2026-07-29 to 2026-08-28 · 23 sessions
The early warning is as good as the full signal — and that is not a promotion
A quiet heads-up fired when a large position is only part-way unwound. It grades level with the loud signal it precedes, which makes it real and still does not justify making it loud.
In simple words
What happened
The partial warning hits 53% of the time against 50% for the full signal that already earns a loud alert — statistically indistinguishable, and with the largest typical peak of the three stages. So the warning is measuring something real. It is not measuring something better, and "as good as the thing we already have" is not a reason to add another loud alert to a feed we recently spent effort quieting.
Who would pay?
A large position rarely closes at once. If a partial exit is detectable, the warning arrives before the full exit does — and the earlier warning is worth more, provided it is not just noise.
How it was tested
All three stages of the same unwind lifecycle were graded the same way over the same window, on real contract prices, collapsed to one observation per name, day and side. The comparison is between stages of one process rather than against an unrelated benchmark.
What would prove it wrong?
The pre-registered failure mode was noise: more than 1.5 fires per session per side would have meant the warning was firing on ordinary churn. It fires 0.87 times per session, comfortably inside the ceiling.
Leader-collapsed evidence
What each setup actually did
19 independent partial warnings, against 24 early and 22 full signals over the same window
| Stage | Episodes | Hit rate | Lower bound | Median peak | Current treatment | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PARTIALPartial unwind detected (the early warning) | 19 | 53% | +115.7% | 32% | Quiet, 0.87 fires/session | NEGATIVE EVIDENCE |
| EARLYEarly unwind stage | 24 | 58% | +101.1% | 39% | Quiet | NEGATIVE EVIDENCE |
| FULLFull unwind (already a loud alert) | 22 | 50% | +97.6% | 31% | Loud | NEGATIVE EVIDENCE |
What we keep
Learnings
- 01
Parity is a real result and it is not a promotion. The honest summary is that the early warning is not noise — which is a different claim from saying it should be louder.
- 02
Set the noise ceiling before you look. Fire rate was the pre-registered way this could have failed, it was checked first, and it passed — which is what makes the outcome comparison worth reading at all.
- 03
Compare stages of one process rather than reaching for an outside benchmark. All three stages share a lane, a window and a grading rule, so the differences between them are about the stage and nothing else.
- 04
A standing instruction to reduce alert volume is itself evidence. When a new candidate grades level with an existing alert, the default should be to keep it quiet.
- 05
Typical peak favours the partial warning (+116% against +98%), but peaks are not captured returns, so that difference does not carry the decision.