Bottom line up front
Only the most recent public fills are visible, so this audit covers the data covered rather than full account history. This account is -71.73% in the data covered, having burned through $93,157 in realised losses across 720 closed trades. The headline pattern is unambiguous: long trades generated $23,191 profit at a 66% win rate, while short trades lost $116,348 at a 63% win rate. Two catastrophic short positions—ETH down $115,298 and XRP down $35,395—account for 161% of total losses. Structural stops were set but ignored through averaging down, and the account exhibits systematic revenge trading and FOMO re-entry behaviour that has consumed edge where it existed.
What the data shows
The account opened with approximately $129,874 and reached a highest balance in this window of $489,560 on 25 June, then declined to $36,717 by the end of the data covered. The deepest decline in this window was -92.53%, a near-total wipeout from highest balance in this window to lowest balance in this window. The arc is not gradual decay; it is a sharp rally followed by a structural collapse driven by two trades.
Money was made on DOGE ($17,015 realised), MOVE ($9,759), SYRUP ($9,614), FARTCOIN ($9,183), PENGU ($8,070), and BTC ($10,388). These six instruments account for $64,029 of realised profit. The remaining six instruments—ETH, XRP, ARB, SOL, AAVE, and MKR—lost $153,107 combined. The asymmetry is stark: long-side trades won $23,191; short-side trades lost $116,348. The short book was the engine of destruction.
Fees paid were $161.11 gross, but net fee drag was $319.39, indicating a small net rebate from maker activity (87.94% maker fill rate). Fees are immaterial to the outcome. The issue is position sizing and risk management. The two largest losses occurred on structural stops set at 3% (ETH) and 4% (XRP), yet the account held through those levels and averaged down instead of exiting. The ETH short opened on 9 July at $2,959.44, reached a max notional of $748,805, and closed on 18 July at $3,265.25 after 208 hours of holding through adverse price action. The XRP short opened on 10 July at $2.63, reached $342,455 notional, and closed 18.8 hours later at $2.78 after a 5.7% move against the position.
Trade quality
Win rate is 64.44%, which is respectable. Profit factor is 0.52, meaning for every dollar won, the account lost $1.92. Expectancy is -$129.38 per trade. The win/loss ratio is 0.28: average winner is $213.59, average loser is -$751.03. This is a negative expectancy system. The high win rate masks a severe sizing problem: losses are 3.5x larger than wins on average. A 64% win rate with a 0.28 win/loss ratio is mathematically doomed.
Post-mortems
ETH short, 9–18 July 2025. Opened at $2,959.44, closed at $3,265.25 after 208 hours. Max notional $748,805. Loss: -$115,298. Flagged for averaging down and oversized loser. This trade was sized at 115x the median loss. The structural stop was 3%, but the position was held and added to through a 10.4% adverse move. This is the single largest loss in the data covered and the primary driver of account failure.
XRP short, 10–11 July 2025. Opened at $2.63, closed at $2.78 after 18.8 hours. Max notional $342,455. Loss: -$35,395. Flagged for averaging down and oversized loser. This trade was sized at 23x the median loss. The structural stop was 4%, but the position was held through a 5.7% move. This is the second-largest loss and compounded the damage from ETH.
ARB short, 29 June 2025. Opened and closed same day at $0.37 to $0.38 after 2.5 hours. Max notional $96,738. Loss: -$7,254. Flagged as revenge trade and oversized loser. This was opened immediately after a loss on a different coin, sized 4.3x median loss, and closed at a loss within hours.
What the risk simulation reveals
Under a 1% hard stop rule applied historically, the account would have realised $24,617 profit with a -13.07% deepest decline in this window. Under 2%, $49,234 profit with -21.55% deepest decline. Under 4%, $98,469 profit with -31.9% deepest decline. These are gross of fees. The simulation stopped 14 episodes early due to stop triggers. The implication is direct: mechanical stops would have reversed the outcome entirely. The account had edge—64% win rate, positive long-side PnL—but destroyed it through position sizing and stop violation.
Open positions
No open positions at the end of the data covered.
Honest summary
- Visible strength: Long-side directional bias generated consistent profit ($23,191 across 66% win rate). DOGE, MOVE, BTC, and SYRUP all showed edge when traded long. The account can identify winning setups.
- Visible weakness: Short-side trades are a systematic loss engine (-$116,348 across 63% win rate). The two largest losses were both short positions held through structural stops via averaging down. Position sizing is inverted: losers are 3.5x larger than winners on average.
- Visible weakness: Revenge trading and FOMO re-entry are documented in the behavioural flags. Five revenge trades are recorded, including the ARB short on 29 June (opened after a loss, sized 4.3x median, closed at a loss). FARTCOIN was re-entered five times after previous closes, with three of those re-entries losing money.
- Data scope: Only the most recent 10,000 fills are visible. Earlier account history is not available. The data covered spans 157 days and includes 720 closed trades, which is a sufficient sample for the patterns shown, but full account history may reveal different behaviour.