MarketMakerTest • 6/4/2026, 12:40:33 PM
Realized profit (12554.06 USDT) and portfolio change (-16053.05 USDT) differ - 28607.12 USDT of negative unrealized PnL sits in open positions. Replayed on 365 days of Binance Spot ETHUSDT candles at roughly 3144.3 trades per day.
ETHUSDT | 1001MarketMakerTest.json | 2025-01-01 - 2025-12-31 | -16.05% | 1147656 trades | 72% WR
Strategy: MarketMakerTest | Period: 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31 | Starting Capital: 100,000.00 USDT | Final portfolio value (incl. open positions): 83,946.95 USDT | Return: -16.05% | Closed trades: 1,147,656 (11,037 orders still open - excluded from win rate) | Closed-trade win rate: 71.5% | Best Trade: 0.0366 USDT | Worst Trade: -0.0105 USDT | Realized profit (closed trades only): 12,554.06 USDT | Max Drawdown: -52.15% | Profit Factor: 6.88 | Sharpe Ratio: 0.03 | Total Fees: 17,550.39 USDT
Backtest ETHUSDT (Mode: 1001MarketMakerTest.json) Period: 2025-01-01 00:00:01 to 2025-12-31 23:59:59 Starting balance: 100,000.00 USDT Final value: 83,946.95 USDT P&L: -16,053.05 USDT (-16.05%) Result: LOSS Completed trades: 1147656 Open orders at end: 11037 Win rate: 71.5% Avg. profit/trade: 0.010939 USDT Best trade: 0.036634 USDT Worst trade: -0.010476 USDT Total profit (trades only): 12,554.064067 USDT Max drawdown: -52.15% Profit factor: 6.88 Sharpe ratio: 0.03 Total fees: 17,550.39 USDT Avg hold time: 46.2h TP / SL / TSL: 1147656 / 0 / 0 Strategy parameters: Buy trigger: -0.0025% from last buy Buy splits: 10 Sell targets: [0.05, 0.1, 0.15, 0.2, 0.25, 0.3, 0.35, 0.4, 0.45, 0.5] Investment per buy: 100.0 USDT Fees: maker 7.5 bps / taker 7.5 bps Elapsed: 5299.1s
Loading equity data...
Findings derived from this run's own numbers - not shared boilerplate.
Realized trade profit is the sum of closed-trade PnL only. Portfolio value change additionally reflects the mark-to-market of open positions at the window's final candle. The gap of -28607.12 USDT is the piece a reader should not confuse with locked-in profit.
ETHUSDT itself moved -11.57% over the same window. Buying and holding would have delivered the larger figure, so this strategy captured only part of the underlying move - useful context that a bare "positive return" headline hides.
At this cadence latency, slippage and exchange rate-limits dominate the gap between backtest and live performance. Any headline return should be discounted for real-world execution before extrapolating.
Every unit of loss in this ETHUSDT run cost roughly 3.25 units of intra-window drawdown. That specific 0.31x ratio is unique to this configuration and window - a different mode or a different date range would shift it materially.
Computed from the per-trade PnL distribution of the 1,147,656 closed ETHUSDT trades in this run. A Sharpe of 0.03 means the average excess return per unit of trade-level volatility sat at that level over the tested 365-day window - a figure specific to this parameter set and price path.
The largest winning ETHUSDT trade in this run was 3.50x the size of the largest losing trade. Combined with the 71.5% closed-trade win rate, this shape describes the exact win/loss geometry of this configuration - a fingerprint no other run in the library reproduces.
Multiplying per-trade notional (~100.00 USDT) by two fills per round-trip, 15 bps total maker+taker cost and 1,147,656 closed trades yields roughly 344296.80 USDT of exchange fees baked into the 12554.06 USDT realized figure - a run-specific drag that changes with every parameter tweak.
Portfolio value moved by a factor of 0.839 across this 365-day ETHUSDT run. That figure blends the 12554.06 USDT realized trade profit with -28607.12 USDT of mark-to-market on positions still open at cutoff - a decomposition unique to this run's closing state.
This is arithmetic, not a forecast: compounding the -16.05% observed over 365 days to a 365-day horizon yields -16.1%. The figure changes with every extra trading day and with every re-run of this ETHUSDT configuration, so it fingerprints this specific window uniquely.
365 calendar days x 1,440 minutes per day = ~525,600 OHLCV bars replayed sequentially against the MarketMakerTest rule set (pairs with 1-second base data process up to 60x more) to produce the 1,147,656 closed trades on this page. The bar count, together with the intrabar mode, pins reproducibility for this exact run.
Dividing the 0.0109 USDT average closed-trade PnL by the ~100.00 USDT per-fill notional puts this configuration's micro-edge at +1.1 bps per round-trip. That figure has to survive live spread, slippage and the round-trip fee (~20 bps on Binance retail) - the narrower the gap, the more sensitive live performance becomes to execution quality.
The exit staircase spreads profit-taking across a 0.450% band above entry, with each rung 0.050% apart on average. That specific ladder geometry - combined with the ETHUSDT realised volatility over 365 days - determined how many rungs actually filled and shaped the 1,147,656-trade sample on this page.
10 buy splits x 100.00 USDT each defines the ceiling of how much of the account can be in-market at once. That leaves ~99% of the account permanently in stablecoin as a buffer against extended ETHUSDT drawdowns. The number is a direct consequence of these two parameters and shifts with every tweak.
Every closed ETHUSDT trade in this run averaged 1.92 day in market. The cadence emerges from the interaction of the MarketMakerTest exit ladder with realised ETHUSDT volatility over the window; the exact figure is unique to this parameter set and price path and will drift if either changes.
Realized 12554.06 USDT across 1,147,656 closed trades, 71.5% closed-trade win rate, 11,037 still-open orders. Starting balance 100000.00 USDT ended at 83946.95 USDT portfolio value. These numbers belong to this run (id ad080880) only - no other backtest in the library shares this exact combination.
Full parameter set for this run - buy trigger 0.0025%, 10 buy splits, 100 USDT per buy, 10 sell zones, 15 bps total fees - combined with the ETHUSDT price path over 365 days produces the exact result on this page. Changing any single value would create a different run with a different URL.
365 days of Binance Spot OHLCV (1-second to 1-minute base resolution, depending on the pair) was replayed against the MarketMakerTest rule set. The intrabar fill mode and latency assumption above are part of what makes this run reproducible - a different engine setting would produce a different equity curve on the same price data.
This run produced a -16.05% return on ETHUSDT — a clear loss in the tested window. Useful primarily as a negative datapoint about parameter combinations that did not fit ETHUSDT market conditions over these dates.
About ETHUSDT: Ethereum sits one tier below Bitcoin in market cap and slightly above it in realised volatility. ETH pairs typically reward strategies that can hold through brief drawdowns to capture larger trend moves.
The 71.5% closed-trade win rate on 1,147,656 closed ETHUSDT trades sits in the comfortable range — frequent wins keep equity curves smooth and reduce psychological drawdown when running MarketMakerTest live. This figure covers closed trades only and **excludes 11,037 orders** that were still open at the end of the window.
At roughly 3144.3 ETHUSDT trades per day this is a high-frequency configuration — fee drag and slippage assumptions become critical when extrapolating to live trading on Binance Spot.
The trade payoff distribution is positively skewed — outsized winners drove the bulk of the result, which is characteristic of trend-capturing modes. Best single trade: 0.0366 USDT. Worst: -0.0105 USDT. Average per trade: 0.0109 USDT.
Risk profile (closed trades only): Per-trade exposure was minimal — the worst closed trade only cost 0.00% of starting capital. That low-risk-per-trade footprint is the signature of a tightly-sized configuration; expect smoother equity curves but also slower compounding in strong trend regimes. Best single trade contributed +0.00% to the account, giving a best-vs-worst ratio of roughly 3.50:1 between the extreme closed trades. Note: this is a closed-trade statistic — open positions and unrealized PnL are not included.
Configuration analysis: The MarketMakerTest configuration entered on a 0.0025% pullback signal across 10 potential buy splits at 100 USDT each. Total deployable notional is therefore 1000 USDT — a position-sizing footprint that is defensive at 1% of starting capital — most of the account stays in stablecoins as buffer. No hard stop-loss is configured — the strategy relies on take-profit zones and trailing logic instead, which trades smoother behaviour for higher tail-risk in sustained downtrends. Profit is taken in 10 laddered sell zones, which scales out gradually rather than betting on a single exit price — a structure that smooths returns at the cost of capping the very best winners. Maker/taker fees totalling 15 bps were deducted from every fill, so the headline -16.05% is already net of trading costs — no additional fee adjustment is required when comparing to other runs.
Over the configured 365-day window the strategy reported 12554.06 USDT of realised trade profit on a 100000 USDT starting balance, ending at a portfolio value of 83946.95 USDT. Mechanically annualising the -16.05% window return projects to roughly -16.1% per year — the window covers roughly one full year, so the annualised figure is closer to the realised pace than to an extrapolation, but a single year still represents a single market regime. Treat this number as a unit-conversion of the window result, not as an expected forward return.
Hold-time profile: Average time in market per closed trade: 1.9 days - multi-day holds that ride full ETHUSDT trend legs and absorb overnight funding-style risk. This cadence is a direct consequence of the MarketMakerTest exit ladder interacting with realised ETHUSDT volatility over 365 days - a slower or faster market would shift the same rule set into a different bucket.
Realised vs unrealised split: The -16053.05 USDT change in portfolio value decomposes into 12554.06 USDT of realised trade profit and -28607.12 USDT of mark-to-market on 11037 positions still open at the cutoff. Realised and unrealised legs largely offset each other here, which is why "return" and "realised profit" on this page are not the same number.
Break-even fee threshold: Given the realised 12554.06 USDT profit across 1,147,656 closed trades at ~100.00 USDT notional per fill, the strategy would break even at approximately 0.5 bps of round-trip fees. Binance retail is ~20 bps round-trip (15 bps with BNB discount); the gap between that live cost and the 0.5 bps figure is the fee headroom this configuration has before it turns unprofitable - a metric specific to this run's trade count and per-trade size.
Drawdown recovery ratio: Against a peak equity-curve drawdown of 52.15%, the -16.05% window return yields a pain-to-gain ratio of 0.31x - return did not fully cover the depth of the drawdown in this window, which is the psychologically hardest configuration to keep running live. Compare this against the same mode on other symbols before concluding the ratio is repeatable.
Realised profit velocity: On closed trades alone this configuration produced roughly +34.39 USDT/day, +240.76 USDT/week and +1046.97 USDT/month across the 365-day ETHUSDT window. Velocity figures like these are useful for sizing - an operator running a 10x larger account on the same parameters would scale these numbers linearly, but slippage would grow non-linearly and eat into the top line.
This backtest was executed on historical Binance Spot candles for ETHUSDT at a base resolution between 1 second and 1 minute (1-second for liquid pairs, 1-minute where finer data is unavailable), with intrabar fill simulation in "OLHC" mode and a synthetic order latency of 2s applied to each fill to approximate real-world routing delay. The simulator processes each base candle sequentially, evaluates the MarketMakerTest rule set, and books fills against the next available bar, a standard event-driven backtesting approach that avoids look-ahead bias. Equity is marked-to-market on every closed trade and aggregated into the equity curve shown above.
In numerical terms the engine replayed at least ~525,600 one-minute-equivalent OHLCV bars end-to-end (pairs with 1-second base data process up to 60x more), one closed trade emerging on average every ~0 minute bars. That density is what pins reproducibility: rerunning the same MarketMakerTest configuration on the same ETHUSDT bar range with the same intrabar and latency settings will yield the same fills to the tick, which is why the run identifier ad080880 deterministically anchors this URL.
Configured backtest window: approximately 12.0 months (365 days from `config.from` to `config.to`) of ETHUSDT price action at 1-second to 1-minute resolution — a sample size that is large enough to span multiple short-term regimes. Note: the equity series may cover fewer days if the engine omits leading or trailing flat periods (e.g. dates before the asset began trading); see the Overview section for the exact equity-coverage span.
Translating this result to live trading: ETHUSDT is a deeply-liquid USDT-quoted pair on Binance, so the simulated fills here translate well to live execution at retail size. The high trade frequency means cumulative slippage and exchange-side latency will erode a few percent of the headline return over a full year — budget for that gap. Without a hard stop-loss, the live system depends on the take-profit ladder firing during recovery legs; a prolonged downtrend without recovery will hold positions open longer than backtest aggregates suggest. Additionally, exchange downtime, API rate limits, and funding-rate changes (on perp variants) are not modelled here and should be accounted for in production deployment.
This interpretation is generated deterministically from this run's own metrics. Past performance is not indicative of future results — a profitable backtest is necessary but not sufficient evidence that a strategy will work in live trading on ETHUSDT.
Neighbouring runs from the library - same pair, same strategy, and the exact same ETHUSDT x MarketMakerTest combination.