Loading
All vaultsThis is my vault, register it
reverse mid curver
B#52 of 249"delta neutral", long stuff mid curvers short, short stuff mid curvers long.
The advertised rate has been moving
Over 19 daily readings it has ranged from -7.82% to -1.23%, averaging -3.70%. The tile below shows today’s quote alone.
19 readings is 19 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.
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 address that runs this vault holds 94% 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 2026-10-07 01:21 UTC. A pattern that stops is cleared rather than left standing.
Taking money
Open
TVL
$155.1k
Return
6.7%
over its watched history, read on 100 of 315 days, thin enough that the figure is an estimate between readings
The venue advertises
-1.3%
the share price implies -50.9% over 27 days, from 39 readings
Its depositors kept
Value and drawdown
This chart shows the last 30 days of a 317 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
- -1.3%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
- -50.9%over 27 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
- $138.3k89% of the vault
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. 1 of 6 is 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?Measured$138.3kWhat the contract will pay out now, read from it. Not the same as what is idle.
- Who runs it, and what else have they run?Measuredreverse mid curverA named operator with a record across every vault they run, including the ones that closed.
- What does it depend on?DeclaredHyperliquid on Hyperliquid
Passport
Identity
Analyst tier
Detail is hidden, not absentHow well it executes
Built from 55 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 55 fills over 105.53 daysTiming indicates discretionary management, confidence 47%.
- · A large share of fills land on minute boundaries.
Overnight activity 0%
Hour-of-day evenness 45%
Cadence regularity 0%
Clock alignment 73%
Fills per day 0.5
Instruments 5
Timing only. This says nothing about whether the strategy is any good, a losing bot is still a bot.
The venue overrode this book
The venue overrode this book: had 1 position settled when the market ended. Most recently 2026-06-15, in TON.
Observed, not modelled, the venue labelled these itself. A liquidation is a margin failure; an auto-deleverage is the venue closing part of a solvent book because the other side failed; a settlement is the market itself ending.
Nearest liquidation, as the venue reports it
HBAR rises 801.9% to 0.84299, from 0.09347 now.
Leverage 11.9× weighted by size, 20× on the most levered leg, a liquidation starts at the second number, not the first.
The closest liquidation is 802% away at the venue's own reported price. Weighted leverage is 11.9×. 15 of 24 positions carry no liquidation price, so the nearest is the nearest we can see.
Current exposure
26 positions · $153.7k gross · 1.0x the vault's capital| Instrument | Side | Notional |
|---|
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DOT | 195.6bps | 100% | $400.00 | Edge 195.6bps against 9.5bps of realised cost. |
| FIL | -44.1bps | 100% | $400.00 | No positive edge observed, capacity is not the binding constraint here. |
Who is in it
Money in and out
Ledger read 2 days 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
19 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 | −$194,464 |
| Closed tradesrealised on the fills the venue reports | $0 |
| Feespaid to the venue on those fills | $0 |
| Fundingpaid or received for holding the positions, from the venue's own ledger | −$85 |
| Open positions movedchange in unrealised profit on what was still open | −$2,553 |
| Not explainedwhat the terms above do not account for, 18.9% of the $38,429 that moved | −$7,269 |
| Change in value$355,044 to $150,674, 2026-09-08 to 2026-09-27 | −$204,370 |
Performance, which is the change less what arrived and left, is −$9,906 over days and fills.
The shape of the record
24 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.
This profile cannot be recomputed from the fills we still hold. The opens that these round trips closed are older than our ninety-day window and have been pruned, while the closes are kept, so a fresh pass finds no round trip at all. The oldest fill left is from 2026-06-15. It was true when it was computed, on 2026-09-12, and it will not change again.
Win rate
54%
Payoff
0.47
Profit factor
0.55
Median hold
24.0h
24 round trips, 54% of them profitable, holding a median 24.0 hours. Average win $1.0k, average loss $2.2k.
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.