Loading
FFLGN Hedge
BHedge for FFLGN
Taking money
Closed
not accepting deposits
TVL
$19.0k
Return
-0.0%
over observed history
Recent
—
30d · 90d
Max drawdown
0.0%
peak to trough
Sortino
—
return per unit of downside risk
History
7d
625 observations
Confidence
2%
in these metrics
Value and drawdown
Range
Hover for values. Upper: vault value, with BTC indexed to the same starting capital. Lower: how far below its own peak it was.
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
Passport
Identity
Vault contract0x97554ce4…470a
Network
Hyperliquid
PlatformHyperliquid
OperatorFFLGN Hedge0x1e2235fc…96c6
Deposit assetUSDC
Created on-chain2026-04-07
First observed by us2026-08-11
Statuslive
What is deciding
unregisteredStrategy versionNot attested — the operator has not bound this record to a specific version
Model providerNot attested — no model declared
ModelNot attested — no model declared
System prompt hashNot attested — no prompt commitment
Policy hashNot attested — no policy commitment
Inferred modemodel assisted (100% confidence)
These fields are empty because nobody has attested them, not because we failed to find them. An operator who registers gets a record that provably cannot be edited after the fact — and a grade no unregistered strategy can reach.
How much to trust this
Provenance gradeBReal capital, readable at the venue — but the operator’s full cohort is unproven.
Machine-managedNot established
Metric confidence2%65 observations over 7 days
RankingNot ranked — insufficient history
Alignment and capacity
Operator’s own share10.0%
Commission10%
Depositor wallets4
Concentration0.82 · largest holder 90%
Estimated capacity$100.9k ($50.5k–$201.9k)
Net flow 30d$0.00
Where the return came from
Costs consumed 34% of gross profitGross realised$4.1k
Trading fees−$1.4k
Net realised$2.7k
That is 14.40% 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.
Computed from 812 recorded fills and the funding on currently open positions. It covers the window we have observed, not the vault’s whole life.
How well it executes
from 812 fills over 55.79 daysTaker share 100% by value
Fee rate 4.5bps
Daily turnover $55.7k
Annual fee drag 48.3%
- · Almost entirely taker flow: this strategy pays the spread on nearly every trade, so its edge has to clear that first.
How this vault behaves
from 812 fills over 55.79 daysTiming indicates model assisted management, confidence 100%.
- · No strong automation signature in the timing.
Overnight activity 5%
Hour-of-day evenness 79%
Cadence regularity 0%
Clock alignment 26%
Fills per day 14.6
Instruments 4
Timing only. This says nothing about whether the strategy is any good — a losing bot is still a bot.
How the capacity estimate was reached
- 2 of 4 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.
| Instrument | Edge | Taker | Median trade | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ETH | 21.2bps | 100% | $2.8k | Edge 21.2bps against 9.5bps of realised cost. |
| SOL | 22.8bps | 100% | $2.3k | Edge 22.8bps against 9.5bps of realised cost. |
| BTC | -8.1bps | 100% | $1.4k | No positive edge observed — capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
| HYPE | -42.8bps | 100% | $627.00 | No positive edge observed — capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
Who is in it
as at 2026-08-23 19:26Largest wallet
90.0%
Top five
100.0%
Concentration
0.820
Wallets seen
4
| # | Wallet | Deposited | Share | All-time P&L | In for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0xb2fcb4e2…cfe8 | $17.1k | 90.0% | -$5.1k | 137d |
| 2 | Leader | $1.9k | 10.0% | -$483.69 | 137d |
| 3 | 0x38d23c4f…994e | $0.00 | 0.0% | -$512.76 | 137d |
| 4 | 0x0da918c7…ec89 | $0.00 | 0.0% | -$225.75 | 137d |
Shares are of the capital we can observe, not of reported TVL ($19.0k) — dividing by a total that includes wallets outside our sample would understate every share and make concentration look better than it is.
Money in and out
Ledger read 30 hours agoIn
$29.7k
6 deposits
Out
$0.00
0 withdrawals
Net
$29.7k
156.8% of TVL
Window
100d
last 6 movements
| When | Type | Amount | Of vault | Transaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-16 19:44 | deposit | $10.2k | 53.67% | 0x133e9e40…a237 |
| 2026-07-16 19:43 | deposit | $1.0k | 5.27% | 0x559809c8…4e10 |
| 2026-04-07 19:41 | deposit | $374.00 | 1.97% | 0x4bb26bf1…2164 |
| 2026-04-07 19:40 | deposit | $973.00 | 5.13% | 0xb645676a…94bb |
| 2026-04-07 19:38 | deposit | $15.5k | 81.88% | 0x7f35854f…d961 |
| 2026-04-07 19:37 | deposit | $1.7k | 8.84% | 0x7c33fd87…3c96 |
Shares are against the vault’s current size, so an old movement is measured against today rather than against what the vault was then. It is the comparison a reader wants — how much of this vault that was — and it is not the same as the share it represented at the time.
The shape of the record
79 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
29%
Payoff
2.63
Profit factor
1.08
Median hold
22.5h
79 round trips, 29% of them profitable, holding a median 22.5 hours. The average win is $790 against an average loss of $301. 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.