audit ledgerCRUXAXcut to the crux.crypto claims, tested.
Is your backtest telling the truth?
The more parameter combinations you try, the better the best one looks —
even on pure noise. This is the single most common reason a strategy that
"worked" in testing loses money live. The correction below deflates a Sharpe
ratio by how hard you searched for it.
Best annualised Sharpe found
Parameter combinations tried
Length of the backtest
years
The checklist that actually matters
Walk-forward, not one backtest. Optimise on old data, test on the next unseen slice — repeatedly.
Out-of-regime. A strategy tuned in a bear year must be tested in a bull and a chop. We ran ours in four regimes; the design-window winner lost in all three others.
Profit factor and win/loss ratio, never win rate alone. 85% win rates lost us money; a few big losses erased many small wins.
Stress the costs. Re-run at 2x and 3x fees. If the edge dies, it was never an edge.
Write the kill criterion before you look at the result. Everything else is negotiation with yourself.
Independent analysis of publicly available Binance copy-trading data. Not affiliated with Binance. Not financial advice. All figures come from Binance's public API at crawl time.