Loading
All vaultsThis is my vault, register it
DOEZOE
BlikelyThe advertised rate has been moving
Over 21 daily readings it has ranged from 993.50% to 4,133.13%, averaging 2,521.91%. The tile below shows today’s quote alone.
21 readings is 21 days, not a year. We began taking them on 2026-09-19 and this window grows with the record rather than standing in for a longer one.
Taking money
—
TVL
$26.0k
Return
1,335.7%
over its watched history, read on 141 of 492 days, thin enough that the figure is an estimate between readings
The venue advertises
1,268%
the share price implies 2,925% over 29 days, from 53 readings. No verdict is drawn: one of the two is beyond planning around
Value and drawdown
This chart shows the last 30 days of a 493 day record; the whole-record figures on this page are measured over all of it, and the 30, 90 and 365-day figures over their own windows, dated below. The rest is the Analyst tierRange
Hover for values. Upper: vault value, with BTC indexed to the same starting capital. Lower: how far below its own peak it was.
The rate, and the seven things that qualify it
A quoted rate is one input, not a verdict. These are the same seven fields in the same order for every vault, so a high rate and a high rate nobody can withdraw from do not look alike.
- Current quoted rate
- 1,268%As the venue states it, from Hyperliquid. Passed on rather than adopted, and whether rewards are inside it is the next row.
- Rewards inside that rate
- No reward rate is published, so we cannot say whether the quote includes one.A published rate, not a verified payment. Promotional projections and amounts actually accrued are different things and this is the first.
- Realised return
- 2,925%over 29 daysDerived from the share price we read, over the window stated. Annualisation is secondary: the window is the measurement.
- Fee basis
- Inside the share priceA return derived from the share price is net of whatever the venue already deducted. Fees charged outside it are not in either number.
- Withdrawable now
- The venue publishes no withdrawable figure, so no amount is claimed either way.A reading of now, not a promise about the day somebody tries. An accruing rate with nothing withdrawable is the case this section exists for.
Profit, and what the value is made of
Value held less cumulative profit is the money people put in. The venue draws the two apart; the gap is the point.Range
Profit and loss since the vault opened, as the venue reports it. It ignores deposits and withdrawals: only trading moves this line.
Value heldNet money put in
Range
Solid: what the vault holds. Dashed: what depositors put in, net of withdrawals. Where the two rise together the growth was deposits, not performance.
No strategy has been declared for this vault
Everything above is reconstructed from public data. A declaration is free, signed from this vault’s own key, and cannot be edited afterwards.Note 28
Evidence
What a risk decision about this vault can rest on
Six questions, and what we hold for each. This is not a score and there is no letter at the end of it: the answers are different kinds of thing and compressing them into one number would hide exactly the part a reader needs. Where we have nothing, the row says so. 2 of 6 are not measured for this vault.
- What does it hold or lend into?DeclaredUSDCThe venue names a deposit asset. What the vault actually holds behind it has not been read.
- How much could leave now?Not measured—No exit reading. This is the figure that decides whether a position can be left, and we do not have it. A deposit here is locked: the longest lockup still running across this vault's depositors is 1 day, read from the venue's own per-depositor field on 2 of 76. That is a floor on the term rather than the term, and it is a constraint on the depositor that the vault-level figure above does not carry.
- Who runs it, and what else have they run?MeasuredDOEZOEA named operator with a record across every vault they run, including the ones that closed.
- What does it depend on?
Passport
Identity
Where the return came from
Costs consumed 10% of gross profitGross realised$135.5k
Trading fees−$9.4k
Funding paid−$3.6k
Net realised$122.5k
Unrealised−$239.52
Total$122.2k
That is 470.47% on the capital the strategy currently runs.
- Slippage is not separated: without a book snapshot at fill time it cannot be measured, so it remains inside gross rather than being estimated.
- Funding is differenced across position snapshots, so it is a flow over the window rather than a level: it counts what changed hands while we were watching and nothing before that. Intervals where a position closed and reopened are refused rather than guessed, which makes the figure a floor.
Paid to trade. Earned by trading, after paying $4k of funding to hold the position.
Computed from 5,213 fills over the 30d in which funding could also be measured, so every part is taken from the same days. That window opens when we started watching, not when the vault started trading. Measured by differencing 1921 snapshot intervals over 30 days. 82 of 2003 intervals were not attributable, a position closed and reopened, or a snapshot was missed, so this is a floor.
Analyst tier
Detail is hidden, not absentHow well it executes
Built from 7,661 individual fills. Two strategies with identical signals can differ by hundreds of basis points purely in how they get filled, taker share, fee rate, slippage. This is the part of a result that is operational competence rather than market view, and it is what tells you whether a good year was skill or a good venue.
See what unlocksAlready a customer? Sign inHow this vault behaves
from 3,000 fills over 13.88 daysTiming indicates rules automated management, confidence 100%.
- · 216.2 fills per day, beyond sustained manual trading.
Overnight activity 8%
Hour-of-day evenness 83%
Cadence regularity 0%
Clock alignment 41%
Fills per day 216.2
Instruments 14
Timing only. This says nothing about whether the strategy is any good, a losing bot is still a bot.
Nearest liquidation, as the venue reports it
ZRO falls 51.1% to 1.0465, from 2.1407 now.
Leverage 5.0× weighted by size, a liquidation starts at the second number, not the first.
The closest liquidation is 51% away at the venue's own reported price. Weighted leverage is 5.0×.
Nearest liquidation
ZRO falls 46.9% to 1.1373, from 2.1407 now.
That is the nearest single instrument breaching this account’s maintenance requirement, so it is a ceiling on safety: a market-wide move hits every leg at once and arrives sooner. Computed from the venue’s own margin state at 2026-10-10 11:20 UTC.
Current exposure
1 positions · $49.8k gross · 1.9x the vault's capital| Instrument | Side | Notional | Share | Entry | Unrealised |
|---|
How the capacity estimate was reached
- 9 of 17 instruments showed no positive edge.
- Impact is inferred from this strategy’s own realised cost, not measured against a book.
- A 10% participation ceiling is applied where venue volume is known.
- Trade size is converted to capital using the strategy’s own capital-to-trade-size ratio.
- Capacity is capped at 50× the largest trade actually observed, beyond that we are extrapolating.
- Measured edge exceeded 100bps per trade and was clipped, above that it is directional luck, not repeatable alpha.
| Instrument | Edge | Taker | Median trade | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZEC | 160bps | 100% | $1.8k | Edge 160.0bps against 9.0bps of realised cost. |
| ENA | 411.1bps | 100% | $615.00 | Edge 411.1bps against 9.0bps of realised cost. |
| GRAM | 111.2bps | 100% | $563.00 | Edge 111.2bps against 9.0bps of realised cost. |
| ZRO | 911.9bps | 100% | $361.00 | Edge 911.9bps against 9.0bps of realised cost. |
| XMR | 535.8bps | 100% | $226.00 | Edge 535.8bps against 9.0bps of realised cost. |
Who is in it
Money in and out
Ledger read 10 hours agoAnalyst tier
Detail is hidden, not absentWho is in this vault, and how much of it is one wallet
A vault that is eighty per cent one depositor is a vault whose price can be reset by a single withdrawal, and whose headline TVL says almost nothing about whether anyone else believes in it. Concentration is the risk a return figure never shows, and it moves before the return line does.
See what unlocksAlready a customer? Sign inWhat changed the value
24 days decomposedThe section above says money moved. This says what the movement WAS. A vault grows because deposits arrived, or because the trading worked, or because it was paid to hold a position, and a size figure renders all three identically.
| Money in and outdeposits less withdrawals, and arriving is not earning | $3,793 |
| Closed tradesrealised on the fills the venue reports | $83,212 |
| Feespaid to the venue on those fills | −$6,420 |
| Fundingpaid or received for holding the positions, from the venue's own ledger | −$3,943 |
| Open positions movedchange in unrealised profit on what was still open | $788 |
| Not explainedwhat the terms above do not account for, 0.1% of the $234,493 that moved | $175 |
| Change in value$45,398 to $123,003, 2026-09-09 to 2026-10-03 | $77,605 |
Performance, which is the change less what arrived and left, is over days and fills.
The shape of the record
109 completed round tripsRebuilt from the venue’s own open and close labels on every fill. A return figure cannot say whether it came from being right often and small or rarely and large, and those are opposite businesses.
Win rate
19%
Payoff
12.94
Profit factor
3.09
Median hold
2.7h
109 round trips, 19% of them profitable, holding a median 2.7 hours. The average win is $7.9k against an average loss of $614. Most trades lose a little and a few pay for all of them, which reads badly on a hit rate and is the more durable shape.
What is still missing
- Operator cohort. We show what the venue still exposes; strategies deleted before we began observing are invisible, and only pre-registration can make a cohort provably complete.
- Gross-to-net waterfall. Returns are venue-reported and not yet decomposed into fees, funding and slippage.
- Off-chain exposure. Anything held on a centralised exchange is invisible to us, so the risk shown is a floor.