INVERSION v1.5.0
generated 2026-10-16 04:26Z
21,932 observed exits

Inversion — start from the winners

Feature-first analysis asks "does X predict Y" and drowns in multiple testing — 3,839 combos were tested on 260726 and exactly one survived. Inversion starts from the outcome and works backwards. This page unifies both inversion lineages on this box: the on-chain pre-pump signature lift (accum_explosion_forensic, case-control vs look-alike duds) and the realised-shape inversion (chart_archetypes).

retrospective timing finding 1–4 h highest observed P(peak≥50%): 52% · n=2,554; descriptive, not an entry rule
the book's biggest bucket 40% of measured timing rows peak inside 5 minutes · expectancy −$25/trade
proof boundaryRESEARCH ONLY retrospective shapes and prospective archetypes are visibly separated; decision effect: NONE
top-decile cutoff +155% peak needed to enter the winners cohort (n=2184)

P−1 Decision inversion — taken vs eligible skipped

M-20 is now measured inside the canonical universal paper path: point-in-time TDE evidence rides the same position and realised exit, while skipped selection quality uses the same fixed 4h outcome lens. Hard-gate rejects are excluded from hesitation arms.

eligible taken · fixed 4h -0.05% resolved 1,557/23,567 · coverage 6.6%
eligible skipped · fixed 4h -0.10% resolved 262/7,231 · coverage 3.6%
measurement-law diagnosis unknown_low_coverage WITHHELD — either cohort is below coverage/N gate
decision effectNONE shadow challenger · no admission, size, exit or live execution authority

Do not read the descriptive EV gap as hesitation skill yet. Coverage is 6.6% taken versus 3.6% skipped; the comparison remains selection-biased until both clear the 80% gate. Canonical source: paper_scorecard.json → decision_quality.m20_attention.

P0 Formal post-pump shelf classifier — point-in-time

A plateau is not automatically bearish. Low volume while price holds a shallow, compressed range above anchored VWAP can be constructive supply dry-up; low-volume breakout is weak; high volume with no progress and negative flow is distribution. The classifier uses only bars visible at classification time and stays shadow-only until forward proof passes.

CONSTRUCTIVE ABSORPTION
tight hold · volume dries · higher lows
BULL-FLAG BREAKOUT
compressed shelf · accepted breakout
NO-DEMAND SHELF
flat + quiet · direction unresolved
DISTRIBUTION PLATEAU
high effort · no result · negative flow
FAILED SHELF
breakout rejected · support lost
UNSTABLE CONSOLIDATION
pause too deep/wide/loud · directionally unresolved
ORDINARY CHOP
no qualifying pole · not a post-pump setup at all

green = continuation structure · amber = unresolved · red = reversion/failure risk. Thin bars are normalized volume; red bars illustrate sell-dominant flow. Schematics—not historical outcomes.

shapemeasurable structurereadconfirmation / invalidation
CONSTRUCTIVE_ABSORPTIONstrong pole · shallow retrace · range+volume contract · AVWAP hold · higher lowswait / continuation candidateclose above shelf high with renewed positive volume/flow
BULL_FLAG_BREAKOUTconstructive shelf + close above resistancecontinuation candidateparticipation required; fail if close returns inside shelf
NO_DEMAND_SHELFflat price + dry volume, weak support evidencedirection unknownwait for directional close + flow
DISTRIBUTION_PLATEAUhigh effort/no result · negative signed volume · flat/lower highsreversion risksupport break confirms; positive-flow upside break negates
FAILED_SHELFclose below support or deep surrender of polereversion risk confirmedmust reclaim shelf low/AVWAP before bullish reuse
UNSTABLE_CONSOLIDATIONpause too deep, too wide, too loud, or directionally unresolved (catch-all after a qualifying pole)waittighten above VWAP for continuation, or close below support for failure
ORDINARY_CHOPno qualifying impulse — pole_return below the pump-floor priorno edgenot a post-pump setup; wait for a new impulse or an independently validated catalyst

Proof: HYPOTHESIS_SHADOW_ONLY. Starting thresholds are priors, not facts. Required: timestamped OHLCV, matched controls, sealed temporal OOS, cost/latency stress, chain×age×liquidity×regime strata, BH-FDR, neighboring-parameter stability, forward paper challenger, then Chris approval.

P0b Broader chart-pattern taxonomy — chart_pattern_intel (12-class, prospective)

P0 covers the post-pump SHELF specifically. chart_pattern_intel.py (v1.0.0, wired into ta_capture.py/token_ta.py/trading_decision_engine.py since 260731) classifies the broader visible chart into 12 additional shapes — acceptance/rejection of prior value, liquidity sweeps, parabolic exhaustion, stair-steps, balance rotation — using the same point-in-time discipline. Until this section existed these lived only as invisible fields (chart_archetype/_bias/_tags) inside token_ta_cache.json; nothing rendered them anywhere.

VALUE ACCEPTANCE UP
CONTINUATION_CANDIDATE · breaks & holds outside prior balance, volume confirms
VALUE ACCEPTANCE DOWN
DOWNTREND_CONTINUATION · breaks & holds below prior balance
FAILED BREAKOUT UP
REVERSION_RISK · closed outside value, then closed back inside
FAILED BREAKDOWN RECLAIM
BOUNCE_CANDIDATE · closed below value, then reclaimed it
UPSIDE LIQUIDITY SWEEP
REVERSION_RISK · wick above prior high, close rejects back down
DOWNSIDE LIQUIDITY SWEEP
BOUNCE_CANDIDATE · wick below prior low, close rejects back up
PARABOLIC EXHAUSTION
NO_CHASE_TRAIL · accelerating return, upper wick or volume spike
VOLATILITY CONTRACTION
WAIT_FOR_EXPANSION · range and volume both shrinking vs prior window
STAIR STEP UP
TREND_CONTINUATION · higher lows, steady positive slope
STAIR STEP DOWN
AVOID_OR_EXIT · lower highs, steady negative slope
BALANCE ROTATION
MEAN_REVERSION_ONLY · flat slope, range inside prior balance
UNCLASSIFIED TRANSITION
WAIT · no rule matched — genuinely ambiguous

green = continuation/bounce bias · amber = wait / no-chase · red = reversion risk. Schematics—not historical outcomes, same as P0. Score is a rule-match strength, not a win probability (score_semantics: RULE_MATCH_NOT_WIN_PROBABILITY) — the classifier has no admission, sizing, or exit authority; proof status is HYPOTHESIS_SHADOW_ONLY pending the same 9 gates as P0.

P0c POINT-IN-TIME PROBABILITY LAB

Frozen chart state at T joined to forward outcomes by explicit horizon. Raw strategy arms collapse to unique economic decisions. RESEARCH ONLY · decision effect: NONE. A rule-match score is never relabelled as a win probability.

rows → decisions353 → 158duplicate arms removed: 195
PIT eligible98UNKNOWN archetypes: 20
outcome provenance quarantine92legacy exact-zero labels withheld as ambiguous, never treated as flat returns
promotionBLOCKED7 open proof gates · locked-forward false

Outcome provenance is a hard gate. Required next: canonical measured-return receipts, one-for-one matched controls, costs/fill stress, declared trials, and locked-forward evidence. Source: chart_archetype_probability_report.json; schema chart_archetype_probability_lab/1.0.0.

00 At a glance

Slices are share of trades (always a positive count, so the geometry is honest). Colour and the legend show whether that cohort makes or loses money — 🟢 profitable, 🔴 losing. A pie cannot draw a negative slice, so signed magnitudes are shown as diverging bars underneath instead of being faked into wedges.

Book by chart archetype

POP_FADED: 4,586 trades (20.9%) · −$8/tradeFLATLINE: 4,500 trades (20.5%) · −$8/tradeDOA: 3,477 trades (15.9%) · −$49/tradeRUNNER_BANKED: 2,100 trades (9.6%) · $73/tradeSPIKE_FADE: 1,638 trades (7.5%) · −$31/tradeGRIND_DOWN: 1,602 trades (7.3%) · −$37/tradeCHOP: 1,515 trades (6.9%) · −$1/tradePOP_BANKED: 1,102 trades (5.0%) · $20/tradeRUNNER_SCRATCH: 941 trades (4.3%) · $3/tradeRUNNER_GAVE_BACK: 387 trades (1.8%) · −$21/tradeSUSPECT_PRICE: 84 trades (0.4%) · $476/trade21,932trades
  • POP_FADED 21% · 4,586 🔴 −$8
  • FLATLINE 21% · 4,500 🔴 −$8
  • DOA 16% · 3,477 🔴 −$49
  • RUNNER_BANKED 10% · 2,100 🟢 $73
  • SPIKE_FADE 7% · 1,638 🔴 −$31
  • GRIND_DOWN 7% · 1,602 🔴 −$37
  • CHOP 7% · 1,515 🔴 −$1
  • POP_BANKED 5% · 1,102 🟢 $20
  • RUNNER_SCRATCH 4% · 941 🟢 $3
  • RUNNER_GAVE_BACK 2% · 387 🔴 −$21
  • SUSPECT_PRICE 0% · 84 🟢 $476

Book by feed

fomo: 2,356 trades (18.3%) · −$8/tradevolume_path: 2,117 trades (16.5%) · −$2/trademomentum_scalp: 1,746 trades (13.6%) · −$18/tradeclu:fomo: 1,655 trades (12.9%) · −$3/tradeoggy_kol: 1,125 trades (8.7%) · −$9/tradeknown_conv: 1,042 trades (8.1%) · −$4/tradefomo_curated: 946 trades (7.4%) · −$9/tradewhalemover_rh: 941 trades (7.3%) · −$4/tradewhalemover: 935 trades (7.3%) · −$4/trade12,863trades
  • fomo 18% · 2,356 🔴 −$8
  • volume_path 16% · 2,117 🔴 −$2
  • momentum_scalp 14% · 1,746 🔴 −$18
  • clu:fomo 13% · 1,655 🔴 −$3
  • oggy_kol 9% · 1,125 🔴 −$9
  • known_conv 8% · 1,042 🔴 −$4
  • fomo_curated 7% · 946 🔴 −$9
  • whalemover_rh 7% · 941 🔴 −$4
  • whalemover 7% · 935 🔴 −$4

Book by shape timing

<5 min: 8,792 trades (40.2%) · −$25/trade>4 h: 3,696 trades (16.9%) · $9/trade1–4 h: 2,554 trades (11.7%) · $5/trade15–30 min: 2,461 trades (11.3%) · $2/trade5–15 min: 2,417 trades (11.1%) · −$10/trade30–60 min: 1,928 trades (8.8%) · $4/trade21,848trades
  • <5 min 40% · 8,792 🔴 −$25
  • >4 h 17% · 3,696 🟢 $9
  • 1–4 h 12% · 2,554 🟢 $5
  • 15–30 min 11% · 2,461 🟢 $2
  • 5–15 min 11% · 2,417 🔴 −$10
  • 30–60 min 9% · 1,928 🟢 $4

Expectancy per trade — signed, so bars not wedges

SUSPECT_PRICE$476
RUNNER_BANKED$73
POP_BANKED$20
RUNNER_SCRATCH$3
CHOP−$1
POP_FADED−$8
FLATLINE−$8
RUNNER_GAVE_BACK−$21
SPIKE_FADE−$31
GRIND_DOWN−$37
DOA−$49

01 Retrospective timing — when did the eventual peak arrive?

time_to_peak contains future information. It describes outcomes but does not prove the chart was flat at minute 15 and cannot authorize a live delayed-entry rule by itself. Keep the Wilson intervals and ex-top-1 check as descriptive evidence; use P0 plus prospective snapshots for prediction.

peak arrivesnP(peak ≥ +50%) 95% confidence intervalexpectancyex-top-1verdict
<5 min8,79211% [10–11%]−$25−$25loses money
5–15 min2,41727% [25–29%]−$10−$10loses money
15–30 min2,46133% [31–34%]$2$2robust — survives ex-top-1
30–60 min1,92841% [39–43%]$4$4robust — survives ex-top-1
1–4 h2,55452% [50–54%]$5$4robust — survives ex-top-1
>4 h3,69647% [45–48%]$9$9robust — survives ex-top-1

◆ Strong separation, but retrospective

The intervals for <5min [22–25%] and 15–30min [41–53%] do not overlap — that is a clean statistical separation, not noise. And the positive bands stay positive with their best trade removed, which almost nothing else in this book does.

Safe reading: trades whose eventual peak occurred immediately performed worse in this book. Unsafe reading: assuming every late peak had visibly plateaued early. P0 now measures the actual early geometry and volume state without that hindsight substitution.

02 Inversion by configuration — what do winners have in common?

Top decile by peak (n=2184, peak ≥ +155%) versus everything else (n=19664). Lift is percentage-point over-representation among winners. A lift above ~6pp is worth a look; below that, treat as noise at this sample size.

exit profile

valuein winnersin restliftskew
SWING72.4%46.6%+25.9pp
SWING_ARM218.6%8.1%+0.5pp
SWING_TRAIL25_53.1%2.6%+0.4pp
MOMENTUM0.0%0.0%+0.0pp
SWING_SL250.1%0.2%-0.0pp
SNIPE0.5%0.6%-0.1pp

source / feed

valuein winnersin restliftskew
fomo15.1%10.2%+4.9pp
control4.5%1.4%+3.1pp
oggy_boost3.6%1.1%+2.5pp
smartmoney5.6%4.0%+1.6pp
cluster5.3%3.9%+1.4pp
fomo_curated5.5%4.2%+1.3pp

chain

valuein winnersin restliftskew
sol61.4%49.7%+11.7pp
avalanche0.0%0.0%-0.0pp
worldchain0.0%0.0%-0.0pp
eth7.0%8.4%-1.4pp
bsc19.8%22.3%-2.5pp
base8.4%11.4%-3.0pp

regime at entry

valuein winnersin restliftskew
poor55.0%52.3%+2.7pp
extreme_poor2.4%3.4%-1.0pp
ground42.5%44.3%-1.7pp

03 Realised shape archetypes

Every closed position classified by what it actually did. Post-hoc by construction — you cannot filter for RUNNER_BANKED at entry. What this does is size each problem: which shapes carry the book and which bleed it.

archetypenexpectancy ex-top-1win ratearmed median peakrobust?
SUSPECT_PRICE84$476$45080%100%0%robust +
RUNNER_BANKED2,100$73$72100%100%248%robust +
POP_BANKED1,102$20$20100%100%71%robust +
RUNNER_SCRATCH941$3$372%100%140%robust +
CHOP1,515−$1−$143%40%10%negative
POP_FADED4,586−$8−$813%100%46%negative
FLATLINE4,500−$8−$81%0%-1%negative
RUNNER_GAVE_BACK387−$21−$210%100%161%negative
SPIKE_FADE1,638−$31−$313%26%9%negative
GRIND_DOWN1,602−$37−$370%26%12%negative
DOA3,477−$49−$500%0%-1%negative

◆ The book splits in two

04 Pre-pump on-chain signature lift (case-control)

From accum_explosion_forensic: exploded tokens versus look-alike duds, so each pattern gets a real lift rather than a survivorship artifact. This answers a different question from the shape work above — not "what shape won" but "what was visible on-chain before it moved".

signaturein explodedin dudsliftn explodednovel?
REACCUM1.4%0.0%37.5×22known
RANGE0.9%0.0%25.6×15known
VOL-ANOM1.4%0.1%12.5×22known
ABSORB1.1%0.1%11.6×17known
CLUSTERED-SUPPLY1.3%0.1%11.4×20known
HL1.4%0.1%11.2×23known
FRESH-SWARM1.6%0.1%10.7×25known
GMGN-CLUSTER1.8%0.2%9.9×29known
WM-BUY0.9%0.1%9.5×14known
FLOW-DIV0.9%0.1%9.5×14known
SIDE-CLUSTER0.5%0.1%9.1×8known
ASSOC-SUPPLY0.8%0.1%8.9×13known
STEALTH-WAVE0.8%0.1%8.9×13known
SQUEEZE0.9%0.1%8.5×15known

Read these as leads, not rules. Several have n_exploded under 30, so the lift is directional. Note the standing finding from that lineage: features that look like drags on win-rate (REACCUM, HOLDER-SURGE, VOL-ANOM) are among the top explosion-lift tails — so do not down-weight a feature on win-rate alone.

05 Who's behind the winners — most-profitable wallets

The operators, not the tokens. Graded S/A wallets by realised 30-day P&L, reused from the ALPHA leaderboard (not recomputed). This is the money to copy-time into the setups above — the same wallets whose buys now name every ACCUM card.

S: 1 wallets (100.0%) · $20/trade1wallets
  • S 100% · 1 🟢 $20
walletgrade30d realisedroi 30dwin
kien28.base.ethNguyeEarlyWhaleS$394,371+20%56%
0x50dcb3f5?$299,912+16%44%
0xcf5a3392?$234,941+13%51%
cDF2-7k-AFeng阿峰_Dailyflipper?$226,728+15%68%
0x05a94a8d?$207,590+11%54%
BaseWhale枯坐p小将3-10X5FigManyFol?$156,147+46%73%
0x1057c855?$126,543+6%45%
Paingelz?$105,660+37%47%
AntPositions?$103,581+5%37%
yukaz?$85,409+40%59%
西瓜🔶BNB?$76,093+8%44%
blockdao🇨🇳 下次钻石手?$60,792+9%43%

06 The playbook — how to trade what the inversion shows

Every line is a direct read of the sections above, not generic advice.

ENTRY · timing hypothesis observe, do not gate Timing is retrospective. P0c must prove matched delay×horizon lift before any entry rule.
EXIT · profile SWING for runners, not TIGHT5 SWING is +30pp in top-decile winners; TIGHT5 is −28.6pp (Section 02). A tight trail books the fast-faders but amputates the tail that carries 75% of profit.
AVOID · admission DOA + FLATLINE ≈ 32% of the book These never tick up (−$60 / −$24). No exit rule saves them — only not entering. This is the admission layer, not a trade.
SIGNAL · pre-pump tails size small, let them run REACCUM 27×, VOL-ANOM 31×, HOLDER-SURGE 21× lift (Section 04): rare but hugely over-represented in explosions. Low win-rate is expected — asymmetric. Never down-weight on win-rate.

07 The winners themselves — top 3+ per chain, entry→peak→exit

The actual trades we learn from, guaranteeing every chain is represented. ● entry · ● peak · ● exit — see how much of each runner we captured (captured) versus what the peak offered (peak). The gap is the exit problem. Robinhood carries Monaco/Pow cabal alpha — the whole point of inversion.

SOL · 8 runners

tokenpeakcapturedsourceentry → peak → exit
$Mooncoin+1953%+628%source_strategyentrypeak +1953%exit
$CLIP+1917%+1271%scoutentrypeak +1917%exit
$CASH+1905%+421%fomoentrypeak +1905%exit
$RBL+1876%-8%clusterentrypeak +1876%exit
$RBL+1876%-8%clusterentrypeak +1876%exit
$FATSEM+1874%-12%clusterentrypeak +1874%exit
$FATSEM+1874%-12%clusterentrypeak +1874%exit
$CASHMONKE+1850%-9%clusterentrypeak +1850%exit

BSC · 3 runners

tokenpeakcapturedsourceentry → peak → exit
$黄金时代+1988%+844%momentum_scalpentrypeak +1988%exit
$bStonkBroker+1875%+599%fomo_curatedentrypeak +1875%exit
$加密人生+1676%+468%smartmoneyentrypeak +1676%exit

BASE · 3 runners

tokenpeakcapturedsourceentry → peak → exit
$CPEG+1383%+923%oggy_boostentrypeak +1383%exit
$dogue+1045%+656%fomoentrypeak +1045%exit
$A1C+994%+411%whalemoverentrypeak +994%exit

ETH · 3 runners

tokenpeakcapturedsourceentry → peak → exit
$YOMOGI+1522%+756%fomoentrypeak +1522%exit
$IMD+1388%+635%wallet_buysizeentrypeak +1388%exit
$GWEI+1361%+604%whalemoverentrypeak +1361%exit

ROBINHOOD · 3 runners

tokenpeakcapturedsourceentry → peak → exit
$RDUBS+1825%+771%scoutentrypeak +1825%exit
$PUNKS+1248%+413%wallet_intelentrypeak +1248%exit
$MICROCHIMP+1050%+347%whalemover_rhentrypeak +1050%exit

How to use this page

inversion_gen.py v1.5.0 · shape + config inversion from chart_archetypes.json · pre-pump lift from accum_explosion_forensic.json · 21,932 observed exits (DEAD/UNRESOLVED excluded)
Claude → docker exec <gw> python3 /opt/data/scripts/inversion_gen.py · Hermes → cron 6 */4, thread 37479