Six fills took $1,000 to $1,564.83
+$564.83 realizedEvery dot is a real check. The dashed lines between them went unobserved.
gap net +$221.231 older trades
Rules vs holding, and the gap
The rules made +$564.83. Holding every call to its last check would have made −$133.93.
The gap helped +$662.37 on two fills and hurt −$441.14 on four fills. Net +$221.23.
Both lines are counterfactuals. Gap = actual proceeds minus proceeds at the exact rule level, which assumes a fill right at that level; thin pump.fun liquidity doesn't guarantee one. Hold = size × last observed mcap ÷ entry mcap.
15 log lines, 6 fills, oldest first
5 taken, 10 runner-ups passed over, 6 alert-only mints
decision timeMarket caps are the ones written in the logs at decision time.
Five active rules, each tied to the trades that justify it
lessons.mdPrefer locking profit early over relying on the trailing stop. Candidate change, needs 2–3 more trades to confirm: after TP1, also sell another 25% at 5x.
give low weight to "creator rewards go to the dev's GitHub" tokens whose contract comes from a third-party caller (both losers were posts of this type from one third-party caller) when the source post itself is small (under ~100K views). The winner came from a genuinely viral meme (~670K views). Prefer calls where the underlying post is broadly viral, and don't enter a token that is already well off its first peak or that follows dead copies of the same narrative (#3 was -24% from ~$30K at entry with an earlier copy already dead).
No sizing change.
who posts the contract matters more than how viral the topic is. #4 rode a huge narrative (a person's post ~3.6M views) and still lost because the only endorsement of the contract was a ~500-view a third-party caller's post. Contracts whose only backer is a caller are 0/3; don't alert on them. Require the contract to be named by the narrative's own account or a narrative caller whose post is itself getting real traction (the winner's contract came from a caller on a ~670K-view meme). Also avoid crowded fields of same-name copies (#4 had 3+ copies splitting buyers).
The 1-min monitor is ahead of the old 30-min checks on one trade
edge +$2.09One mark per event (Oct 11–Oct 13). Too few events for a by-hour rate, so there are no hourly bars: an empty hour here means nothing yet, not a quiet hour.
table · by hour
| hour | calls | fills |
|---|---|---|
| 15:00 | 1 | 1 |
| 17:00 | 0 | 1 |
| 18:00 | 2 | 1 |
| 19:00 | 1 | 2 |
| 21:00 | 1 | 1 |
| trade | 1-min actual | 30-min shadow | 1-min edge | shadow exits | actual / shadow |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #5 FWOYD | +$73.04 | +$70.95 | +$2.09 | TP1 | closed / closed |
| total | +$73.04 | +$70.95 | +$2.09 |
Shadow = the same rules applied only at :26 and :56 past, 7am–10pm MT, to the market cap the 1-min monitor observed at those minutes, with its peak tracked from those samples only. Hypothetical fills, never written to the ledger. Open legs are marked at their last observed mcap.