Loading
All vaults
This is my vault, register it
XJ Systematic Dual Alpha
BA systematic approach that captures the momentum of market leaders with absolute discipline. Join a vault designed to turn trend strength into steady, controlled growth.
How you get outNo notice periodread 2026-10-16
The contract imposes NO notice period: a redeem settles in the transaction that asks for it. That is not a promise of an instant exit — it is still subject to the vault having the money, which is the liquidity reading and a separate question — but there is no queue, no request step and no lock-up in the contract.
Six risks, read separately
The same six across every vault we scoreSix risks, read separately
Strategy risk band High
SEVERE market and concentration risk on this vault, against an overall band of high. The band weighs them against everything else, which is why it can read better without being in conflict.
| Risk | Reads | In the band |
|---|
This vault advertised a rate and no longer does
It quoted 262.02% at its highest and was still quoting on 2026-10-21. It quotes nothing now. A vault that has never paid and a vault that has stopped paying both read as nothing on the tiles below, and they are not the same proposition.
From 36 daily readings of the venue’s own advertised rate, which we began taking on 2026-09-19. It says the rate moved, not why.
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 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 2026-10-25 00:00 UTC. A pattern that stops is cleared rather than left standing.
Taking money
Open
TVL
$9.5k
Return
-19.0%
over its watched history, read on 99 of 346 days, thin enough that the figure is an estimate between readings
The venue advertises
-14.1%
the share price implies -180.5% over 29 days, from 230 readings. No verdict is drawn: one of the two is beyond planning around
Value and drawdown
This chart shows the last 30 days of a 346 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
- -14.1%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
- -180.5%over 29 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
- $7.8k82% 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$7.8kWhat 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?MeasuredXJ Systematic DualA 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
Vault contract
0x951703a6…5865
NetworkHyperliquid
Platform
Hyperliquid
Deposit assetUSDC
Created on-chain2025-11-06
Where the return came from
Gross realised−$154.18
Trading fees−$6.12
Funding paid−$56.26
Net realised−$216.56
Unrealised$1.6k
Total$1.4k
That is 14.95% 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 60 fills over the 30d 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 6421 snapshot intervals over 30 days. 92 of 6513 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 178 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 178 fills over 86.49 daysTiming indicates discretionary management, confidence 61%.
- · 37 instruments traded concurrently.
Overnight activity 9%
Hour-of-day evenness 69%
Cadence regularity 0%
Clock alignment 25%
Fills per day 2.1
Instruments 37
Timing only. This says nothing about whether the strategy is any good, a losing bot is still a bot.
Current exposure
15 positions · $12.5k gross · 1.3x the vault's capitalHow the capacity estimate was reached
- No instrument showed a positive edge against its realised cost.
Who is in it
Money in and out
Ledger read 40 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
23 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 | −$0 |
| Closed tradesrealised on the fills the venue reports | −$3 |
| Feespaid to the venue on those fills | −$4 |
| Fundingpaid or received for holding the positions, from the venue's own ledger | −$54 |
| Open positions movedchange in unrealised profit on what was still open | −$376 |
| Not explainedwhat the terms above do not account for, 0.1% of the $5,171 that moved | $3 |
| Change in value$11,097 to $10,711, 2026-09-24 to 2026-10-21 | −$386 |
Performance, which is the change less what arrived and left, is −$385 over days and fills.
The shape of the record
23 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
22%
Payoff
1.94
Profit factor
0.54
Median hold
8.6d
23 round trips, 22% of them profitable, holding a median 8.6 days. The average win is $104 against an average loss of $53. 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.