Loading
All vaultsThis is my vault, register it
God Why Vault 2
Blikelygod why back to curry hill
One thing worth a look
Patterns in this vault’s record that have more than one explanation. None of them lowers its grade and none of them is a finding of wrongdoing, a ledger cannot separate the readings below, and neither can we.
- The operator holds 100% of this vault themselves.
- Equally consistent with: A manager with their own money at risk, which is usually a good sign. It does mean the return is a personal account’s, not a record of managing anyone else’s.
Measured over the last 30 days, as of 2026-09-16 20:41 UTC. A pattern that stops is cleared rather than left standing.
Taking money
Closed
not accepting deposits
TVL
$192.1k
Return
26.8%
over its watched history
The venue advertises
336.7%
a year, on their own figures
Recent
Value and drawdown
Range
Hover for values. Upper: vault value. 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 contract
0x877f3228…e1b2
NetworkHyperliquid
Platform
Hyperliquid
OperatorGod Why Vault 20x2f33cf0e…0824
Deposit assetUSDC
Where the return came from
Costs exceeded gross profit by 70.7×Gross realised$5.17
Trading fees−$5.17
Funding paid−$360.34
Net realised−$360.34
Unrealised$40.0k
Total$39.6k
That is 20.62% 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.
Underwater over this window. Costs exceeded everything earned.
Computed from 43 fills over the 2d 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 218 snapshot intervals over 1.5 days.
Analyst tier
Detail is hidden, not absentHow well it executes
Built from 254 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 254 fills over 0.07 daysTiming indicates rules automated management, confidence 31%.
- · Observed for under a day, so the overnight signal is not yet available.
- · 3659.5 fills per day, beyond sustained manual trading.
- · A large share of fills land on minute boundaries.
Overnight activity not yet measurable
Hour-of-day evenness 21%
Cadence regularity 0%
Clock alignment 63%
Fills per day 3659.5
Instruments 2
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
CASHCAT falls 60.9% to 0.07195, from 0.18381 now.
Leverage 4.4× weighted by size, 10× on the most levered leg, a liquidation starts at the second number, not the first.
The closest liquidation is 61% away at the venue's own reported price. Weighted leverage is 4.4×.
Nearest liquidation
CASHCAT falls 60.9% to 0.07184, from 0.18352 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 2026-09-17 00:58 UTC.
Current exposure
2 positions · $344.9k gross · 1.8x the vault's capital| Instrument | Side | Notional | Share | Entry | Unrealised |
|---|
How the capacity estimate was reached
- No instrument showed a positive edge against its realised cost.
| Instrument | Edge | Taker | Median trade | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CASHCAT | -2.1bps | 31% | $250.00 | No positive edge observed, capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
| FARTCOIN | -1.5bps | 1% | $316.00 | No positive edge observed, capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
Who is in it
Money in and out
Ledger read 5 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
nothing decomposed yetThe 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.
Nothing can be decomposed for this vault yet: 3 days are held back because a reader has not covered them.
- 1 day: fills have been walked, but not over these days
- 1 day: the funding ledger has been walked, but not over these days
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.