Public research · Historical backtestsGPT-reviewed for publication

Legacy NFIV5 free sample

This schema v1.0 artifact is retained only as a limited historical sample. It does not include the v1.1 date-range and trading-cost evidence required for current database reports.

Strategy research report: NFIV5 across market regimes

The catalog contains 315 source-code analyses. Its historical record contains 215 backtest runs, including 126 runs that completed without a runner error across 65 distinct strategies. Completion means the backtest executed; it does not mean the strategy was profitable. A separate 71-strategy community research batch advanced one candidate to a 49-asset, five-window historical validation.

Research date:

Review model: gpt-5.6-sol

Browse the weekly research archive

01 · Research coverage

Research coverage

A compact view of the completed analysis and backtest records behind this report.

Source-analyzed strategies

315

code-analysis coverage, not empirical passes

Backtest runs

215

Completed runs

126

65 independent strategies with a completed backtest · 58.60% run completion rate; completion is not profitability

Failed runs

89

Lead research candidate

NostalgiaForInfinityV5

The batch research record identifies this as the one candidate that met its predefined cross-regime, out-of-sample, specified-risk-control, and per-asset coverage checks. That record supports only paper-trading observation and further validation, not real-capital deployment.

Selected for follow-up validation across market regimes; this is not a recommendation to trade with real funds.

Open strategy research

02 · Cross-regime evidence

Cross-regime evidence

Results are shown window by window so a single favorable period cannot hide weaker conditions.

Performance by window

Strategy return

The center line is zero. Market change is context, not a claim of benchmark outperformance.

Bull market

Market +124.0%

+20.79%

Sideways market

Market -2.0%

+3.3%

Bear market

Market -32.0%

+2.34%

Out-of-sample recovery

Market

+5.92%

Out-of-sample extreme altcoin bear market

Market -59.0%

-6.4%

Positive returnNegative return

Return quality and risk

Profit factor / max drawdown

Each metric has its own scale across this report. Read the labels for exact values.

Backtest window details

WindowRegimeMarketStrategyProfit factorMax drawdownSharpePair coverage
Bull marketBull+124.0%+20.79%3.262.40%9.1441 positive / 6 negative · Very broad
Sideways marketSideways-2.0%+3.3%1.791.30%1.9834 positive / 9 negative · Broad
Bear marketBear-32.0%+2.34%1.352.00%1.5129 positive / 15 negative · Broad
Out-of-sample recoveryRecovery+5.92%2.470.95%3.6133 positive / 8 negative · Broad
Out-of-sample extreme altcoin bear marketExtreme altcoin bear-59.0%-6.4%0.6110.40%-2.3016 positive / 26 negative · Failed breadth test

03 · Methodology

Methodology

  1. 1

    Catalog coverage and empirical coverage are different: 315 strategies received source-code analysis, while 126 of the 215 historical runs completed without a runner error and covered 65 distinct strategies. A completed run is not the same as a profitable result. A separate 71-strategy community batch had 39 completed and 32 incomplete initial backtests.

  2. 2

    The candidate was tested across bull, sideways, bear, and two out-of-sample windows to reduce the risk of a false positive from one favorable period.

  3. 3

    The final historical test scenario covered 49 assets with available data across the windows, assumed full allocation and a -12% hard stop-loss, and decomposed results by asset.

  4. 4

    The assessment considered return, profit factor, Sharpe ratio, maximum drawdown, and positive-versus-negative asset coverage. An isolated win rate or relative performance against buy-and-hold was not treated as proof of positive expectancy.

04 · What the evidence says

What the evidence says

  • The candidate produced a positive return in four of five windows. Maximum drawdown was no more than 2.4% in each positive-return window.
  • The bull-market window reported a 20.79% simulated return and a profit factor of 3.26; the per-asset summary counted 41 positive and 6 negative assets. This shows breadth within that historical window, but does not establish future breadth or rule out concentration in individual trades.
  • In the bear-market window, the market-change context was -32% and the strategy simulation returned 2.34%. The figures use different series and do not by themselves establish benchmark outperformance; this was not a live result.
  • The extreme altcoin bear-market window exposed the primary weakness: a -6.4% strategy return, 0.61 profit factor, and 10.4% maximum drawdown.
  • An earlier eight-asset test concealed the extreme-bear weakness. Expanding to 49 assets and decomposing results by asset revealed the fuller risk profile.

05 · Limitations to keep in view

Limitations to keep in view

  • All figures are historical backtests, not live-trading performance, and do not establish that future results will be similar.
  • The report tests specified assumptions for data, fees, slippage, fills, and strategy configuration. Real trading conditions may differ materially.
  • Thirty-two strategies did not complete the initial backtest, so the comparison across all 71 strategies was not based on equally complete evidence.
  • Positive and negative asset counts are not trade counts. The source report did not provide per-window trade counts for the final 49-asset test, so this page does not infer them.
  • A prolonged extreme altcoin decline still produced a material loss and drawdown. Longer samples, broader validation, and live execution observation are required before any real-capital decision.

This report only documents a research process and historical simulations. It is not investment advice, a trading recommendation, a return forecast, or a guarantee. Any real-capital decision requires independent assessment and remains entirely at the decision-maker's risk.

06 · Publication audit

Publication audit

The exact public report payload shown on this page passed automated privacy, provenance, financial-claims, and caveat checks before publication.

Status
Approved
Review model
gpt-5.6-sol
Reviewed at
Personal information
No findings in the approved public payload
Integrity binding
The reviewed payload matches the published payload.