0xe357fa9fecb084f0303ff341b0bc55c89f2bb5ce
0xe357...b5ce audit. -$71 realised trading PnL across 2 closed position cycles, using 192 public fills from Mar 17, 2025 to Aug 16, 2025.
The dollar PnL is the realised result from closed trades in the data covered. The percentage uses an inferred starting value (current account value $692,330 minus closed trading PnL -$71 = starting estimate $692,401). 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.
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 151 calendar days of visible trading history.
The sample is too small to draw reliable conclusions about this account's trading approach. Two closed episodes across 151 days of activity produced a net loss of $1.22 after fees on $300k gross volume. Both trades were losses: a BTC long entered at 83,711 on 17 March 2025 and exited at 83,710 within 8 minutes for –$71.25, and a @195 long opened 15 August 2025 and closed 16 August 2025 for –$0.05. No winning trades are recorded. One open position is currently active. The account holds $692k in current balance.
Activity spans 151 days with only two closed trades, making pattern inference unreliable. The BTC trade on 17 March was a long position sized at $100k notional, entered at 83,711.03 and exited at 83,710.01 in 7.8 minutes. The exit occurred below entry despite a 3% structural stop distance, suggesting the position was closed manually rather than stopped. The trade carried an averaging-down flag, indicating multiple fills were layered into the position before exit. The @195 trade opened 15 August at an unspecified entry price, held for 21 hours across a $13.26 notional position, and closed at 0.0 on 16 August for a $0.05 loss.
Realised PnL totalled –$1.22 after a net fee drag of $69.09 USD. Gross fees paid were $70.08 across $300k in gross volume, representing a 23.3 basis point execution cost. The fee burden nearly matched the realised loss, indicating that execution friction was the dominant cost driver relative to the small net loss.
No winning trades are present in the record. Both closed episodes resulted in losses. The account currently holds one open position.
Win rate is 0% across two closed episodes. Profit factor is undefined—no winning trades exist to offset losses. Expectancy cannot be meaningfully calculated from two trades, one of which was a micro-loss. The BTC trade was the material loss event at –$71.25; the @195 trade was negligible at –$0.05.
BTC long, 17 March 2025: Entered at 83,711.03, exited at 83,710.01 after 7.8 minutes on a $100k notional position. Loss of $71.25. The trade carried an averaging-down flag, meaning the position was built through multiple fills. The 3% structural stop was in place but the exit occurred above the stop level, indicating manual closure.
@195 long, 15–16 August 2025: Opened 15 August at an unrecorded entry price, held 21 hours on a $13.26 notional position, closed at 0.0 on 16 August for a $0.05 loss. No structural stop was recorded for this trade.
No matching position cycles in the data covered.
No matching position cycles in the data covered.
No matching position cycles in the data covered.
Expectancy is not a forecast. It is the historical average result per closed position cycle in this reconstructed sample.
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.
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.