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 loss-making in the data covered: -53.75% realised PnL, -$69,406.75 in absolute terms. The highest balance in this window was $228,248 on 3 June; the lowest was $45,883 on 28 June, a deepest decline in this window of -79.9%. The core failure is structural: a 14.29% win rate, a profit factor of 0.06, and an expectancy of -$2,478.81 per closed trade. Four oversized losses—BTC at -$49,409, ONDO at -$3,207, and two HYPE trades totalling -$5,934—account for 85% of realised losses. The account has no edge on any instrument except TON and JTO, which together generated $2,532.60 against $88,560 in total closed losses.
What the data shows
The account opened on 15 May 2026 and has completed 28 closed trades in the data covered, with 12 positions currently open. The trajectory is sharply negative: the account began with an estimated $129,120 and is now at $59,714, having burned through $69,406 in realised losses plus $26,494 in fees. The fee drag is material but secondary; the core problem is that 85.7% of closed trades lose money.
By instrument, the pattern is uniform failure. BTC generated -$50,555 across 4 episodes with a 0% win rate. ETH lost -$8,227.81 across 10 episodes, also 0% win rate. HYPE, ONDO, SKY, S, FOGO, LINK, ETHFI, and SOL are all loss-making. Only TON (1 episode, +$2,257.56) and JTO (1 episode, +$275.04) show wins. The account is entirely long-biased; no short positions were closed profitably.
The two largest losses are instructive. The BTC trade opened on 15 May at $78,321.80 and closed on 17 May at $78,284.77, a -0.28% move that cost $49,409.45. The position was sized at $3.585M notional with 40x leverage on a $129k account—a structural stop distance of only 0.85% to liquidation. This was a revenge trade: it opened immediately after a -$355 SOL loss. The ONDO trade opened on 16 May at $0.35, closed on 18 May at $0.34, and lost $3,207.28 on a $228M notional position. Both trades show maximum adverse excursion (MAE) well within the structural stop distance, meaning a disciplined stop would have prevented most of the damage.
Fees consumed $26,494.10 of the $61.14M in closed trade volume, a ratio of 0.043%. This is not exceptional but not the primary leak. The realised PnL before fees would have been -$61,911.96, still a catastrophic loss.
Trade quality
Win rate of 14.29% against a loss rate of 85.71%. Profit factor of 0.06—for every dollar won, the account lost $16.67. Average win of $1,049.04; average loss of -$3,066.79, a win/loss ratio of 0.34. Expectancy of -$2,478.81 per closed trade. These numbers describe an account with no edge and no discipline. The longest win streak was 1 trade. The longest loss streak was 9 consecutive losses. A 21.05% win rate under a 1% stop rule (simulated gross of fees) would have limited losses to -$10,609.23 and deepest decline in that window to -8.84%; under a 4% rule, losses would have been -$42,436.92 with a deepest decline in that window of -34.85%. The account's actual behaviour—no stops in place on any open position—cost it roughly $40,000 in the data covered.
Post-mortems
BTC long, 15–17 May 2026. Opened at $78,321.80, closed at $78,284.77, -$49,409.45 loss. Position notional peaked at $3.585M on 40x leverage. This was a revenge trade following a -$355 SOL loss. The structural stop distance was 0.85%, meaning the account was liquidation-adjacent on a micro move. MAE was only -0.28%, well within the stop distance. The trade held for 52.59 hours and never showed meaningful profit (MFE +1.05%). This is a textbook over-leverage, revenge-driven liquidation risk that should have been stopped at -0.85%.
ONDO long, 16–18 May 2026. Opened at $0.35, closed at $0.34, -$3,207.28 loss. Position notional peaked at $228M on 10x leverage. Held for 45.51 hours. MAE was -3.12%, exceeding the structural stop distance of 1.66%. No stop was in place. MFE was +1.73%, so the trade briefly showed profit before reversing. This is a second oversized loser in the same 48-hour window, compounding losses after the BTC blowup.
What the risk simulator reveals
Under a 1% stop rule applied retroactively to all closed trades (gross of fees), the account would have realised -$10,609.23 with a deepest decline in that window of -8.84% and a 21.05% win rate. Under a 2% rule, losses would have been -$21,218.46 with a deepest decline in that window of -17.59%. Under a 4% rule, losses would have been -$42,436.92 with a deepest decline in that window of -34.85%. In all three scenarios, 3 episodes were stopped early. The actual loss of -$69,406.75 with a deepest decline in this window of -79.9% shows that the absence of stops cost the account between $27,000 (4% rule) and $58,800 (1% rule) in the data covered.
Open positions
The largest open position is ETH long: 400.4743 contracts, entry $1,786.66, mark $1,793.50, 25x leverage, cross margin, held 54 days, unrealised +$2,735.54 (+9.56% ROE), liquidation at $1,703.67. This position has accrued $777.13 in funding costs since opening. No stop is in place.
BTC long is open with 2 contracts, entry $63,909, mark $64,063, 40x leverage, cross margin, held less than 1 day, unrealised +$308 (+9.64% ROE), liquidation at $46,212.08. Funding cost since open is $1.60. No stop.
ONDO long is open with 93,641 contracts, entry $0.3163, mark $0.3293, 10x leverage, cross margin, held 53 days, unrealised +$1,213.35 (+40.96% ROE), no liquidation price. Funding cost since open is $134.76. No stop.
A short position in xyz:CL (crude oil futures) is open with 0.793 contracts, entry $100.78, mark $71.429, 5x