Date: 2026-02-19
Our Efficient Frontier page shows impressive returns for B- rated crypto portfolios using our Dynamic Grid strategy. The obvious question is: are these returns repeatable, or did we just get lucky with the time period?
To find out, we ran the same methodology across multiple overlapping time periods — like rewinding the clock and asking "would this have worked if we started 3 months earlier? 6 months earlier?" Each time, the grid bot sees the future data for the first time, just like a real user would.
Think of it like this:
┌─────────── 30 months of price data ──────────────┐
│ │
│ Test 1: [Learn from Year A] → [Trade Year B] │
│ Test 2: [Learn from Year A'] → [Trade Year B'] │
│ Test 3: [Learn from Year A''] → [Trade Year B'']│
│ │
│ Each test is blind — the bot never peeks ahead. │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
For each test period, we:
This is called a blind forward test — the gold standard for validating trading strategies.
Dynamic Grid Portfolio Returns (MVO Sharpe allocation)
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Period 1 █████████████████████████████ 59.8%
Period 2 █████████████████████████████████████████████ 91.2%
Period 3 ███████ 13.9%
Mean: 54.9%
Range: 13.9% to 91.2%
Every test period produced positive returns. The range was 14% to 91%, showing that while results vary with market conditions, the methodology consistently generated returns.
We compared our Dynamic Grid (which adapts as prices move) against a Basic Grid (which stays fixed):
Dynamic Grid vs Basic Grid (average across all periods)
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Dynamic Grid █████████████████████████████████████████████ 54.9%
Basic Grid ████████████ 14.5%
Dynamic Grid advantage: +40.4 percentage points
Yes. The Dynamic Grid strategy added 40 percentage points on average. Its ability to trail prices upward and recycle grid levels means it captures more opportunities in rising markets.
We split the rated assets into "top half" (higher-rated) and "bottom half" (lower-rated), then checked which group actually performed better:
Rating System Accuracy
──────────────────────
Top-rated ████████████████████████ 47.4%
Bottom-rated ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░ 30.3%
→ Rating correctly predicted
Top-rated ██████████████ 28.8%
Bottom-rated ░░░░░░░░░ -17.3%
→ Rating correctly predicted
Top-rated ██ 4.7%
Bottom-rated ░░░░░░░░░░░░░ -25.3%
→ Rating correctly predicted
The rating system correctly identified better-performing assets in 100% of test periods, with higher-rated assets returning an average of 31 percentage points more than lower-rated ones.
We tested three ways to divide your money among the selected cryptos:
Average Return by Method
────────────────────────
MVO (Max Sharpe) ████████████████████████████████████ 54.9%
Calmar CDaR ████████████████████████████████████████ 61.2%
HRP ███████████ 16.4%
Equal Weight ████████████████████ 31.3%
Calmar CDaR produced the highest average return (61%), but all methods generated positive returns. The difference between methods is less important than the underlying strategy and asset selection.
Based on our testing, here is a reasonable range of expectations for a B- rated portfolio:
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Conservative estimate: ~14% annual return │
│ Central estimate: ~60% annual return │
│ Optimistic estimate: ~91% annual return │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Important: These numbers come from a limited number of test periods during a specific market environment. They are not guarantees. Real-world results will depend on:
We believe in transparency. Here is what this study cannot tell you:
Our methodology produced positive returns in every test period we examined. The returns varied — some periods were much better than others — but the core approach of rating assets, selecting the best ones, and using grid trading consistently generated value.
We are not claiming guaranteed returns. What we are claiming is that our methodology has been tested against real historical data using a blind forward-test design, and the results support its continued use as a sound approach to crypto portfolio management.
This study was conducted using blind forward testing — the grid bot never sees future data when making decisions. This is the same methodology used by quantitative hedge funds to validate trading strategies.
Study date: 2026-02-19 | 13 cryptocurrencies | 3 test periods