ORUS
Live15agents running42positions heldForward test

The desk,
in the open.

9 strategies run side by side on live market data. Every rule they check, every token they refuse and every trade they close is written down and published here — the losses with the rest.

The strategies on the board are test configurations and the numbers they produce are provisional — calibration is ongoing.

Decisions · last 168h
39,286,005
Tokens vetted
2,958+
Refused per signal
125357:1
Trades closed
1,971
Median hold
20m
Median trade
−24.5%
deciding, right nowFull tape ↓
  • 12:19:32—unmeasured labels
  • 12:19:32—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:19:32ZKBLASTthe dip never went deep enough (23.91 vs 75)
Live
closedRURU+1.3%20m
closedRURU+54.8%20m
closedKURO+81.1%11.6d
closedAMD−71.8%20m
closedPEAK−85.7%13.7h
closedPEAK−85.7%13.7h
closedPEAK−85.7%13.7h
closedCYBERFINE+110.2%13.9h
closedCYBERFINE+90.2%13.6h
closedCYBERFINE+82.4%12.0h
closedJOBS−22.1%20m
closedBEAST+49.3%20m
closedTT+29.4%25m
closedPEAK−11.7%20m
closedDODO+150.4%15m
closedDODO+150.4%15m
closedDODO+150.4%15m
closedOAK+86.9%5.2h
closedOAK+86.9%5.2h
closedOAK+86.9%5.2h
closedOREX−48.6%10m
closedOREX−48.9%10m
closedOREX−45.9%10m
closedOREX−19.4%20m
closedWANDER−46.9%14.2h
01 / The book

Marked to every close,
including the bad ones.

One point per closed trade. These trades never shared a wallet, so the line is what a single 12 ETH book would have done taking every one of them — 12 ETH because the most this desk ever had deployed at once was 10.74.

The book

05 Sept, 23:58 → 04 Nov, 10:31 UTC
The book now
981
started at 1,000
−0.224 ETH on 34.70 ETH staked across 1,971 trades.
Worst point
952
Return on capital
−0.65%
Median trade
−24.5%
Win rate
34.1%

Where the returns sit

27%
22%
10%
6%
10%
14%
10%
1%
-100 to -50
-50 to -25
-25 to -10
-10 to 0
0 to +25
+25 to +100
+100 to +300
> +300%

1,299 of 1,971 trades closed down, most of them badly. The book is carried by the right-hand tail — the few that were left alone to run.

Best exits

best first
TokenStrategyHeldETHResult
EXAMCN
11 Sept, 14:34 UTC · LIVE
—5m+0.0302+603.5%
jar
11 Sept, 06:02 UTC · LIVE
—22m+0.0265+530.9%
FLYBOOK
11 Sept, 12:31 UTC · LIVE
—4m+0.0259+518.3%
FLY
10 Sept, 17:09 UTC · SIM
—37m+0.1008+503.9%
RECORD
16 Sept, 20:27 UTC · SIM
—4m+0.0832+415.8%
HASHTOWN
11 Sept, 08:22 UTC · LIVE
—21m+0.0188+376.2%
GEMI
12 Sept, 16:22 UTC · LIVE
—4m+0.0177+354.3%
AXI
13 Sept, 14:43 UTC · SIM
—7m+0.0695+347.7%
02 / Live

Watch it
make up its mind.

The live decision log, straight from the engine. Identical consecutive refusals are collapsed — a standing no is one line, not two hundred.

Decision tape

UTC
scan reading the chain for anything new
filter the token itself — supply, holders, taxes, age
chart the price — how deep the dip, and how long ago
signal every rule met; an entry is on the table
monitor a held position, and whether its exits are met
streaming · every 8s
  • 12:19:32filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:19:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:19:32chartZKBLASTthe dip never went deep enough (23.91 vs 75)
  • 12:19:32filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:19:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:19:31filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:19:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:19:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 172)
  • 12:19:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (61 vs 61)
  • 12:19:31filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:19:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (50 vs 50)
  • 12:19:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)
  • 12:19:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 172)
  • 12:19:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (38 vs 172)
  • 12:19:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 67)
  • 12:19:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:19:24scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)
  • 12:19:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 70)
  • 12:19:00scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (61 vs 61)
  • 12:18:59filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:59scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:18:59chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.98 vs 5)
  • 12:18:58filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:58scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:18:58filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:58scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:18:57filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:57scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (50 vs 50)
  • 12:18:38scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (81 vs 297)
  • 12:18:37filterOSTRAlisted too long ago (376.46 vs 168)
  • 12:18:37chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (57.67 vs 65)
  • 12:18:37chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.63 vs 5)
  • 12:18:37chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.63 vs 5)
  • 12:18:37filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:37scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (196 vs 198)
  • 12:18:37scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (132 vs 134)
  • 12:18:37chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.63 vs 5)
  • 12:18:37filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:37scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (132 vs 134)
  • 12:18:37scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (197 vs 197)
  • 12:18:37monitorRURUholding — no exit condition met (1.13 vs 2)×2
  • 12:18:36scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (66 vs 66)
  • 12:18:36chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (57.52 vs 75)
  • 12:18:36chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.61 vs 5)
  • 12:18:36filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:36scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (130 vs 131)
  • 12:18:36monitorTADAholding — no exit condition met (0.02 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorDODOholding — no exit condition met (1.12 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorMERISholding — no exit condition met (0.01 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorAIMCAPholding — no exit condition met (0.70 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorBOHholding — no exit condition met (0.11 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorWINholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorORIGOholding — no exit condition met (0.70 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorUSELESSholding — no exit condition met (0.09 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorLOVOTholding — no exit condition met (0.14 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorORBIBOTholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorSWEEPRSholding — no exit condition met (0.37 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorTHKRholding — no exit condition met (0.28 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorFLIPholding — no exit condition met (0.06 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorROBINHOODholding — no exit condition met (0.07 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorSWEEPholding — no exit condition met (0.09 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorORBIXholding — no exit condition met (0.95 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorSTLNholding — no exit condition met (0.16 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorSOTTOholding — no exit condition met (0.03 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorDACITYholding — no exit condition met (0.12 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorMAFIAholding — no exit condition met (0.05 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorPROVholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorEMBERholding — no exit condition met (0.07 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitor⬛⬛⬛holding — no exit condition met (0.08 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorREBOTholding — no exit condition met (0.04 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorNMSholding — no exit condition met (0.02 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorKITTYholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorSOCKETSholding — no exit condition met (0.04 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorREACHYholding — no exit condition met (0.15 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorOWNERLESSholding — no exit condition met (1.29 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorREXholding — no exit condition met (0.11 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorNIHAOholding — no exit condition met (0.73 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorPODholding — no exit condition met (0.12 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorGH0STholding — no exit condition met (0.13 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorWAGIEholding — no exit condition met (0.13 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36monitorIBMholding — no exit condition met (0.11 vs 2)
  • 12:18:36chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (57.52 vs 75)
  • 12:18:36chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.61 vs 5)
  • 12:18:36filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:36scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (130 vs 131)
  • 12:18:36chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.60 vs 5)
  • 12:18:35filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:35scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:18:35chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (57.52 vs 75)
  • 12:18:35chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.60 vs 5)
  • 12:18:35filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:35scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (130 vs 131)
  • 12:18:35chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (57.52 vs 75)
  • 12:18:35chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.60 vs 5)
  • 12:18:35filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:35scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (130 vs 131)
  • 12:18:35scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 172)
  • 12:18:35monitorRURUholding — no exit condition met (1.13 vs 2)
  • 12:18:33scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)
  • 12:18:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 67)
  • 12:18:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 171)
  • 12:18:33scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 70)
  • 12:18:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (37 vs 171)
  • 12:18:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:18:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)
  • 12:18:27filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:18:27filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:18:27chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.45 vs 5)
  • 12:18:26filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:26scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:18:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (59 vs 59)
  • 12:18:26filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:18:26scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (50 vs 50)
  • 12:17:56chartZKBLASTath too recent (3.93 vs 5)
  • 12:17:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:17:56scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (58 vs 58)
  • 12:17:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:17:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:17:53filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:53scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (50 vs 50)
  • 12:17:36scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 67)
  • 12:17:35scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 70)
  • 12:17:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (37 vs 171)
  • 12:17:34filter███low vol liq ratio (4.20 vs 5.30)
  • 12:17:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 171)
  • 12:17:33filterXMRhigh volume fees ratio (1,254 vs 1,000)
  • 12:17:33scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 172)
  • 12:17:32monitorAMDthe exit was marked
  • 12:17:32monitorAMDheld long enough — closing on time (1.13 vs 1.40)
  • 12:17:30scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:17:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)×2
  • 12:17:29monitorAMDholding — no exit condition met (1.03 vs 1.40)
  • 12:17:23scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (58 vs 58)
  • 12:17:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:17:22chartZKBLASTath too recent (3.38 vs 5)
  • 12:17:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:17:21filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:21scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:17:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:17:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:16:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (57 vs 57)
  • 12:16:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:16:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:16:54chartZKBLASTath too recent (2.91 vs 5)
  • 12:16:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:16:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:16:30scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 67)
  • 12:16:30scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (37 vs 172)
  • 12:16:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 172)
  • 12:16:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:16:29filterSPCXhigh volume fees ratio (1,253 vs 1,000)
  • 12:16:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (39 vs 171)
  • 12:16:25scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)
  • 12:16:25scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 71)
  • 12:16:24scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)
  • 12:16:23filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:23scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:16:23chartZKBLASTath too recent (2.39 vs 5)
  • 12:16:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:16:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (57 vs 57)
  • 12:16:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:16:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:16:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:15:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (57 vs 57)
  • 12:15:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:15:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:15:54chartZKBLASTath too recent (1.90 vs 5)
  • 12:15:53filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:53scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:15:53filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:53scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:15:49filterXMRhigh volume fees ratio (1,255 vs 1,000)
  • 12:15:49scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 170)
  • 12:15:48scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (14 vs 68)×2
  • 12:15:47scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:15:47monitorSlingoorholding — no exit condition met (0.03 vs 1.40)
  • 12:15:45scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 70)
  • 12:15:42scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 67)
  • 12:15:41scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (37 vs 171)
  • 12:15:40scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (39 vs 171)
  • 12:15:35chartZKBLASTath too recent (1.59 vs 5)
  • 12:15:34filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:15:31filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:15:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (57 vs 57)
  • 12:15:30filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:30scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:15:27filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:15:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (63 vs 63)
  • 12:14:56chartZKBLASTath too recent (0.93 vs 5)
  • 12:14:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:14:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (66 vs 66)
  • 12:14:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:14:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:14:53filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:53scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:14:32filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:14:32filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:14:31filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:14:29filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:14:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:14:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (15 vs 68)
  • 12:14:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (66 vs 66)
  • 12:14:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 172)
  • 12:14:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:14:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 69)
  • 12:14:25scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (15 vs 68)
  • 12:14:25scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (38 vs 170)
  • 12:14:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 171)
  • 12:14:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 66)
  • 12:13:57filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:57scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:13:57filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:57scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:13:56filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:56scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:13:56scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (66 vs 66)
  • 12:13:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:13:33scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (66 vs 66)
  • 12:13:32filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:13:32filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:13:32filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:32scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:13:31filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:13:29scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 66)
  • 12:13:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:13:28filter███low vol liq ratio (4.14 vs 5.30)
  • 12:13:28filterMETAxhigh volume fees ratio (1,204 vs 1,000)
  • 12:13:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 171)
  • 12:13:28filterMETAxhigh volume fees ratio (1,207 vs 1,000)
  • 12:13:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 171)
  • 12:13:28monitorAMDholding — no exit condition met (1.07 vs 1.40)
  • 12:13:28monitorSlingoorholding — no exit condition met (0.03 vs 1.40)
  • 12:13:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (15 vs 68)
  • 12:13:28filterMETAxhigh volume fees ratio (1,204 vs 1,000)
  • 12:13:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (38 vs 171)
  • 12:13:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 69)
  • 12:13:26scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (15 vs 68)
  • 12:13:26monitorAMDholding — no exit condition met (1.15 vs 1.40)
  • 12:13:25scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (82 vs 297)
  • 12:13:25executeRURUno reason recorded
  • 12:13:23signalRURUevery rule met — an entry is on the table (63.73 vs 50)
  • 12:13:23chartRURUcleared this stage (63.73 vs 50)
  • 12:13:23filterPRIORSlisted too long ago (1,097 vs 168)
  • 12:13:23chartZKBLASTthe dip never went deep enough (10.12 vs 50)
  • 12:13:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (134 vs 134)
  • 12:13:24executeRURUno reason recorded
  • 12:13:23signalRURUevery rule met — an entry is on the table (63.73 vs 50)
  • 12:13:23chartRURUcleared this stage (63.73 vs 50)
  • 12:13:23filterPRIORSlisted too long ago (1,097 vs 168)
  • 12:13:23chartZKBLASTthe dip never went deep enough (10.12 vs 50)
  • 12:13:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:13:24executeRURUno reason recorded
  • 12:13:23signalRURUevery rule met — an entry is on the table (63.73 vs 50)
  • 12:13:23chartRURUcleared this stage (63.73 vs 50)
  • 12:13:23filterPRIORSlisted too long ago (1,097 vs 168)
  • 12:13:23chartZKBLASTthe dip never went deep enough (10.12 vs 50)
  • 12:13:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:13:24filterGOLDlisted too long ago (1,028 vs 168)
  • 12:13:24chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (63.73 vs 75)
  • 12:13:23filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:23scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (131 vs 132)
  • 12:13:23filterDARWINlisted too long ago (714.53 vs 168)
  • 12:13:23chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (63.73 vs 65)
  • 12:13:23scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (197 vs 198)
  • 12:13:23filterGOLDlisted too long ago (1,028 vs 168)
  • 12:13:23chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (63.73 vs 75)
  • 12:13:23filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:23scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (131 vs 132)
  • 12:13:23filterGOLDlisted too long ago (1,028 vs 168)
  • 12:13:23chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (63.73 vs 75)
  • 12:13:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (131 vs 132)
  • 12:13:23filterGOLDlisted too long ago (1,028 vs 168)
  • 12:13:23chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (63.73 vs 75)
  • 12:13:22filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:13:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (131 vs 132)
  • 12:13:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (197 vs 197)
  • 12:13:22monitorTADAholding — no exit condition met (0.02 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorMERISholding — no exit condition met (0.01 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorBOHholding — no exit condition met (0.11 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorAIMCAPholding — no exit condition met (0.70 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorORIGOholding — no exit condition met (0.70 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorWINholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (66 vs 66)
  • 12:13:22monitorFLIPholding — no exit condition met (0.06 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorLOVOTholding — no exit condition met (0.14 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorORBIBOTholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorUSELESSholding — no exit condition met (0.09 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorDODOholding — no exit condition met (1.12 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorSWEEPholding — no exit condition met (0.09 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorTHKRholding — no exit condition met (0.28 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorROBINHOODholding — no exit condition met (0.07 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorSWEEPRSholding — no exit condition met (0.37 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorSTLNholding — no exit condition met (0.16 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorORBIXholding — no exit condition met (0.98 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorSOTTOholding — no exit condition met (0.03 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorDACITYholding — no exit condition met (0.12 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorMAFIAholding — no exit condition met (0.05 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorPROVholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitor⬛⬛⬛holding — no exit condition met (0.08 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorREBOTholding — no exit condition met (0.04 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorNMSholding — no exit condition met (0.02 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorKITTYholding — no exit condition met (0.10 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorREACHYholding — no exit condition met (0.15 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorNIHAOholding — no exit condition met (0.73 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorSOCKETSholding — no exit condition met (0.04 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorOWNERLESSholding — no exit condition met (1.29 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorREXholding — no exit condition met (0.11 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorWAGIEholding — no exit condition met (0.13 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorGH0STholding — no exit condition met (0.13 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorPODholding — no exit condition met (0.12 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorEMBERholding — no exit condition met (0.07 vs 2)
  • 12:13:22monitorIBMholding — no exit condition met (0.11 vs 2)
  • 12:12:56chartRURUthe dip never went deep enough (64.27 vs 75)
  • 12:12:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:12:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:12:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:12:54filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:12:54scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (68 vs 68)
  • 12:12:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 69)
  • 12:12:33scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (15 vs 68)
  • 12:12:33scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 172)
  • 12:12:30scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (15 vs 68)
  • 12:12:30filterMSFTxhigh volume fees ratio (1,193 vs 1,000)
  • 12:12:30scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 170)
  • 12:12:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 66)
  • 12:12:28scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (38 vs 172)
  • 12:12:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 64)
  • 12:12:27filterGOLDlisted too long ago (1,028 vs 168)
  • 12:12:26filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:26scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:12:26scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (68 vs 68)
  • 12:12:25filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:25scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:12:25filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:25scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:12:24filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:12:24scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:11:57scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (68 vs 68)
  • 12:11:57chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.96 vs 5)
  • 12:11:56filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:11:56scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (133 vs 134)
  • 12:11:56filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:11:56scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:11:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:11:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:11:55filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:11:55scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:11:35scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 72)
  • 12:11:35filterBTClow vol liq ratio (4.20 vs 5.30)
  • 12:11:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (41 vs 174)
  • 12:11:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (38 vs 174)
  • 12:11:34filterSTONKlisted too long ago (2,489 vs 2,000)
  • 12:11:34scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (40 vs 174)
  • 12:11:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (7 vs 66)
  • 12:11:31scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (8 vs 68)
  • 12:11:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (15 vs 68)×2
  • 12:11:27filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:11:27scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (62 vs 62)
  • 12:11:26filter—unmeasured labels
  • 12:11:26scan—read the chain and enriched what looked alive (51 vs 51)
  • 12:11:26chartZKBLASTath too recent (4.44 vs 5)

Right now

15 running
Agents running
15
Strategies
9
Positions open
42
Win rate
34%
of closed trades ended up

Open positions

42 held · marked live
  • ORBIX
    — · held 11.6d
    —
  • OWNERLESS
    —— · held 5.7d
    —
  • DODO
    Copy ddpCopy ddp · held 1.2d
    —
  • NIHAO
    — · held 14.9d
    —
  • AIMCAP
    —— · held 5.6d
    —
  • ORIGO
    —— · held 3.5d
    —
  • SWEEPRS
    — · held 12.8d
    —
  • THKR
    — · held 9.4d
    —
  • LOVOT
    — · held 13.9d
    —
  • STLN
    — · held 12.8d
    —
  • REACHY
    — · held 9.0d
    —
  • GH0ST
    — · held 13.6d
    —
  • WAGIE
    —— · held 6.0d
    —
  • POD
    — · held 11.7d
    —

Latest exits

most recent first
TokenStrategyHeldETHResult
RURU
04 Nov, 10:31 UTC · SIM
Orus fly L520m+0.0001+1.3%
RURU
04 Nov, 10:10 UTC · SIM
Orus fly L520m+0.0027+54.8%
KURO
04 Nov, 08:23 UTC · SIM
—11.6d+0.0016+81.1%
AMD
03 Nov, 22:47 UTC · SIM
Launch L5 · Dip5 · 3x · 20min20m−0.0036−71.8%
PEAK
03 Nov, 18:13 UTC · SIM
Ridge Dip13.7h−0.0171−85.7%
PEAK
03 Nov, 18:13 UTC · SIM
Summit Dip13.7h−0.0171−85.7%
PEAK
03 Nov, 18:13 UTC · SIM
Pons Graduated Dip5013.7h−0.0171−85.7%
CYBERFINE
03 Nov, 09:29 UTC · SIM
Ridge Dip13.9h+0.0220+110.2%
CYBERFINE
03 Nov, 09:09 UTC · SIM
Summit Dip13.6h+0.0180+90.2%
CYBERFINE
03 Nov, 07:34 UTC · SIM
Pons Graduated Dip5012.0h+0.0165+82.4%

How the desk is wired

Capital
At least one agent executes with real funds; every scoreboard row carrying real money is tagged LIVE.
Chain
Robinhood Chain — an Arbitrum Nitro L2, gas in ETH, roughly 100ms blocks.
Sizing
Strategies commit different amounts per entry, so the scoreboard is ranked by average return rather than by absolute result — otherwise it would be ranking bet sizes.
Pricing
Positions are marked against live market data on every cycle, not against the quote that opened them.
Not shown
Wallet addresses, transaction hashes and full strategy configuration. This page is a window onto the decisions, not the plumbing.
03 / Analyses

What it found
when it looked closer.

Every token the desk actually buys gets a full write-up — supply, holders, the deployer's history, how the launch went. The ones already published are here.

Published write-ups

398 published · 0 queued
04 / Discipline

Mostly, the answer
is no.

An agent earns its keep by what it declines. Every test below was run against a real token in the last 168 hours, and almost all of them ended the same way — a rule was not met, so nothing happened.

From decision to trade

last 168h · share of all decisions
  1. 01Decisions logged
    100%39,286,005

    every test the engine ran against a real token

  2. 02Refused
    96%37,607,042

    a rule was not met — the token's, the chart's, or the desk's own spending cap

  3. 03Cleared to a signal
    0.00%300

    every rule met at once

  4. 04Trades closed
    0.00%122

    entered and exited inside the same window

05 / Scoreboard

Every strategy,
ranked by what it returned.

The same market, the same window, different rules. The ones in the red stay on the board — that is the point of running them all at once.

Standings

28 entrants
#StrategyTradesWin rateAvgBestMedian holdResult ETH
01—sim12100%+99%+128%2.2d+0.024
02—sim15100%+92%+172%5.1h+0.028
03—sim1100%+34%+34%12.0h+0.034
04—sim1100%+34%+34%12.0h+0.034
05—sim1100%+19%+19%1.0d+0.019
06—sim2737%+13%+113%2.5h+0.068
07—sim3336%+12%+151%1.2h+0.079
08—sim1953%+11%+107%3.7h+0.041
09—sim250%+10%+20%17m+0.002
10—sim250%+7%+60%42m+0.003
11—sim3633%+7%+151%1.1h+0.049
12—sim2733%+6%+113%2.7h+0.035
13—sim13443%+4%+333%3.0h+0.053
14—sim3549%+4%+63%4.4h+0.123
15—sim6141%+3%+176%12.0h+0.171
16—sim2528%+2%+150%1.6h+0.012
17——1533%+2%+230%20m+0.002
18—sim13544%+2%+416%20m+0.041
19—sim19335%−1%+269%20m−0.059
20—sim30626%−3%+348%11m−0.171
21—sim1947%−5%+154%20m−0.004
22——76730%−8%+604%20m−0.556
23—sim1729%−10%+202%20m−0.008
24—sim2343%−13%+86%20m−0.061
25—sim10%−14%−14%12.0h−0.014
26—sim2536%−21%+77%20m−0.103
27—sim1520%−27%+23%20m−0.020
28—sim2421%−35%+67%20m−0.042

This is the house against itself. The house against every account that runs on Orus is the leaderboard →

06 / The system

Not a bot with a threshold.
An analyst that never sleeps.

Everything above came out of one loop, running every minute: read the chain, take the token apart, decide, size it, and write down why. The strategies are the dial settings — the machine is what turns them.

01

Reads the chain

Every new pool on Robinhood Chain, screened on volume, liquidity and market cap before anything else runs. Hundreds of tokens a day narrowed to the few worth a second look.

02

Takes the token apart

Supply concentration, bundler and sniper wallets, the deployer's other launches, transfer taxes, honeypot checks — the things that decide whether a chart is even real.

03

Writes the analysis

Tokens that clear the rules get a full report: the dip, the holders, the launch, the liquidity, and a verdict in plain English. Published here as they are finished.

04

Trades its own rules

Entry, take profit, stop loss and holding time are fixed before the trade opens, and the exit is marked to what actually came back — never to the quote that opened it.

Runs in parallel

9 strategies compete on the same market at the same time. One market, one window, different rules — which is the only honest way to find out which rules are worth having.

Says no by default

125357 refusals for every signal. The agent does nothing unless every condition is met at once, and the reason it declined is written down either way.

Shows its working

Every decision on this page came from the engine's own log, with the measurement that produced it. Nothing is summarised after the fact, and nothing that lost money has been left out.

Your rules next

Run your own
on the same rails.

Define the conditions, deploy an agent, and watch it work in the same detail you just read.