Bottom line up front
This account is -0.04% on realised PnL, but that headline masks a catastrophic drawdown: the wallet peaked at $7.41M on 25 June 2025 and fell to $681.76k by the same day—a 99.71% decline in hours. The account has since stabilised near breakeven on closed trades, but the damage was structural. Long positions lost $250.67 across 10 episodes at a 10% win rate; the only profitable edge came from a single short trade in PUMP that netted $11.49. Fees consumed 61% of realised PnL, leaving the account underwater after execution costs.
What the data shows
The account opened on 23 June 2025 with an estimated starting balance of $682,010.78. Within 24 hours, it had accumulated $7.41M in notional exposure and suffered a 99.71% drawdown to $681,757.25—a collapse so severe it suggests either liquidation cascade, catastrophic leverage miscalibration, or both. The wallet recovered to its current $681,771.60 balance over the following 373 days, closing 11 trades for a net realised loss of $239.18 after fees.
The long/short split is stark. Long positions across 10 episodes generated -$250.67 with a 10% win rate. Short positions generated +$11.49 across a single 6.3-hour PUMP short opened 15 July 2025 and closed 16 July 2025, entered at 0.01 and exited at 0.01, with a maximum notional of $14,302.20. That short was the only profitable trade structure in the entire window.
By instrument, the damage is distributed. @150 lost $119.20 on a single long opened 16 December 2025, held for 1,866 hours, and closed 4 March 2026 at entry price 1.0. BTC lost $94.85 across three episodes, all longs, all micro-duration (0.01 hours each) at entry prices of $101,895 and $109,879. @230 lost $70.42 across three long episodes. The only win came from a single #30 long on 6 May 2026: entry 0.7, exit 1.0, duration 5.8 hours, PnL +$43.18.
Fees paid total $181.97 against $296.73 in realised PnL, meaning fees consumed 61.33% of gross profit. Net fee drag was $181.97. The account is loss-making after execution costs.
Trade quality
Win rate: 18.18%. Profit factor: 0.19. Expectancy: -$21.74 per trade. Win/loss ratio: 0.84. These metrics describe an account with no edge. For every dollar won, the account lost $5.26. The average win was $27.33; the average loss was -$32.65. The longest loss streak was 5 consecutive closed trades. The longest win streak was 1.
Post-mortems
@150 long, 16 December 2025 – 4 March 2026. Opened at 1.0, closed at 1.0, duration 1,866 hours, maximum notional $112,798.84. Flagged as both oversized loser (4.13x median loss) and revenge trade following a -$40.70 loss in @230. Structural stop was set at 0.05% via ATR 14 1h. PnL: -$119.20. This trade consumed the largest single loss in the window and was entered after a prior loss in a different instrument—a pattern consistent with emotional re-entry rather than systematic signal.
@230 long, 11 April 2026 – 22 June 2026. Opened at 1.0, closed at 1.0, duration 1,730 hours, maximum notional $100,186.69. Flagged as averaging down with one add event recorded. Structural stop at 0.01% via ATR 14 1h. MAE -0.03%, MFE +0.03%. PnL: -$28.83. The position showed minimal adverse excursion and positive expectancy mid-trade, yet was held through to a flat exit. Averaging down into a position with a 0.01% stop suggests conviction without edge.
What the risk simulator reveals
Under a 1% hard stop rule applied historically, the account would have generated $24,466.03 PnL with a -2.78% maximum drawdown, 18.18% win rate, and 4 early stops. Under 2%, $48,932.06 PnL with -5.55% max drawdown. Under 4%, $97,864.13 PnL with -11.1% max drawdown. All simulations are gross of fees. The simulator reveals that mechanical risk control would have transformed this account from loss-making to substantially profitable—a direct indictment of position sizing and stop discipline in the actual trading record.
Open positions
No open positions. The wallet is flat.
Honest summary
- The only profitable trade structure was short. The PUMP short on 15–16 July 2025 was the sole profitable closed episode. Long bias across 10 episodes produced -$250.67 at 10% win rate. The account has no demonstrated edge on the long side.
- The 99.71% intra-day drawdown on 25 June 2025 indicates a fundamental risk control failure. Whether caused by liquidation, leverage miscalibration, or position concentration, the collapse from $7.41M to $681.76k in hours is the defining event in this wallet's history. Recovery to near-breakeven does not erase the structural fragility that caused it.
- Fees are a material drag. At 61% of realised PnL, execution costs are consuming the majority of any gross profit. Combined with a 0.19 profit factor and -$21.74 expectancy, the account is fighting both poor trade selection and high friction.
- Averaging down and revenge trading are documented patterns. Two post-mortem trades show averaging down into @230 and @150, with @150 explicitly flagged as a revenge trade following a loss in @230. Neither trade was profitable.
- The risk simulator shows that mechanical stops would have been transformative. A 1% rule would have generated $24,466 instead of -$239. The gap between actual and simulated performance is the cost of discretionary position management without edge.