Crypto Short-Horizon Trend (campaign): a killed candidate
Verdict: KILLED Stage: screen prototype
Identity: crypto_short_tsmom
The strong 0.60 screen lives entirely in the untradeable 2016-18 illiquid era; modern crypto is flat-to-dead with a catastrophic -4.88 skew (crash-day reversals). KILLED.
Why it was worth testing
This died at the screen stage, before a full walk-forward was ever run. Screening exists so that ideas which cannot clear a coarse, cost-aware bar do not consume the far more expensive machinery behind it. A screen kill is a cheap kill, and it is published for the same reason as an expensive one: the trial was still spent, and it still raises the evidence bar for everything already in the book.
The result
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Screen net Sharpe | 0.3000 |
What this does and does not say
It says this configuration, on this data, net of the costs we charge, did not clear the bar it pre-registered. It does not say the underlying economic effect does not exist, that no implementation of it works, or that someone with different data or different execution would reach the same conclusion. A null is evidence about a test, not a proof about a market.
It also does not say the trial was free. Every hypothesis tested raises the deflated-Sharpe hurdle for every sleeve already in the book, including the ones that survived. That is why the kill count is published beside the survivor count rather than behind it.