cd2171386d
Added Phase 2 enhancement section at top of v11 analysis doc: - Hybrid passive + active SL recovery approach - User requirement specification - Implementation details (30s passive, 60s/90s active recovery) - attemptSLPlacement() function description - Git commit reference and deployment timestamp Deployment: Dec 15, 2025 13:30 UTC Container: trading-bot-v4 (sha256:4eaef891...)
393 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
393 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
# v11 Indicator Analysis - December 15, 2025
|
|
|
|
## 🛡️ BUG #87 FIX DEPLOYED - PHASE 2 ACTIVE SL RECOVERY
|
|
|
|
**Status:** ✅ PHASE 2 DEPLOYED (Dec 15, 2025 13:30 UTC)
|
|
**Git Commit:** dcee117 "enhance: Bug #87 Phase 2 - Active SL recovery at 60s/90s"
|
|
**Container:** trading-bot-v4 (image sha256:4eaef891...)
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2 Enhancement: Hybrid Passive + Active Recovery
|
|
|
|
**User Requirement:** "30sec after position was opened it shall only check. after 60s and 90s check if it does not exist it shall try to place the SL. if both attempts on 60 and 90 fail then stop trading and close position"
|
|
|
|
**Implementation:**
|
|
- **Attempt 1 (30s):** Passive verification only (give initial placement time to propagate)
|
|
- **Attempt 2 (60s):** Check + attemptSLPlacement() if missing (active recovery #1)
|
|
- **Attempt 3 (90s):** Check + attemptSLPlacement() if missing (active recovery #2)
|
|
- **Emergency:** haltTradingAndClosePosition() if both recovery attempts fail
|
|
|
|
**New Function:** `attemptSLPlacement(tradeId, symbol, marketIndex)`
|
|
- Loads trade from database (positionSizeUSD, entryPrice, stopLossPrice, takeProfit1Price, takeProfit2Price)
|
|
- Calls placeExitOrders() with tp1SizePercent=0, tp2SizePercent=0 (SL orders only)
|
|
- Updates database with SL signatures (slOrderTx, softStopOrderTx, hardStopOrderTx) if successful
|
|
- Returns true on success, false on failure
|
|
|
|
**Benefits:**
|
|
- Maximizes trade survival by attempting recovery before emergency shutdown
|
|
- Two recovery chances reduce false positive halts (60s + 90s)
|
|
- 30s passive first gives initial placement reasonable Drift propagation time
|
|
|
|
**Next Trade:** Monitor logs for Phase 2 behavior verification
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Executive Summary
|
|
|
|
**Overall Performance:** 7 trades, 57.1% win rate, -$1.80 total P&L
|
|
**Sample Size:** TOO SMALL for definitive conclusions (need 20+ trades)
|
|
**Data Quality:** Average quality score 88.6 (good filtering)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 🚨 CRITICAL FINDINGS - IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED
|
|
|
|
### 1. **LONG TRADES ARE LOSING MONEY** (-$2.22 total, 40% WR)
|
|
- **Problem:** LONGs at top of range (80-100%) are mixed results
|
|
- **Worst Loser:** Quality 75, RSI 73.5 (overbought), Position 94.4% → **-$17.09 loss**
|
|
- **Pattern:** Buying overbought conditions at range tops = disaster
|
|
|
|
### 2. **SHORT TRADES ARE PERFECT** (+$0.42 total, 100% WR)
|
|
- **2 trades, 2 wins** (Quality 85-105, ADX 22-34)
|
|
- **Both:** RSI 38-44 (bearish zone), good momentum
|
|
|
|
### 3. **QUALITY 95-99 FAILED** (-$4.72 on 1 trade)
|
|
- **Single failure:** Q95, LONG at 63.5% position, RSI 59.5 → stopped out
|
|
- **Contradicts:** Q100+ had 100% WR (+$24.01)
|
|
- **Issue:** Quality 95 threshold may be too low, or 95-99 tier unlucky
|
|
|
|
### 4. **RSI SWEET SPOT FOR LONGS: 60-70** (100% WR, +$26.97)
|
|
- **Avoid:** RSI >70 (overbought) → -$17.09
|
|
- **Avoid:** RSI 50-60 (weak bullish) → -$12.10
|
|
- **Trade:** RSI 60-70 (strong but not overbought) → +$26.97
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Detailed Pattern Analysis
|
|
|
|
### Direction Performance
|
|
|
|
| Direction | Trades | Win Rate | Total P&L | Avg P&L |
|
|
|-----------|--------|----------|-----------|---------|
|
|
| **SHORT** | 2 | **100.0%** | **+$0.42** | +$0.21 |
|
|
| **LONG** | 5 | **40.0%** | **-$2.22** | -$0.44 |
|
|
|
|
**Conclusion:** v11 SHORTs are working, LONGs need filter improvements.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Quality Score Tiers
|
|
|
|
| Quality Tier | Trades | Win Rate | Total P&L | Avg P&L |
|
|
|--------------|--------|----------|-----------|---------|
|
|
| **100+** | 2 | **100.0%** | **+$24.01** | +$12.01 |
|
|
| **95-99** | 1 | **0.0%** | -$4.72 | -$4.72 |
|
|
| **85-89** | 2 | **100.0%** | +$3.37 | +$1.69 |
|
|
| **<85** | 2 | **0.0%** | -$24.47 | -$12.23 |
|
|
|
|
**Findings:**
|
|
- ✅ Quality 100+ = perfect edge (2/2 wins)
|
|
- ✅ Quality 85-89 = solid (2/2 wins)
|
|
- ❌ Quality 95-99 = single failure (1/1 loss) - **SAMPLE SIZE TOO SMALL**
|
|
- ❌ Quality <85 = disaster (0/2 wins)
|
|
|
|
**Action:** Need 5+ more trades in 95-99 tier to validate if real problem or outlier.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### ADX Strength Analysis
|
|
|
|
| ADX Tier | Trades | Avg ADX | Win Rate | Total P&L |
|
|
|----------|--------|---------|----------|-----------|
|
|
| **30+ Very Strong** | 1 | 34.2 | **100.0%** | +$0.38 |
|
|
| **20-25 Moderate** | 4 | 23.6 | **50.0%** | +$1.85 |
|
|
| **15-20 Weak** | 2 | 16.2 | **50.0%** | -$4.04 |
|
|
|
|
**Finding:** Strong ADX (30+) only 1 trade but won. Moderate (20-25) is 50/50.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Price Position Analysis (LONGs Only)
|
|
|
|
| Price Zone | Trades | Avg Pos | Win Rate | Total P&L |
|
|
|------------|--------|---------|----------|-----------|
|
|
| **80-100 Top** | 3 | 89.5% | **66.7%** | **+$9.88** |
|
|
| **60-80 Upper** | 1 | 63.5% | **0.0%** | -$4.72 |
|
|
| **40-60 Middle** | 1 | 54.2% | **0.0%** | -$7.38 |
|
|
|
|
**CRITICAL FINDING:**
|
|
- ✅ LONGs at TOP of range (80-100%) = **66.7% WR, +$9.88**
|
|
- ❌ LONGs at MIDDLE/UPPER (40-80%) = **0% WR, -$12.10**
|
|
|
|
**Explanation:** This seems counterintuitive but:
|
|
1. **Top of range (80-100%):** Strong momentum breakouts, continuation plays
|
|
2. **Middle/upper (40-80%):** Weak momentum, often rejects or chops
|
|
|
|
**BUT WARNING:** Top winner (Q100, +$23.63) skews this. Need more data.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### RSI Analysis by Direction
|
|
|
|
#### LONG Trades RSI Performance
|
|
|
|
| RSI Zone | Trades | Avg RSI | Win Rate | Total P&L |
|
|
|----------|--------|---------|----------|-----------|
|
|
| **70+ Overbought** | 1 | 73.5 | **0.0%** | **-$17.09** ⚠️ |
|
|
| **60-70 Strong** | 2 | 63.2 | **100.0%** | **+$26.97** ✅ |
|
|
| **50-60 Bullish** | 2 | 57.3 | **0.0%** | -$12.10 |
|
|
|
|
**ACTIONABLE RULE FOR LONGs:**
|
|
- ✅ **ENTER:** RSI 60-70 (strong but not overbought) = **100% WR**
|
|
- ❌ **BLOCK:** RSI >70 (overbought) = biggest single loss (-$17.09)
|
|
- ❌ **BLOCK:** RSI <60 (weak momentum) = 0% WR
|
|
|
|
#### SHORT Trades RSI Performance
|
|
|
|
| RSI Zone | Trades | Avg RSI | Win Rate | Total P&L |
|
|
|----------|--------|---------|----------|-----------|
|
|
| **40-50 Bearish** | 1 | 44.0 | 100.0% | +$0.03 |
|
|
| **30-40 Weak** | 1 | 38.8 | 100.0% | +$0.38 |
|
|
|
|
**Finding:** Both SHORTs won with RSI 38-44 (bearish/weak zones) ✅
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Exit Reason Breakdown
|
|
|
|
| Exit Reason | Count | Percentage | Avg P&L |
|
|
|-------------|-------|------------|---------|
|
|
| **SL** | 4 | 57.1% | -$1.39 |
|
|
| **TP1** | 2 | 28.6% | +$1.86 |
|
|
| **manual** | 1 | 14.3% | +$0.03 |
|
|
|
|
**Finding:** 57% of trades hit SL (stopped out). Only 29% hit TP1.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Winner vs Loser Comparison
|
|
|
|
### Top Winner: Quality 100 LONG (+$23.63)
|
|
- **Time:** 12-10 19:35
|
|
- **Metrics:** ADX 24.8, RSI 63.0, Position 93.8%, Vol 1.30
|
|
- **Exit:** SL (but made profit somehow - check this)
|
|
- **Pattern:** Top of range (93.8%), RSI sweet spot (63.0), good volume
|
|
|
|
### Worst Loser: Quality 75 LONG (-$17.09)
|
|
- **Time:** 12-15 02:19
|
|
- **Metrics:** ADX 23.4, RSI 73.5, Position 94.4%, Vol 1.41
|
|
- **Exit:** SL
|
|
- **Pattern:** **Overbought RSI (73.5)** at top of range
|
|
|
|
**Key Difference:** Winner at RSI 63, loser at RSI 73.5 → **RSI 70+ is death zone**
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 📊 OPTIMIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS
|
|
|
|
### Immediate Filters (High Confidence)
|
|
|
|
#### 1. **BLOCK OVERBOUGHT LONGs** (RSI >70)
|
|
```typescript
|
|
if (direction === 'long' && rsi > 70) {
|
|
score -= 50 // Major penalty
|
|
blockReason = 'OVERBOUGHT_RSI_LONG'
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
**Impact:** Would have blocked -$17.09 loss (worst trade)
|
|
|
|
#### 2. **REQUIRE RSI 60-70 FOR LONGs**
|
|
```typescript
|
|
if (direction === 'long' && (rsi < 60 || rsi > 70)) {
|
|
score -= 30 // Significant penalty
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
**Impact:** Would have blocked 3 losers (-$29.19 total)
|
|
|
|
#### 3. **KEEP SHORT ENTRY LOGIC AS-IS**
|
|
- SHORTs are 100% WR (2/2) with current filters
|
|
- RSI 30-50 range is working
|
|
- Don't change what's not broken
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Medium Confidence Filters (Need More Data)
|
|
|
|
#### 4. **CONSIDER BLOCKING LOW ADX (<20)**
|
|
- ADX 15-20 had 50% WR (-$4.04)
|
|
- But only 2 trades - need 5+ more
|
|
- **Wait for more data**
|
|
|
|
#### 5. **VALIDATE QUALITY 95-99 TIER**
|
|
- Single failure at Q95 (-$4.72)
|
|
- Could be outlier
|
|
- Need 5+ trades in this tier before adjusting threshold
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Research Questions (Collect More Data)
|
|
|
|
1. **Price Position Paradox:** Why do LONGs at top (80-100%) win more than middle (40-80%)?
|
|
- Hypothesis: Top = breakout momentum, middle = chop/rejection
|
|
- Need 10+ more trades to validate
|
|
|
|
2. **Quality 95-99 Anomaly:** Is Q95-99 actually worse than Q85-89?
|
|
- Current: Q85-89 = 100% WR, Q95-99 = 0% WR
|
|
- Need 5+ more trades at Q95-99
|
|
|
|
3. **Volume Impact:** Vol 1.30-1.42 on winners, 0.95-1.41 on losers
|
|
- Insufficient sample to determine threshold
|
|
- Need 20+ trades
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Data Quality Assessment
|
|
|
|
### Sample Size Status
|
|
- **Total Trades:** 7 (❌ Need 20+ minimum)
|
|
- **LONG Trades:** 5 (⚠️ Need 10+ minimum)
|
|
- **SHORT Trades:** 2 (❌ Need 10+ minimum)
|
|
- **Quality Tiers:** 1-2 per tier (❌ Need 5+ per tier)
|
|
- **ADX Tiers:** 1-4 per tier (⚠️ Borderline)
|
|
- **RSI Zones:** 1-2 per zone (❌ Need 5+ per zone)
|
|
|
|
**Confidence Level:** LOW - Most patterns need more data for validation
|
|
|
|
**Exception:** RSI >70 LONG disaster is strong signal (single worst trade, clear overbought condition)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Action Plan
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: Immediate (Today)
|
|
1. ✅ **Add RSI >70 penalty for LONGs** (-50 points)
|
|
2. ✅ **Add RSI <60 penalty for LONGs** (-30 points)
|
|
3. 📊 **Monitor next 10-15 trades** to validate pattern
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: Data Collection (Next 7 Days)
|
|
1. Collect 15+ more v11 trades (target: 20+ total)
|
|
2. Validate RSI 60-70 sweet spot holds
|
|
3. Check if quality 95-99 failure was outlier
|
|
4. Analyze price position paradox with more data
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: Refinement (After 20+ Trades)
|
|
1. Optimize ADX thresholds if pattern emerges
|
|
2. Adjust quality score tiers based on larger sample
|
|
3. Consider volume multiplier if correlation found
|
|
4. Review position sizing based on RSI zones
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Technical Notes
|
|
|
|
- **Database:** All queries from `Trade` table with `indicatorVersion = 'v11'`
|
|
- **Column Names:** `adxAtEntry`, `rsiAtEntry`, `pricePositionAtEntry`, `volumeAtEntry`
|
|
- **P&L:** `realizedPnL` field (post-exit calculated values)
|
|
- **Date Range:** Dec 10-15, 2025 (5 days of trading)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Appendix: All v11 Trades
|
|
|
|
### Sorted by P&L (Best to Worst)
|
|
|
|
| Date | Symbol | Dir | Quality | ADX | RSI | Pos | Vol | Exit | P&L |
|
|
|------|--------|-----|---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|------|-----|
|
|
| 12-10 19:35 | SOL | LONG | 100 | 24.8 | 63.0 | 93.8 | 1.30 | SL | +$23.63 |
|
|
| 12-11 19:12 | SOL | LONG | 85 | 15.4 | 63.3 | 80.3 | 1.31 | TP1 | +$3.34 |
|
|
| 12-14 10:37 | SOL | SHORT | 105 | 34.2 | 38.8 | - | - | TP1 | +$0.38 |
|
|
| 12-10 22:37 | SOL | SHORT | 85 | 22.4 | 44.0 | - | - | manual | +$0.03 |
|
|
| 12-10 04:55 | SOL | LONG | 95 | 23.9 | 59.5 | 63.5 | 1.42 | SL | -$4.72 |
|
|
| 12-12 13:07 | SOL | LONG | 75 | 17.0 | 55.0 | 54.2 | 0.95 | SL | -$7.38 |
|
|
| 12-15 02:19 | SOL | LONG | 75 | 23.4 | 73.5 | 94.4 | 1.41 | SL | -$17.09 |
|
|
|
|
**Total:** -$1.80 (57.1% WR, 4 wins, 3 losses)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Conclusion
|
|
|
|
**v11 has potential but needs RSI filter refinement for LONGs.**
|
|
|
|
**Clear Signal:** RSI >70 for LONGs = disaster zone (-$17.09 worst trade)
|
|
|
|
**Winning Pattern:** RSI 60-70 for LONGs = 100% WR (+$26.97)
|
|
|
|
**SHORTs:** Working perfectly (2/2 wins), don't change
|
|
|
|
**Next Steps:**
|
|
1. Add RSI 60-70 requirement for LONGs
|
|
2. Block RSI >70 LONGs entirely
|
|
3. Collect 15+ more trades to validate patterns
|
|
4. Re-analyze after reaching 20+ trade sample size
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## 🛡️ Bug #76 Protection System - DEPLOYED Dec 16, 2025
|
|
|
|
**Root Cause Confirmed:** Position cmj8abpjo00w8o407m3fndmx0 opened 07:52 UTC with TP1/TP2 orders but **NO stop loss order** (Bug #76 - Silent SL Placement Failure). Database shows:
|
|
- `tp1OrderTx`: DsRv7E8v... ✅ (exists)
|
|
- `tp2OrderTx`: 3cmYgGE8... ✅ (exists)
|
|
- `slOrderTx`: NULL ❌ (never placed)
|
|
- `softStopOrderTx`: NULL ❌
|
|
- `hardStopOrderTx`: NULL ❌
|
|
|
|
**User Impact:** Position left completely unprotected. User saw TP orders in Drift UI and assumed SL existed. As price approached danger zone, checked more carefully and discovered SL missing.
|
|
|
|
**User Interpretation:** "TP1 and SL vanished as price approached stop loss" - but actually SL was never placed from the beginning (Drift order history only shows filled orders, not cancelled).
|
|
|
|
**Prevention System Implemented:**
|
|
|
|
### Architecture: 3-Tier Exponential Backoff Verification
|
|
- **Attempt 1:** 30 seconds after position opens
|
|
- **Attempt 2:** 60 seconds (if Attempt 1 fails)
|
|
- **Attempt 3:** 90 seconds (if Attempt 2 fails)
|
|
- **If all fail:** Halt trading + close position immediately
|
|
|
|
### Implementation Files
|
|
1. **lib/safety/sl-verification.ts** (new file)
|
|
- `querySLOrdersFromDrift()` - Query Drift on-chain state for SL orders
|
|
- `verifySLWithRetries()` - 3-tier verification with exponential backoff
|
|
- `haltTradingAndClosePosition()` - Emergency halt + position closure
|
|
- `checkTradingAllowed()` - Circuit breaker check before new trades
|
|
|
|
2. **app/api/trading/execute/route.ts** (modified)
|
|
- Circuit breaker check at line ~95 - rejects trades when halted
|
|
- Verification trigger at line ~1128 - starts after position added to manager
|
|
- Runs asynchronously in background (doesn't block trade execution)
|
|
|
|
### Safety Features
|
|
- **Drift On-Chain Verification:** Queries actual Drift orders, not just database
|
|
- **Circuit Breaker:** Halts all new trades after critical SL placement failures
|
|
- **Automatic Position Closure:** Closes unprotected position immediately for safety
|
|
- **Critical Telegram Alerts:** Notifies user of halt + closure actions
|
|
- **Rate Limit Efficient:** 3-9 queries per position (vs 360/hour with interval-based)
|
|
|
|
### User Mandate
|
|
> "i mean the opening of the positions was/is working flawlessly so far. so i think simply check 30s/60s/90s after the position was opened that the risk management is in place. 3 calls after an action took place. thats still not much as we dont open trades that often.
|
|
>
|
|
> if it fails. stop trading and close the current position. better safe than sorry"
|
|
|
|
### Expected Behavior
|
|
1. Position opens successfully at T+0s
|
|
2. Verification Attempt 1 at T+30s → queries Drift for SL orders
|
|
3. If SL found: SUCCESS, verification complete ✅
|
|
4. If SL missing: Wait, retry at T+60s
|
|
5. If still missing: Wait, retry at T+90s
|
|
6. If still missing after 3 attempts:
|
|
- Set `tradingHalted = true` (global flag)
|
|
- Close position immediately via market order
|
|
- Send critical Telegram alert
|
|
- Reject all new trade requests with "Trading halted" error
|
|
- Require manual reset via API or Telegram command
|
|
|
|
### Deployment
|
|
- **Date:** Dec 16, 2025 11:30 UTC
|
|
- **Status:** Code complete, ready for Docker build + deployment
|
|
- **Git commits:**
|
|
- aa16daf "critical: Fix Bug #87 - Add 3-tier SL verification with circuit breaker" (Dec 15, 2025 11:11 UTC)
|
|
- Docker Image: SHA256:80fd45004e71fa490fc4f472b252ecb25db91c6d90948de1516646b12a00446f
|
|
- **Status:** ✅ DEPLOYED AND OPERATIONAL - Container restarted, SL verification active
|
|
- **Manual Reset:** Required after halt - prevents cascading failures
|
|
|
|
**"Better safe than sorry" - User's mandate prioritizes capital preservation over opportunity.**
|