Loading
All vaultsThis is my vault, register it
God Why Vault 2
evidence grade Bsoftware-run classification: likelygod why back to curry hill
Due-diligence report: complete, dated, with a digest anybody can check
One thing worth a look
Patterns in this vault’s record that have more than one explanation.
What these are
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 address that runs this vault holds 100% of it.
- Equally consistent with: A manager with their own money at risk, which is usually a good sign, and then the return is a personal account’s rather than a record of managing anyone else’s. It can also be a treasury or a custodian: the chain shows who holds the shares, not whose money they are.
Measured over the last 30 days, as of 2026-11-01 03:01 UTC. A pattern that stops is cleared rather than left standing.
Taking money
Closed
not accepting deposits
TVL
$100.00
Return
-35.0%
over its watched history
The venue advertises
29.6%
the share price implies 30.2% over 30 days, from 386 readings
Performance
Leaving, in the venue's terms
closed to deposits
no lock published: 0 follower records and they do not agree · leaving does not close the positions · read 2026-11-01
Recent
2.5% · —
30d · 90d
Market move behind it
11.9%
54.2% fall at 4.5×
Return per book-turn
-0.001%
turns 807.1× a day
Max drawdown
The record behind these figures
History
45d
over 42 readings from one source. The record below is longer: 1,231 readings in total (1,231 readings, all taken at the time), and the metrics use one source family rather than mixing them.
Record begins
2026-09-15
began 2026-09-15, and the record starts with it
Record rests on
Grade B
The whole record is grade B.
Confidence
12%
in these metrics
Six risks, read separately
The same six across every vault we scoreSix risks, read separately
Strategy risk band High
Severe market and depositor concentration risk on this vault, against an overall band of high.
How this is read
Due-diligence report
- Complete: every section, nothing withheld
- Issued: a digest anybody can check with us
- Dated: every figure with when it was read
- Portable: one file for a committee or a file
The advertised rate has been moving
Over 43 daily readings it has ranged from -49.61% to 500.00%, averaging 17.97%. The tile above shows today’s quote alone.
How this is read
43 readings is 43 days, not a year: all recorded by us, which we began on 2026-09-19. The window grows with the record rather than standing in for a longer one.
How much could leave, by amount
Your position
Pick or type an amount to weigh it against both: what the venue says could leave now, and the largest single withdrawal anybody has made here.
How you get outNo notice periodread 2026-10-16
The contract imposes no notice period and no request step: a redeem that succeeds settles in the transaction that asks for it, and it succeeds only if the vault holds enough to pay at that moment, which is the liquidity reading and a separate question.
How this is read
There is no queue and no lock-up in the contract.
Value and drawdown
This chart shows the last 30 days of a 47 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.
- Current quoted rate
- 29.6%
- Rewards inside that rate
- No reward rate is published, so we cannot say whether the quote includes one.
- Realised return
- 30.2%over 30 days
- Fee basis
- Inside the share price
- Withdrawable nowagainst it
- $0.000.0% of the vault
- History quality
- 386readings
- What it depends on
- 51risk score
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.
How this is read
It ignores deposits and withdrawals: only trading moves this line.
Value heldNet money put in
Range
Solid: what the vault holds.
How this is read
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. 1 of 6 is not measured for this vault.
| Source mark | Question | What we hold | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| What does it hold or lend into? | USDCThe venue names a deposit asset. What the vault actually holds behind it has not been read. | Declared | |
| How much could leave now? | $0.00What the contract will pay out now, read from it. Not the same as what is idle. | Measured | |
| Who runs it, and what else have they run? | God Why Vault 2A named operator with a record across every vault they run, including the ones that closed. | Measured |
Passport
Identity
Where the return came from
Gross realised−$26.8k
Trading fees−$245.87
Funding paid−$165.74
Net realised−$27.2k
Unrealised$4.2k
Total−$23.0k
That is -22,967.95% 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.
- Gross realised PnL is not positive, so the cost ratio is not meaningful.
Underwater over this window. Costs exceeded everything earned.
Computed from 1,600 fills over the 7d 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 187 snapshot intervals over 6.9 days. 11 of 198 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 2,300 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 2,300 fills over 23.37 daysTiming indicates model assisted management, confidence 100%.
- · 98.4 fills per day, beyond sustained manual trading.
Overnight activity 1%
Hour-of-day evenness 74%
Cadence regularity 0%
Clock alignment 25%
Fills per day 98.4
Instruments 6
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
SPX rises 69.6% to 0.65066, from 0.38354 now.
Leverage 4.5× weighted by size, 5× on the most levered leg, a liquidation starts at the second number, not the first.
Our margin model puts this at 0.0% instead. Both are shown because the disagreement is real: the venue knows its own maintenance requirement, and the model knows what a market-wide move does to every leg at once.
The closest liquidation is 70% away at the venue's own reported price. Weighted leverage is 4.5×. 1 of 3 positions carry no liquidation price, so the nearest is the nearest we can see.
Nearest liquidation
CASHCAT falls 0.0% to 0.12127, from 0.12127 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 2026-10-09 19:24 UTC.
Current exposure
3 positions · $261.4k gross · 2614.1x the vault's capital| Instrument | Side | Notional |
|---|
How the capacity estimate was reached
- 4 of 6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PENGU | 988.7bps | 100% | $392.00 | Limited by market share: 10% of 0M daily volume across 36 trades a day. |
| SPX | 1020.3bps | 29% | $131.00 | Limited by market share: 10% of 1M daily volume across 133 trades a day. |
| CASHCAT | -384.9bps | 5% | $116.00 | No positive edge observed, capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
| FARTCOIN | -554.1bps | 56% | $237.00 | No positive edge observed, capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
| ZEC |
Who is in it, and what moved in and out
Ledger read 25 days agoAnalyst tier
Who is in this vault, and what moved in and out
Locked here: every depositor we read with their share of the vault, the largest single wallet, and the ledger of each deposit and withdrawal. 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.
See what unlocksAlready a customer? Sign inWhat changed the value
2 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.
What is still missing
What this page cannot show yet, and why.
What they are
- 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.