/sharp scale, and what duration is most representative of an "effective manipulation event"。

The results are as follows:

20%-50% of notable manipulations in the zones
Once the manipulation lasts longer than 96 hours, the odds are no longer significant

After combining data and experience, I adjusted the definition of the new exercise cycle to:

Pump + Dump is done within 20%-50% of the area + 96 hours。

Too high, too few samples。

Too low, too loud。

IX. DEFINITION OF THE COSTS, EMPLOYMENT OF THE PASS AND RETRAINING

And then I decided not to just stare at 55 coins。

I extended it to:

Since March 1st, 2025, all the new 221 non-TradFi new contracts。

That's the amount of money after the contract that actually started to form。

And then I did a few things:

According to the statistics, the manipulation zone is defined as

"A PULL AND SMASH OF THE XX% RANGE WITHIN XX HOURS"

(For strategic effectiveness, specific thresholds are hidden here)

Count the frequency of occurrence of manipulations in each currency that meet this definition
Depending on frequency, all currencies are divided into four categories:

Super-high-level manipulation

2. High-handedness

3. Manipulation

4. Low manipulation

Finally, 70 "super-high" and "high-manipulation" types were sifted out of 217。

Then, based on these newly defined manipulation cycles, no longer distinguish between the drive styles, directly seek commonality, and try to identify the "top" precursor signals。

The final conclusion, very unusual:

There's no deal
The order book is useless
The speed of the tractor won't work
high amplitude + lower high is useless
WAIT, WAIT, WAIT

THE ONLY THING REALLY USEFUL IS NUDITY。

FINALLY, WE HAVE TWO RELATIVELY SIGNIFICANT SIGNALS: V4A AND V4B

X. V4A AND V4B

V4A: EARLY ENTRY, FIRST FOOT

The logic is:

Early entry
No reading, no amplitude
"Touch the top" only for the first time in a moment
THE DROP SUPPORT IS STILL BASED ON 1H CLOSING PRICE
BUT THE THRESHOLD FOR CONFIRMING A BREAK IS LOWER THAN V4B
Shorter search time after tectonic confirmation

The flow of water is endless, and the battle is one of the best。

V4B: SLOW DOWN AND WAIT FOR CONFIRMATION

The logic is:

the price has fallen off the peak
Markets are still volatile, but the decline has been confirmed
The search is much longer after the touchdown
So we can get more confirmation

It's more steady and slower。

It's two different philosophys

Both strategies are currently presented in the same way:

trail +SL

That is:

IF YOU'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, YOU'RE GOING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION OF X PER CENT
IF IT'S WRONG TO ENTER THE FIELD, THEN THE SL HANDLES IT

THIS SL WAS ALSO MEASURED。

In 166 returns:

SL TRIGGER IS A DIGITS
Average loss 1%
Maximum retreat - 1.87%

IN OTHER WORDS, I PUT A SINGLE R:R DOWN AT 1:1。

Not by a single windfall, but by:

Winner + HF。

After re-testing the new slide points, the financial costs and the latest data set, I found that:

The depth of Orderbook that you were worried about, it's true。

But it also confirms another thing:

Manipulation itself is precisely the area with the highest volume of transactions。

only & nbsp;V4A stands。

The reason is simple:

Early entry is much more important than "recognizing."。

11: Real-time testing

I did two more things to keep the whole study from going back to the "godly" phase:

A Scanner script with data required for the Binance API scanning strategy
DEPLOYED ON VPS EVERY 60 SECONDS

And do another Dashboard, push the signal directly through WebHook to Discord Bot. While real-time testing is not running long enough, the sample is still very small, the confidence range is very wide and, strictly speaking, can only be used for directional reference。

However, the overall results are consistent with the research phase。

For the moment, this is probably the case:

V3: MOST FREQUENTLY TRIGGERED (ABOUT 70%), 50% WINNER, BUT PNL IS SLIGHTLY NEGATIVE
V4A: TRIGGER MODERATE (ABOUT 26%), CURRENTLY WIN 100%, PNL APPROXIMATELY 25%
V4B: Trigger only one time and build a Dashboard at the same time to connect the signal via WebHook to Discord Bot

It's not a few days from now, but it's basically a kiss. - Yeah

V3: MOST FREQUENTLY TRIGGERED (70%), 50% WINNING, BUT PNL IS SLIGHTLY NEGATIVE

V4A: TRIGGER IS MODERATE (26%), CURRENTLY WINS 100% AND PNL 25%, ALTHOUGH THE SAMPLE IS TOO SMALL TO CONCLUDE AND CONTINUE TESTING

V4B: TRIGGER ONLY ONE TIME AND LOSS

Twelve. So far, I've drawn up a few profit points

1. It has to be short

THE MEDIAN HOLD TIME FOR V4A IS ONLY 1 HOUR

2. & nbsp;We have to get in early. Don't wait for confirmation

When we're sure, we'll have to wait for the fattest part

3. & nbsp;You have to be determined

Turn around and run as soon as you get out

4. We'll make a profit

Don't make a value investment

5. & nbsp;It won't stop. There's plenty of opportunities

70 SURVEILLANCE UNITS, BASICALLY 2-3 V4A SIGNALS A DAY

Follow-up optimization

I'm still running real-time tests, but there are a few areas of excellence worth considering:

1) Supporting position and tectonic signals that may be relevant to the hot attempt at liquidation

Intuitively, I think

A better top signal is likely to be directly related to the realization of the heat。

Unfortunately, I haven't got enough good data。

The principle is simple:

If there's no one left above Disk

He has no incentive to go up and eat

Below is the same

So I've started a pool collection, and I'm going to take in all the new contract money after March 2025, and I'm going to do a test of the liquidation heat。

2) Control the frequency scoring system

Now I've used the frequency of manipulation cycles over the past time to rate currencies, distinguishing between "super-high-manipulation" and "high-manipulation"。

But there is a clear problem with the system:

It's based on the frequency of the last six months。

And the real deal is that we don't want "who used to be the worst."

It's "who's worth the demon now."。

A lot of money that used to be used to a lot of games

It is likely that the dealer has reached an advanced stage and has even been abandoned。

Keep staring at them, it doesn't make much sense。

And this score is our definition

So the more rational direction is to make one:

A dynamic scoring system over time。

Preliminary data already support this direction, and more real-time test samples are now missing。

3) Should be extended to the local currency

I'm in the range of currencies now, mainly new contracts after 2025。

But in reality, a lot of old coins are more suitable for manipulation:

There's a contract, even a spot
It's low enough
The project is almost over
No one cares
It's all done

This kind of currency, in a sense, is a natural template。

IF V4A IS EQUALLY VALID FOR THE LARGE COINS IN THESE COINS, IT MEANS THAT THIS SET IS NOT JUST A MATCH FOR A SAMPLE OF THE NEW CURRENCY, BUT THAT IT REALLY CAPTURES A MORE GENERAL SET OF MANIPULATION MECHANISMS。

This direction is supported for the time being in the data。

BUT I'M NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE V4A COLLECTION。

Thirteen: "How do you work on trading platforms?"

In our philosophy of @HertzFlow xyz, any trading opportunity for assets is essentially just a game of up and down, traditional assets are good, mainstream currencies are good, and even the "Penzi scheme" focuses not on the asset itself, but on the pattern of price movements。As long as there's a pattern, we can run a strategy

It's no exception

A platform for dealing, not where assets are mounted, but where to run. What we need to do more than look at the fundamentals of assets is to look at "what strategy this deal can run and whether it has a chance to do it."

Yeah, we're gonna give it to the dealer

AI in hand, you have a chance to fight the dog house. We have also regularized such data services and will provide public services in the form of @goo economy skill

@HertzFlow xyz test network is on line today for 17 "super-high/high-manipulation" assets that are being tracked in a strategy that we have tested. Let's get you out of here。The 17 types are:

$0G

$AKT

$ARC

$HEMI

$HYPER

$MT

MOODENG

$PARTI

$PROMPT

SOON

STBL

$SWARMS

$TAC

VINE

$ZEREBRO

If you're not confident enough to take the money, then Hertz Flow, the test net, you're the one that touches the rocks across the river. Field

You'd rather be the king than the king! You'll be the king of tomorrow

Original Link