Loading
Hypernova
B#67 of 77All trades fade, but death is never an end. Despite hardships, eternal glory may still lie ahead.
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 2026-08-24 17:53Z. A pattern that stops is cleared rather than left standing.
Taking money
Open
TVL
$38.4k
Return
-6.4%
over observed history
Recent
-0.8% · 2.8%
30d · 90d · 1.8% over a year
Max drawdown
15.9%
peak to trough
Sortino
-0.21
return per unit of downside risk
History
1.2y
806 observations
Confidence
33%
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 contract0x800b3a89…f1bf
Network
Hyperliquid
PlatformHyperliquid
OperatorHypernova0x8cc49ef4…db7f
Deposit assetUSDC
Created on-chain2025-06-15
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 modediscretionary (60% 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 confidence33%65 observations over 432 days
Ranking#67 of 77 perp vault
Alignment and capacity
Operator’s own share100.0%
Commission10%
Depositor wallets3
Concentration1.00 · largest holder 100%
Estimated capacity$1.92M ($961.1k–$3.84M) · floor
Net flow 30d$0.00
Where the return came from
Costs consumed 10% of gross profitGross realised$1.3k
Trading fees−$128.76
Funding received$0.03
Net realised$1.1k
Unrealised$19.00
Total$1.1k
That is 2.98% 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 165 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 165 fills over 86.01 daysTaker share 44% by value
Fee rate 2.83bps
Daily turnover $5.3k
Annual fee drag 1.4%
How this vault behaves
from 165 fills over 86.01 daysTiming indicates discretionary management, confidence 60%.
- · No strong automation signature in the timing.
Overnight activity 12%
Hour-of-day evenness 76%
Cadence regularity 0%
Clock alignment 42%
Fills per day 1.9
Instruments 3
Timing only. This says nothing about whether the strategy is any good — a losing bot is still a bot.
Current exposure
1 positions · $9.6k gross · 0.3x the vault's capital| Instrument | Side | Notional | Share | Entry | Unrealised | Leverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ETH | long | $9.6k | 100% | 1920 | $19.00 | 20x |
Snapshot taken 2026-08-19 11:09 UTC. A strategy that flips intraday can look flat at every snapshot and still carry risk in between. Click an instrument to see every other vault holding it.
How the capacity estimate was reached
- 1 of 2 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.
- Capped at 50x current capital; beyond that the estimate is unfalsifiable.
- At least one instrument hit the observed-size cap, so the total is a floor rather than an estimate.
| Instrument | Edge | Taker | Median trade | Limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HYPE | 286.1bps | 25% | $452.00 | Edge 286.1bps against 3.9bps of realised cost. Estimate limited by observed trade sizes — treat as a floor, not a ceiling. |
| BTC | -10.2bps | 18% | $339.00 | No positive edge observed — capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
Who is in it
as at 2026-08-24 01:27Largest wallet
100.0%
Top five
100.0%
Concentration
1.000
Wallets seen
3
| # | Wallet | Deposited | Share | All-time P&L | In for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Leader | $38.9k | 100.0% | -$1.1k | 434d |
| 2 | 0xa8f8debb…673f | $1.50 | 0.0% | $4.16 | 34d |
| 3 | 0xbc3fe5fa…08bb | $0.00 | 0.0% | -$1.7k | 426d |
Shares are of the capital we can observe, not of reported TVL ($38.4k) — 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 22 hours agoIn
$174.4k
6 deposits
Out
$0.00
0 withdrawals
Net
$174.4k
453.7% of TVL
Window
398d
last 6 movements
| When | Type | Amount | Of vault | Transaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-20 17:55 | deposit | $1.3k | 3.47% | 0x5fef0f62…aabe |
| 2025-07-20 05:41 | deposit | $34.0k | 88.40% | 0xcc5b1409…a3d2 |
| 2025-07-18 16:51 | deposit | $34.1k | 88.66% | 0x1db05cdc…ddd6 |
| 2025-07-12 15:15 | deposit | $35.0k | 91.04% | 0x0b601463…1bb0 |
| 2025-06-23 17:40 | deposit | $30.0k | 78.04% | 0xf138a1a4…31be |
| 2025-06-18 00:47 | deposit | $40.0k | 104.05% | 0x842474de…6a8a |
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
235 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
46%
Payoff
0.93
Profit factor
0.79
Median hold
45m
235 round trips, 46% of them profitable, holding a median 45 minutes. Average win $108, average loss $116.
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.