Algocrat AI

описание

Where long-term proven strategies, meet next-gen crypto trading algorithms: www.algocrat.ai

← к каналу @algocrat

1 658

подписчиков

Охват к подписчикам

99,9%

ERR

Реакции к просмотрам

0,00%

0 на 20 постов

Пересылки к просмотрам

0,23%

Постов в день

0,0

всего 20

Где отзываются чаще

доля реакций к просмотрам

2 июн.без подписи0,00%
2 июн.🔍 FX Brokers vs Binance: What Works Best In 2026 One question dominates Algocrat AI's conversations: should you trade crypto on traditional FX brokers like IC Markets or stick with crypto exchanges like Binance? For hedge funds managing large sums, the answer remains crystal clear — crypto exchanges offer unmatched liquidity. But for retail traders? The landscape has completely shifted. The Great Reversal of 2023-2024 When we first crunched 2023 numbers, FX brokers had wide spreads and poor execution. Binance was the obvious leader. Fast forward to today, and the tables have turned. FX brokers caught up with competitive pricing that often beats even Binance. The Numbers Don't Lie Our latest analysis shows IC Markets now beats Binance for BTC execution costs. While Binance still offers better raw pricing, their commission structure (0.03-0.05% per side on perpetual futures) tips the scale. Even with superior pricing, Binance's total costs exceed IC Markets roughly 75% of the time. Binance isn't completely out of the game. It still claims victory in about 25% of trading scenarios, even with commissions included. Their overnight advantage remains untouchable — zero overnight fees and typically low funding costs for intraday trading. The Fine Print Our analysis compares Binance's low VIP tiers (accessible to most retail traders) against IC Markets' BTCUSD CFDs. We focused on mostly intraday trading patterns. ┃ **Important caveat**: High VIP tier holders or traders keeping positions overnight may still find Binance superior due to lower funding fees. For the average retail trader focused on intraday moves? IC Markets delivers better value in 2026. This shift represents a fundamental change in the retail trading cost structure that most traders haven't recognized yet. Best regards, The Algocrat AI Team0,00%
12 мая🧭 What’s Next: New Track Record + Precision Accounts [2 of 3] As we explained in our previous post, our analysis made one thing clear: Pepperstone is no longer suitable for our crypto trading infrastructure. So we’re making a decisive shift. We are now strengthening our partnership with IC Markets, the broker that consistently delivered the best execution in our analysis. To start: We are moving our main track record away from Pepperstone and onto one of a long-standing account operating under IC Markets. This is not a new account. It has been running Algocrat algorithms since 2024, compounding over time under real market conditions: 📈 New Official Track Record Introducing “Precision Accounts” At the same time, due to our long-standing relationship with IC Markets, we’ve worked closely with their team to unlock something new: A specialized account type called 'Precision Accounts', built specifically for our clients. These accounts are designed to provide the best possible execution environment within the broker. What You Get - Preferred execution quality - Dedicated liquidity environment - Reduced slippage during normal conditions - Ultra-fast, low-latency execution - No artificial order throttling - Optimized conditions for algorithmic systems - Built for serious algo traders, not casual retail flow How to Access If you want to be part of this setup, reach out to us directly: 📩 accounts@algocrat.ai We’ll guide you through the process and explain how to get access. Best, Algocrat AI Team0,00%
5 маябез подписи0,00%
5 мая🧐 Why our 2025 track record underperformed reality Over the past several months, we’ve been conducting a deep execution analysis across our trading infrastructure at Algocrat AI. What we found explains why, last year, our public track record appeared significantly worse than what many clients actually experienced. The Discovery We analyzed performance across Pepperstone, IC Markets, and Fusion Markets. We selected these brokers because they’re the most widely used among our clients, giving us enough variation in account sizes, currencies, platforms, and risk levels to make the comparison statistically meaningful. The result: Pepperstone showed consistently worse execution, up to ~2.3x worse than the best-performing broker, IC Markets. Over time, small differences in fill prices compound into 20 to 40% worse gross performance annually. Why We Could Finally Compare After migrating to our in-house copy trading system, the same trades now execute across dozens of accounts at the exact same moment. This removed variables like signal timing differences and allowed for clean, apples-to-apples comparisons across brokers. What We Found Across two dozen accounts, - Pepperstone consistently delivered the worst execution prices - Variation within Pepperstone was minimal (most accounts performed similarly poorly) - Larger accounts at other brokers still achieved better execution, ruling out size as the cause Put simply, When the same trade is executed at the same time, Pepperstone almost always gives the worst fill. Impact on Our Track Record Our main track record (hosted on Myfxbook) was running on Pepperstone. This means it significantly underperformed relative to what many clients experienced elsewhere. While the public track record showed flat performance for 2025, many clients at other brokers achieved solid two-digit returns. What We’re Doing We're withdrawing from Pepperstone and will no longer use it. This is just the first step. In the next post, we’ll break down what’s changing, and how we’re optimizing execution going forward. You deserve the best possible trading conditions. We’re making sure you get them. Best, Algocrat AI Team0,00%
23 апр.📈 64.81% In 90 Days [Q1 Performance Report] The first quarter of 2026 is officially in the books, and we're thrilled to share the exceptional results we got at Algocrat AI. After the foundational work we completed throughout 2025—refining our algorithms, enhancing risk management, and strengthening our infrastructure—these numbers represent the payoff our long-term traders have been waiting for. Legacy Portfolio Performance • +46.91% total growth • 8.70% maximum drawdown Our flagship Legacy Portfolio continued its remarkable momentum from January, delivering consistent gains while maintaining disciplined risk management throughout the quarter. Nova Portfolio Performance • +17.90% total growth • 3.84% maximum drawdown The Nova Portfolio demonstrated exactly what it was designed for: steady, controlled growth with minimal volatility—perfect for traders seeking lower-risk exposure. Combined Portfolio Impact: +64.81% Together, both portfolios generated an incredible +64.81% in combined growth during Q1 2026, proving that our dual-portfolio approach delivers results across different risk profiles. To our existing traders: Congratulations! Your patience during our development phase in 2025 is now paying significant dividends. Ready to Join? If you've been watching from the sidelines, Q1 2026 demonstrates why serious traders choose Algocrat AI for consistently unmatched algorithmic trading performance. 👉 Click Here To Apply Now Best regards, The Algocrat AI Team0,00%
31 мар.✨ AI bubble or not, this window won't last forever We recently discussed the AI bubble and how venture capital is heavily subsidizing tools like Claude and OpenAI Codex. This creates a rare opportunity where users get massive productivity gains at artificially low prices. Whether there's a bubble or not, it makes sense to use these tools to their fullest potential right now. The Reliability Problem Is Disappearing Fast Everyone knows AI has reliability issues, but that perception is changing rapidly. Anthropic famously tested their models by having them manage office vending machines — with mixed results at best. However, new AI models with dramatically improved reliability have emerged in recent months. If you tried these tools even three months ago, the latest versions might surprise you. The Coding Experience Has Transformed These appear to be slightly improved versions of previous models, but the actual working experience is completely different. A few months ago, AI-generated code was unreliable and created endless debugging loops that spawned countless memes. Now, with Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-5.3-Codex, the code simply works most of the time. For most practical use cases, you describe what you need and get working code. Software Developers Aren't Going Anywhere Prediction markets and industry professionals don't expect mass unemployment in software engineering anytime soon. Software developers do much more than write code — they clarify requirements, make trade-offs, and handle production responsibility. AI adoption remains limited by governance and risk concerns, and saved time often gets reinvested into building more software rather than cutting jobs. Time to Act Experienced developers already understand this shift. But if you're a domain expert who never mastered coding, you likely have ideas that AI could now help implement. If you haven't tried these latest tools yet, now is the time to start. 👉 Explore AI-Powered Trading Tools Best, The Algocrat Team0,00%
16 мар.❓Is there an AI bubble, and will It pop? (here's the math) What is an AI bubble burst? Ask 10 people, and you'll get 11 opinions. However, for the purposes of this post, we'll call it a significant, sustained drop in the valuations of leading AI-related companies, supported by official price data and major news outlets Now, let's see what people are most worried about. The first concern among many investors is the high concentration in the U.S. stock market. It's currently at an all-time high, with the 7 biggest stocks (AI-exposed megacaps) comprising a whopping 33% of the S&P 500. In a 500-company index, where only 7 account for a third, that surely can't be good, right? Actually, economic research doesn't support this claim. -Higher Stock Market Concentration Does Not Mean Higher Risk (Acadian, March 2024), - Stock Market Concentration (Morgan Stanley, Jun 4, 2024), - and a variety of other studies show there has been no historical correlation between market concentration and the probability of stock market dips. However, this doesn't mean tail risks remain the same. With higher concentration, markets are more prone to sharper dips because of sudden "black swan" events Another thing people often mention is the very high valuations right now: It's well known that a high CAPE (Shiller cyclically adjusted P/E) has historically been a good indicator of lower-than-average returns going forward. This has been shown by a variety of market research: - Valuation Ratios and the Long-Run Stock Market Outlook (Campbell & Shiller), - Equity Market Focus: Objective Expected Returns (AQR, 2025), - Current Constituents CAPE (Research Affiliates, 2025). This pattern has held many times across different markets: the "lost decade" of the US market after 1999, Japan after 1989, Canada in 2000, and so on. However, "statistically more likely" does not mean "it will happen". And markets can sustain bull runs for a long time before an eventual decline If we look at the substance, the main problem with the current AI wave is simple: Companies are spending huge amounts of money to build AI infrastructure and hire the best available AI talent, while not earning nearly enough to cover those costs. Leaked industry reports support this claim: leading AI labs are burning billions of dollars and, as experts say, don't have a clear strategy for recouping them. The strategy seems to be: "we'll go all-in on AI research, and then figure out how to make money". That's why many AI tools are surprisingly cheap these days. They are so cheap because they are subsidized by venture capital. You can build a working app for just a few dollars using Claude Code or OpenAI Codex because those tools have been paid for by AI investors. A mature, self-funding market would have priced them much higher than they are now Now, to the most important part: How likely is a significant devaluation? Companies are taking this high-stakes gamble not because they are dumb, but because they think they will win big. Of course, nobody knows the answer, and any estimates here would be probabilistic. T hese estimates also depend on the time horizon. Looking at the next 2 years, the estimated chance of a "bubble" by the end of 2026 is roughly 20%, and by the end of 2027 it's 35-40%. There is probably no merit in looking even further, as predictions become increasingly uncertain the longer the time horizon So, the chances of it happening rather soon are there. At the same time, there is likely a greater than 60% chance it won't happen by the end of 2027. If that's true, we'll soon see even higher valuations and spending among the top AI companies. So, people using AI tools are likely to continue being subsidized by venture capital in the coming years. If you can leverage these tools for your work, now is the best time to do it: 👉 Apply for Access Now Best, The Algocrat AI Team0,00%
2 мар.без подписи0,00%
2 мар.без подписи0,00%
2 мар.без подписи0,00%
2 мар.🤨 ATH Portfolios, But Negative Sentiment? (The Paradox) January and February were marked by strong performance in both the Legacy and Nova Algocrat AI portfolios. However, within the Algocrat AI community, the sentiment has been mostly negative recently. Why are people often upset even though both portfolios are at an all-time high and are profitable? The Negativity Bias There are two practical reasons for this. First, we are evolutionarily inclined toward negativity, which is why most news outlets focus more on bad news than good news. It's also why people with any issues are more likely to actively participate in chats. Recently, many users have been outperforming our Legacy track record. However, only those with matching or worse results responded when asked for their outcomes. When everything is going well, people tend to stay quiet, but when problems arise, they are more likely to join the discussion. Loss Aversion at Work The second reason is plain old loss aversion. The gist is that people react more strongly to losing money than to gaining the same amount. Most people have this tendency, and those who don't are often professionally deformed (e.g., professional traders). Again, it appears we are evolutionarily predisposed to it. The Daily Monitoring Problem What does this look like in practice? When someone closely monitors a trading account, they often see both profits and losses. As mentioned earlier, people tend to feel losses more strongly than profits. That's why, even if there's a profit overall, most people perceive the results as negative when they watch their trading closely. The Simple Solution If the day-to-day swings are stressing you out, that's not a character flaw. It's a very normal human response. The simplest fix is to zoom out: check results less often, follow the process, and judge performance over longer windows. You'll usually feel better. Best, The Algocrat AI Team0,00%