QuantProp. Analyze a trade file ↗
coinback / Experiment result

E-21. The same 6 families with long holds 6h/12h/24h + funding (2026-07-15)

36 runs extending holds to 6h/12h/24h with real BTC funding: the best was gross +0.19% per signal but negative after costs; promotion refused.

Original record: 2026-07-15 · Migrated: 2026-10-27 · Translated from Korean: 2026-10-27
A historical record, not rerun in this migration.

The figures, hypotheses and verdicts of the time are preserved. A past positive result or candidate mention does not mean validated profitability today or a live-trading recommendation. Validation periods that were already used are not treated as new independent validation.

This is an English translation of a preserved Korean original. It describes conditions at the time of writing, not current provider specifications, costs or regulations. Phrases in the original about blocking or avoiding losses interpret simulated experiments and are not realized account results. Statistical trial counts differ from the number of independent strategies or CSV rows.

E-21. The same 6 families with long holds 6h/12h/24h + funding (2026-07-15)

  • Preregistered D-027. The E-20 signal code was not changed; only the horizon was extended as a new lineage.
  • All 36 runs completed. preliminary/train pass 0; val/test not opened.
  • Best: majority 2d/20d/EMA60 + RSI reclaim + 24h. 369 signals, 0.423/day, gross +0.19040%, funding +0.01957% paid, baseline net -0.02917%, net at 1.5× costs -0.12917%. Gross positive in 4 of 6 windows and at 3 horizons.
  • Pattern: all 6 majority-macro families had 24h as their best horizon, with gross +0.124~+0.190%, but all were negative after market-order costs + funding. Slow macro was weaker.
  • Verdict D-028: official promotion refused. RSI 24h is not deleted; it is kept as a reference group for F1/F2 execution research, but it is not called alpha without real maker fills, non-fills and markouts.
  • The cost counterfactual on the same maker-entry/taker-exit path is +0.0508%, but at 1.5x costs it is -0.0092%. This gap means strategy performance is very sensitive to real fill selectivity.

Source and migration evidence

Source: backtest/docs/experiment-log.md#E-21

Original SHA-256: 069c4aaaf53a20930ca8d94ba6365b4ce2b6bc560171d662a4c179ea55a6857c

Raw data and account information are not part of the public package. The original results do not replace statistical or scientific revalidation. The English text is a translation; numbers, tables and charts are carried over unchanged.