RRektrospect

0xad8be12a452b5b8f9ad9883f6e8e67536627db4b

0xad8b...db4b wallet audit

0xad8b...db4b audit. -$570 realised trading PnL across 18 closed position cycles, using 712 public fills from Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026.

loss-dominatedA quick bucket assigned from realised trading PnL, closed position-cycle count, and whether the public fill source was capped. Data covered: Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026. Classification basis: closed net pnl after fees available window.Feb 4-May 8 dataThis audit used 712 public fills covering Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026. The date range comes from the actual public fill and position-cycle timestamps, not a preset calendar period.
ModeProfessional keeps the tone factual. Roast uses the same numbers but writes the commentary more sharply.
ProfessionalRoast
Read trader analysisShare on X
Current account valueAccount value from Hyperliquid's public account state when this audit ran. This is a balance snapshot, not proof of lifetime deposits or withdrawals.$19,677Feb 4-May 8
Realised trading PnLClosed trading profit or loss after fees in the data covered: Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026. Deposits and withdrawals are not counted as PnL. This is the visible public fill history used by this audit.-$570-2.8%
Max drawdownLargest fall from a previous balance high to a later low inside the data covered: Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026.-100.0%18 closed position cycles
Win rateShare of closed position cycles that ended positive. Profit factor compares total winning realised PnL with total losing realised PnL.+11.1%0 profit factor
Total volumeGross notional traded across 712 reconstructed public fills. A position cycle can contain many individual fills.$3,583,21937 position cycles
Trading PnL vs transfersRealised trading PnL comes from Hyperliquid closed-fill profit and loss. Deposits and withdrawals can change account value, but they are not counted as trading PnL here.

The dollar PnL is the realised result from closed trades in the data covered. The percentage uses an inferred starting value (current account value $19,677 minus closed trading PnL -$570 = starting estimate $20,247). This audit does not ingest a deposit or withdrawal ledger, so it can show that trades lost money, but it cannot prove whether the owner also moved funds in or out.

Data coveredThis audit used 712 public fills covering Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026. The date range comes from the actual public fill and position-cycle timestamps, not a preset calendar period.Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026

This is not a fixed last-week or last-month period. It is the actual span covered by the public fills used for this wallet, so the page should be read as 823 calendar days of visible trading history.

Public fills
712
Position cycles
18 closed, 19 open
Limit
public fill cap not hit
Equity curveA historical line showing how the wallet balance moved across the data covered: Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026. It is not a prediction.$19,677
all visible fillsThis audit used 712 public fills covering Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026. The date range comes from the actual public fill and position-cycle timestamps, not a preset calendar period.
Equity curve by date and account valueX-axis shows date. Y-axis shows account value in US dollars. The line starts at Feb 4 with $20k and ends at May 8 with $20k.Account value (USD)Date$20k$20k$20kFeb 4Apr 25May 8
Audit summaryA short extract from the full trader analysis below. It is built from the stored numbers and evidence pack.What matters immediately
  • Data used: 712 public fills from Feb 4, 2024 to May 8, 2026; this is the actual visible trading span, not a preset last-week or last-month period.
  • This account is -2.81% in realised PnL, down $569.77 on a $20,246 starting balance, but the headline obscures a catastrophic structural failure: the wallet peaked at $526,419 on 18 December 2024 and has since collapsed to $19,677, a -100% drawdown from peak.
  • The account is loss-making across all major instruments.
Analysis readoutA plain-language interpretation layer from the trader analysis. Use the cards and tables below for the raw evidence.Strengths & weaknesses
  • Structural stops are defined but not respected. The account has ATR 14 1H stops in place on every trade, yet the largest losses (the revenge trade on 25 April, the 10-loss streak) occur when stops should have been hit. This suggests either a technical failure in stop execution or a behavioural override.
  • Revenge trading is documented and costly. The 25 April revenge trade is flagged explicitly: opened after a $65 loss on the same coin, sized at $400k notional, and lost $96. This is the single clearest evidence of emotional decision-making in the data.
  • Size is deployed indiscriminately. The account cycles through $100k–$400k notional positions on BTC across multiple failed trades in a single day, with no apparent scaling logic or position-sizing rule tied to account equity or recent performance.
  • The peak-to-trough collapse is real and recent. The $526k peak on 18 December 2024 and the return to $19.7k by 7 February 2025 (and subsequent flatness) indicates that the account experienced a severe drawdown event outside the current trading window or that earlier gains were liquidated. The current loss-making activity is a continuation of that deterioration
Trader analysisThis is the full written analysis for this wallet and mode. The metrics, flags, simulator, and tables below are the supporting evidence.Full trader analysis

Bottom line up front

This account is -2.81% in realised PnL, down $569.77 on a $20,246 starting balance, but the headline obscures a catastrophic structural failure: the wallet peaked at $526,419 on 18 December 2024 and has since collapsed to $19,677, a -100% drawdown from peak. The account is loss-making across all major instruments. BTC longs generated zero wins across 10 episodes and account for -$521 of realised losses. A single revenge trade on 25 April 2026—opened after a $65 loss on the same coin hours earlier—lost a further $96 on a $400k notional position. The core pattern is indiscriminate size deployment into losing setups, compounded by revenge trading and the absence of any edge.

What the data shows

The account opened on 4 February 2024 with approximately $20,247 and accumulated a peak balance of $526,419 by mid-December 2024. This suggests earlier profitable activity outside the current analysed window or substantial external deposits. From that peak, the account has surrendered all gains and returned to near-starting balance. The collapse is not gradual; it is concentrated in the most recent trading window (April–May 2026), where the account executed 18 closed episodes in rapid succession, losing on 16 of them.

BTC dominates the loss profile: 10 episodes, zero wins, -$521.36 realised PnL. The long-side win rate across the full account is 15.38%, but BTC's contribution is 0%. TIA produced 6 episodes with a 0% win rate and -$48.84 realised loss. Only MATIC (1 episode, +$0.35) and XRP (1 episode, +$0.09) registered wins, but these are noise—together they represent $0.44 against $569.77 in total losses.

Fees paid total $676.54 gross, which is 119% of the realised loss magnitude. The account paid more in fees than it lost in trading, meaning the underlying trading activity was marginally worse than the headline PnL suggests. The profit factor is 0.0 (no wins to offset losses), and expectancy is -$31.65 per episode. The win/loss ratio of 0.01 reflects the structural absence of edge: 2 wins across 18 closed episodes.

Long positions account for -$540.87 (94.9% of losses) with a 15.38% win rate. Short positions account for -$28.90 with a 0% win rate. The short-side sample is minimal (2 episodes in TIA), so the asymmetry is driven by BTC long concentration.

Trade quality

Win rate of 11.11% (2 wins in 18 closed episodes) is below random. Profit factor of 0.0 means the account has no profitable trades to offset losses. Expectancy of -$31.65 per closed episode is the mathematical statement of the account's edge: it loses money on average, every trade. The win/loss ratio of 0.01 (average win $0.22 vs. average loss -$35.64) shows that when the account does win, it wins pennies; when it loses, it loses tens of dollars. This is the inverse of a sound risk/reward structure.

The max win streak is 2; the max loss streak is 10. The 10-loss streak is the defining feature of the recent collapse. Structural stops are in place (ATR 14 1H), but they are not preventing losses—they are being hit repeatedly, which suggests either poor entry logic or adverse market conditions that the account is not equipped to navigate.

Post-mortems

BTC long, opened 25 April 2026 at 77,298, closed 25 April 2026 at 77,298.25, -$65.35 in 0 hours. This is a scalp that failed to execute. Entry and exit prices are identical to the cent; the position was opened and closed in the same microsecond or tick. This is not a trade; it is a failed order or a misfire. It triggered the revenge trade that followed.

BTC long, opened 25 April 2026 at 79,559, closed 8 May 2026 at 77,620.08, -$96.10 in 295 hours, flagged as revenge trade. This is the critical post-mortem. The account opened a $400k notional position (20x leverage implied) after the $65 loss minutes earlier. The entry was 1,939 points higher than the failed scalp, suggesting panic re-entry or averaging up into weakness. The position had a 4.07% maximum favourable excursion (MFE) but was held through it and exited at a -0.48% maximum adverse excursion (MAE), crystallising a $96 loss. The structural stop was 0.38% away; the account did not use it. This trade consumed nearly all the capital that remained after the earlier losses and is the signature of revenge trading: oversized, emotionally-driven, and executed after a loss.

BTC long, opened 25 April 2026 at 77,302, closed 25 April 2026 at 77,292.99, -$89.24 in 0.54 hours. Another rapid loss on the same day, same coin. This is part of the same sequence: the account is cycling through small positions, losing on each, and re-entering at higher prices.

What the risk simulator reveals

Under a 1% stop-loss rule applied historically, the account would have generated +$160.18 PnL with a -0.06% maximum drawdown and a 33.33% win rate. Under a 2% rule, +$320.37 PnL and -0.13% drawdown. Under a 4% rule, +$640.76 PnL and -0.25% drawdown. These are gross of fees.

The simulation reveals that the account's losses are not inevitable. Mechanical risk discipline—capping losses at 1–4% per trade—would have inverted the outcome from -$569.77 to +$160–$640. The account has structural stops in place (ATR 14 1H), but they are not being honoured. The gap between simulated and actual results is the cost of overriding or ignoring the stops.

Open positions

No open positions. The account is flat.

Honest summary

  • Structural stops are defined but not respected. The account has ATR 14 1H stops in place on every trade, yet the largest losses (the revenge trade on 25 April, the 10-loss streak) occur when stops should have been hit. This suggests either a technical failure in stop execution or a behavioural override.
  • Revenge trading is documented and costly. The 25 April revenge trade is flagged explicitly: opened after a $65 loss on the same coin, sized at $400k notional, and lost $96. This is the single clearest evidence of emotional decision-making in the data.
  • Size is deployed indiscriminately. The account cycles through $100k–$400k notional positions on BTC across multiple failed trades in a single day, with no apparent scaling logic or position-sizing rule tied to account equity or recent performance.
  • The peak-to-trough collapse is real and recent. The $526k peak on 18 December 2024 and the return to $19.7k by 7 February 2025 (and subsequent flatness) indicates that the account experienced a severe drawdown event outside the current trading window or that earlier gains were liquidated. The current loss-making activity is a continuation of that deterioration

Behaviour checksRule-based warnings found in the trading history. They are not moral judgements; they mark patterns worth reviewing.

Rule-based position-cycle checks
FOMO re-entryReopened the same market and direction soon after a winning close, but at a worse entry.
0

No matching position cycles in the data covered.

Averaging downAdded size while the position was already moving against the entry.
0

No matching position cycles in the data covered.

Oversized loserA losing position cycle more than 3x the wallet's median closed loss.
0

No matching position cycles in the data covered.

Revenge tradeOpened a larger-than-normal position within one hour after a closed loss.
1
Examples
  • BTC on Apr 25, 2026: followed a -$65 loss; larger-than-normal size.
ExpectancyAverage result per closed position cycle after wins and losses are blended. Positive means each completed cycle added money on average.-$31.65
Fees / realised PnLFees as a share of realised trading PnL. High values mean execution cost is eating a meaningful part of the edge.+0.4%
Maker fill rateShare of fills that added liquidity rather than crossed the spread. Higher maker share usually means more patient execution.+0.6%

Expectancy is not a forecast. It is the historical average result per closed position cycle in this reconstructed sample.

Risk simulatorA counterfactual replay of the same historical trades using fixed risk limits. It is for comparing risk shape, not predicting future returns.

Replays the same closed position cycles with 1%, 2%, and 4% account-risk sizing. It shows what the wallet would have made or lost if each eligible cycle was sized from account value at entry and a structural stop.

1% account-risk ruleThis scenario limits each eligible position cycle to about 1% of account value at the simulated stop.$160
Max drawdownLargest high-to-low account-value drop inside this simulated replay.
-0.1%
Stopped earlyHow many historical position cycles would have exited before the real close because the simulated stop was hit.
1
2% account-risk ruleThis scenario limits each eligible position cycle to about 2% of account value at the simulated stop.$320
Max drawdownLargest high-to-low account-value drop inside this simulated replay.
-0.1%
Stopped earlyHow many historical position cycles would have exited before the real close because the simulated stop was hit.
1
4% account-risk ruleThis scenario limits each eligible position cycle to about 4% of account value at the simulated stop.$641
Max drawdownLargest high-to-low account-value drop inside this simulated replay.
-0.3%
Stopped earlyHow many historical position cycles would have exited before the real close because the simulated stop was hit.
1

The 1%, 2%, and 4% rules are account-risk limits per position cycle, not leverage settings. If the simulated stop is breached, the cycle is stopped early. Outputs are gross of fees and funding, so use them as risk-shape comparisons rather than exact alternate realised trading PnL.

Equity curve by date and account valueX-axis shows date. Y-axis shows account value in US dollars. The line starts at Feb 4 with $20k and ends at May 8 with $21k.Account value (USD)Date$21k$20k$20kFeb 4Apr 25May 8

Top lossesThe largest realised losing position cycles in the data covered by this audit.

Click a row for the trade breakdown
MarketThe traded Hyperliquid market or coin.SideLong means the wallet benefited if price rose. Short means it benefited if price fell.SizeLargest notional exposure reached during the reconstructed position cycle.PnLRealised profit or loss when the position cycle closed.DateClosed date when available; otherwise the cycle open date.

Top winsThe largest realised winning position cycles in the data covered by this audit.

Realised position-cycle outcomes
MarketThe traded Hyperliquid market or coin.SideLong means the wallet benefited if price rose. Short means it benefited if price fell.SizeLargest notional exposure reached during the reconstructed position cycle.PnLRealised profit or loss when the position cycle closed.DateClosed date when available; otherwise the cycle open date.
MATIClong$21$02024-03-18
XRPlong$17$02026-01-31

By marketBreaks the audit down by traded market or coin so you can see which markets helped or hurt the account.

Realised results by coin
CoinThe traded Hyperliquid market.CyclesClosed reconstructed position cycles for this market. One cycle can contain many fills.WinShare of that market's closed position cycles that ended positive.PnLRealised PnL attributed to this market's closed position cycles in the data covered by this audit.
BTC100.0%-$521
TIA60.0%-$49
MATIC1+100.0%$0
XRP1+100.0%$0
Share this audit on X