Analyst’s summary
Ansem is a pseudonymous crypto trader. His record is drawn from X posts: most of his claims are mentions of an asset with no direction, a small share carry a direction, and of those a small share name a price level or a business outcome. His directional calls are almost all crypto, with a small share in single equities and almost none in other commodities. Across the whole record his most-called names are BTC, HYPE and XPL.
How accurate is he?
He is accurate 29.0% of the time against a base rate of 42.6% for the assets he calls, so he scores 13.6 points below it. Accurate means he hits or partially hits the hurdle in the direction his signal implies, inside the window he named or the calculated window determined from our algorithm; for a price target it means the target was reached inside the window, or half the stated move was.
How does he compare to just holding Bitcoin, and to the S&P 500?
If you had put $1 into Bitcoin on the day of his first crypto call in September 2025 and left it there until his last crypto call was settled, you would have $0.79. If you had put $1 into every one of his 26 crypto calls instead, buying when he posted and selling when each call was due, you would have $0.47; Bitcoin held on those same days made $0.58.
If you had put $1 into the S&P 500 on the day of his first equity call in October 2025 and left it there until his last equity call was settled, you would have $1.15. If you had put $1 into every one of his 3 equity calls instead, buying when he posted and selling when each call was due, you would have $0.57; the S&P 500 held on those same days made $1.07.
Taking profit early, at twice the hurdle (at the target, on a price-target call) with no stop-loss, turned $1 into $0.42. The base rate on the assets he picks is $1.29: the same assets, bought on random dates in the same period, held for the same lengths of time, with the same long and short sides.
Explainer on his accuracy against his return
Accuracy counts how often he was right; return counts how far the price went. He was right less often than chance, and a dollar compounds the path, not the average: his hits averaged +44.3% and his misses -37.5%. (* see the footnote below for a fuller explanation)
How does following his timing compare to the base rate of the assets he chose?
A dollar following every one of his calls to the end of its window became $0.50 against a base rate of $1.29; with a stop at the hurdle and a take-profit at twice it (at the target, on a price-target call), $0.70. Over the last six months he scored 43.1% against a base rate of 50.1% on 13 calls.
What is the best holding period if we follow Ansem?
One day: a dollar following every call for one day became $0.99 against a base rate of $0.94, and no other plain hold does better. On tracking, his edge over the assets is largest at 1 days, +0.9% against +0.2%, and at ninety days he is 29.8 points behind them.
Does he have any names where he has a particular edge?
On ZEC, ETH, NVDA his calls beat the asset's own 30-day move; on BTC, the name he calls most, they trailed it by 7.9 points; they trailed it on SOL.
In our opinion, a follower should not take this voice as a timing signal. Following his calls turned one dollar into fifty cents against a dollar twenty-nine for the same assets on random dates, and the one-day hold is the only horizon where he keeps pace. His bullish calls are weak and his bearish calls strong, and his edge sits in a few names: ZEC, ETH and NVDA beat the asset's own thirty-day move, while BTC and SOL trailed. Treat his mentions as colour, not conviction.
Notes
1 Right means the hurdle test. Every asset carries a hurdle, T, that depends on its class and on how long the call was given (the table on page 2): 5 percent for a single equity at ninety days, under half a percent at next close, eleven at a year; 13 percent for crypto at ninety days. A full hit is a move of at least twice T in the direction he called by the end of the window and counts 1.0; a partial hit is at least T and counts 0.8; a miss, and a flat outcome that moved less than T either way, count zero. A price-target call is a full hit when the target is reached inside the window, a partial at half the stated move and a miss otherwise; it has one reading, the touch, so a later fall does not change it and the hit rate is not a holding return. Every resolved call is scored and every one is in the denominator. At expiry reads the price once at the window's end; one-touch counts the same move if it happened at any point inside the window.
2 Base rate: for each call, over every window of the same length on the same asset across the record, from two years before his first call to the last price and leaving out the call's own window, the share that cleared the same hurdle in his direction, with a partial at 0.8 and everything else zero; built exactly as the hit rate is, then averaged over his calls. Lift is his rate minus it. The percentiles and the drift in Parts 2 and 3 use a narrower set, the 730 days before each call.
3 The percentile is where a call's return ranks among all windows of the same length in that stock's own past two years; the 50th is chance. The placebo band is what random posting dates on the same assets produce; a reading inside it is indistinguishable from chance.
4 The dollar base rate: the same assets, the same number of calls, the same long and short sides, bought on random dates; the median of 150 such runs. Each call is held to its own window, and a price-target call is sold at its target if that comes first, on his dates and on the random ones alike.
5 Win rate and return per call: a follower buying at the first close after each post and selling thirty days later, costs deducted; the share of calls that made money, and the average result.
6 Drawdown: the deepest fall of that follower's account from its peak.
7 A bracket is a take-profit and a stop-loss set in advance; here both are set in units of the call's own hurdle, and a price-target call takes its target as the take-profit, so a take-profit fill is a hit banked and a stop fill is a miss taken. It is a rule of ours, not part of his record, and it never feeds the alpha gate.
* Accuracy counts calls. Every call counts once, whatever the size of the move: a full hit is one, a partial is 0.8, a miss or a flat is zero. Six of his twenty-nine calls were full hits, three partial, twenty were misses or flats. Random windows on the same assets clear the hurdle more often than that, because assets of this kind move the hurdle's distance inside the window about 34.1% of the time on their own. So by count he is right less often than chance. Return weighs calls by how far they moved. His six hits averaged +44.3%, one of them, ZEC, +84.4%. His fifteen misses averaged -37.5%, and his five flats were small. Add them up and the winners are worth +339 points against -578 for the losers. Here the two measures point the same way.
Summary of metrics
Integrity: 2062 posts were read, yielding 209 claims, 39 directional calls and 29 resolved. (see section: the worked claim, Part 5, annex)
Information: scoring for accuracy by our rules, he is accurate 29.0% of the time, against a base rate of 42.6% for the same assets, so he scores 13.6 points below it. On tracking his calls, his best horizon is one day, where his calls return +0.9% against +0.2%, an edge of 0.6 points. At the ninety-day horizon his calls return -8.1% on average, 29.8 points behind the assets' own return of +21.8% over the same days. (see section: 1.3, 1.18, 2.19)
Robustness: the record spans 8 months, so there is no full year to compare; over the last six months he scored 43.1% against a base rate of 50.1% on 13 calls; the record holds 29 resolved calls on 14 assets. (see section: 1.6, 1.9, 5.3, 5.4)
Concentration: his calls beat the asset's own 30-day move on ZEC, ETH, NVDA; on BTC, the name he calls most, they trailed it by 7.9 points; they trailed it on SOL. (see section: 2.8)
Response profile: if we follow all of Ansem's calls, the holding period most profitable is one day. One dollar following every call for one day became $0.99 against a base rate of $0.94. There is no benefit to holding his calls for 7 days, 30 days or each call's own window. (see section: 1.3, 2.13, 2.14b)
Distribution: one call is worth -8.3% on average, after costs; the middle half of his calls end between -32.4% and +17.7%, and 41.4% of them end positive. Following every call to the end of its window turned one dollar into $0.50 against a base rate of $1.29, and the account fell 62.0% from its peak along the way. (see section: 2.13 to 2.16)
accuracy at expiry (vs base rate at expiry of 42.6%)
accuracy on one-touch (vs base rate one-touch of 66.2%)
$0.47 vs $0.79 (hold Bitcoin, crypto calls)
one dollar following his equity calls vs holding the S&P 500, and his crypto calls vs holding Bitcoin, each for its own period
ETH +7.6%/+0.3%
NVDA +5.2%/+4.7%
the names where his edge is biggest: his average 30-day return / the asset's own
37.9% / -7.5% (30 day)
44.8% / -2.3% (7 day)
48.3% / +0.9% (1 day)
win rate / return per call, by holding period; aggregate is each call held to its own window
$0.25 vs base rate $1.10 (30 day)
$0.41 vs base rate $0.97 (7 day)
$0.99 vs base rate $0.94 (1 day)
one dollar following every call vs the base rate for following the same assets on random dates
selling each call as soon as it is up twice its hurdle, no stop-loss: 44.8% of calls win against 41.4% on a plain hold to the window, but one dollar ends at $0.42 against $0.50: capping the winners costs more than it saves
his average return against the assets' own, at the horizons he uses most (ten or more calls); the difference is his edge in points
Following Ansem's calls from the first close at or after each post and holding each call to the end of its own window, one dollar became $0.50 over 322 days in market, against just holding the S&P 500 for his equity calls ($0.57 following those calls against $1.15 held) and Bitcoin for his crypto calls ($0.47 following those calls against $0.79 held), and against holding the same assets Ansem chooses on random dates, which would have produced $1.29.
This report does not establish an investment advantage. Comparison data for similar assets was unavailable.
Bible v0.46 · PRD draft-81 · Ruling Ledger v85 · effect-2.0, reduced to own-history in this run · Specimen v12.15