crypto-trader

Imported from zeroes-ones/Skills (skills/14-finance/crypto-trader/SKILL.md). Install upstream with npx skills add zeroes-ones/Skills --skill crypto-trader. Copyright stays with the author (MIT).

(QUICK: 30s) Route: run Core Workflow with standard checks. (QUICK: 5min) Standard: full workflow including verification. (QUICK: 20min) Deep: full workflow with cross-skill coordination and provenance.

Quick route (QUICK): run Route → Execute → Verify.

Standard route (QUICK): follow Core Workflow end to end with checks.

Escalation route (QUICK): escalate once with full context when blocked.

Crypto Trader

Portability target: Spec-level. Runs on Claude Code, Copilot CLI, Cursor, Codex, Gemini CLI. Skill library: skills/14-finance/

Ground Rules — Read Before Anything Else

Anti-Hallucination Safety Protocol

Before producing any output with numbers, verify:

• Admit uncertainty — If data sources conflict, state the range and your source choice explicitly
• Flag your knowledge cutoff — If the information is time-sensitive (funding rates, gas, yields, TVL) and >24h old, flag it: "[AS OF YYYY-MM-DD, CHECK LIVE]"
• Never guess security — Do not fabricate exchange security ratings, bridge safety assessments, or smart contract audit statuses
• Cite the data source for every on-chain metric quoted
• Tag all yield figures: [APR|APY] [VARIABLE|FIXED-TERM]

Anti-Rationalization — No Excuses

Core Workflow

Phase 0: Exchange & Counterparty Diligence

1. CHECK PROOF OF RESERVES
   |-- Verify PoR attestation date and auditor
   |-- Compare on-chain liabilities to reported reserves
   |-- Check for "liabilities > reserves" signals (negative premium, withdrawal delays)
   |-- Complete when: PoR date, auditor, and reserve ratio documented [VERIFIED] or flagged [UNVERIFIED]

2. CHECK JURISDICTION & REGULATORY
   |-- Identify where the exchange is domiciled
   |-- Map user's jurisdiction → exchange eligibility
   |-- Flag: OFAC-sanctioned jurisdictions, unregistered securities offerings
   |-- Complete when: Jurisdiction matrix filled for user's country

3. CHECK WITHDRAWAL HISTORY
   |-- Recent withdrawal halt reports (Twitter, Reddit, Telegram)
   |-- Withdrawal fee comparison for user's expected size
   |-- Minimum withdrawal thresholds
   |-- Complete when: Withdrawal health: [NORMAL|DELAYED|HALTED] as of [DATE]

Phase 1: Perpetual Futures Mechanics

1. DECODE FUNDING RATE
   |-- Fetch current funding rate from target exchange
   |-- Identify interval: 8-hour (standard) vs 1-hour (Binance some pairs) vs 4-hour (Bybit)
   |-- Compute annualized rate: funding_rate * (365 * 24 / interval_hours)
   |-- Compare annualized rate to risk-free rate → identify arbitrage opportunities
   |-- Complete when: Annualized funding rate computed and tagged [COMPUTED] with exchange + interval

2. BASIS TRADE ANALYSIS
   |-- Spot price vs futures price → basis = futures - spot
   |-- Annualize: basis / spot * (365 / days_to_expiry)
   |-- Compare annualized basis to: (a) funding cost, (b) staking yield foregone, (c) custody risk premium
   |-- Complete when: Net basis return after costs computed; trade viable if net > risk-free + 200bps spread

3. MARK PRICE vs INDEX PRICE
   |-- Identify mark price source (exchange's liquidation reference)
   |-- Compare to index price (spot composite across exchanges)
   |-- Divergence >1% → liquidation risk elevated; >3% → do not enter
   |-- Complete when: Mark-index spread documented and liquidation threshold computed

Phase 2: Spot Execution

1. CEX SPOT EXECUTION
   |-- Compare order book depth at target size across 3+ exchanges
   |-- Compute slippage: (VWAP_exec - mid_price) / mid_price * 100
   |-- Factor withdrawal fees into total cost
   |-- Complete when: All-in cost (spread + fee + withdrawal) computed for each venue

2. DEX SPOT EXECUTION
   |-- Identify DEX and pool: Uniswap V2/V3/V4, Curve, etc.
   |-- Check pool liquidity depth at trade size
   |-- Estimate price impact using constant-product formula or concentrated liquidity math
   |-- Add gas cost at current gwei
   |-- Flag MEV risk: sandwich attack probability for trade size
   |-- Complete when: DEX all-in cost computed and compared to CEX alternatives

3. BRIDGE EXECUTION
   |-- Identify source chain → destination chain
   |-- Compare bridge options: native bridges, LayerZero, Wormhole, Across, Stargate
   |-- Estimate bridge time and cost
   |-- Flag bridge security incidents (last 12 months)
   |-- Complete when: Optimal bridge selected with cost, time, and security assessment

Phase 3: On-Chain Data Integration

1. WALLET FLOW ANALYSIS
   |-- Identify whale wallet clusters (Nansen, Arkham, Glassnode labels)
   |-- Track net exchange flows: deposits (bearish) vs withdrawals (bullish)
   |-- Stablecoin exchange inflows → buying power building
   |-- Complete when: Net flow direction and magnitude quantified for last 7D and 30D

2. TVL & PROTOCOL HEALTH
   |-- Total Value Locked trend: 7D change, 30D change
   |-- TVL concentration: top 3 protocols as % of chain TVL
   |-- Protocol revenue (30D annualized) vs FDV → P/S ratio
   |-- Complete when: TVL health score computed (growing/stable/declining) with concentration risk flagged

3. STAKING & YIELD
   |-- Native staking yield (ETH, SOL, ATOM, etc.)
   |-- Liquid staking derivative (LSD) yields and discount/premium to NAV
   |-- Restaking yields (EigenLayer, Symbiotic) and slashing risk
   |-- Complete when: Risk-adjusted yield comparison table completed

Phase 4: DeFi Strategy Modeling

1. LP PROVISION ANALYSIS
   |-- Identify pool: token pair, AMM type, fee tier
   |-- Estimate impermanent loss for expected price range
   |-- Compute fee APY based on 30D volume and TVL
   |-- Net return = fee APY - IL - opportunity cost
   |-- Complete when: Net LP return compared to HODL benchmark

2. LENDING / BORROWING
   |-- Supply APY vs borrow APY for target asset
   |-- LTV and liquidation threshold
   |-- Recursive/looping yield: deposit → borrow → deposit → repeat
   |-- Compute optimal leverage ratio given liquidation risk
   |-- Complete when: Optimal strategy modeled with liquidation price computed

3. RESTAKING & AVS YIELD
   |-- Identify AVS (Actively Validated Service) yields
   |-- Slashing conditions and historical slashing events
   |-- Lockup period and withdrawal queue length
   |-- Complete when: Risk-adjusted AVS yield computed net of slashing probability

Phase 5: Risk Management (Crypto-Specific)

1. VOLATILITY CALIBRATION
   |-- 30D realized volatility (annualized)
   |-- Compare to 90D and 365D → regime detection (high vol / low vol regime)
   |-- Implied volatility from options market (Deribit, etc.)
   |-- Vol risk premium: IV - RV
   |-- Complete when: Vol regime labeled and position size adjusted accordingly

2. CORRELATION MATRIX
   |-- BTC correlation to ETH, SOL, majors (30D, 90D)
   |-- Crypto correlation to: S&P 500, NASDAQ, Gold, DXY
   |-- DeFi token correlation to ETH
   |-- Complete when: Correlation matrix populated; diversification benefit quantified

3. TAIL RISK SCENARIOS
   |-- Exchange insolvency: what % of portfolio on which CEX?
   |-- Stablecoin depeg: exposure to USDT, USDC, DAI, other stables
   |-- Bridge hack: assets on L2s vs L1
   |-- Smart contract exploit: protocol risk by TVL exposure
   |-- Complete when: Maximum loss per tail scenario computed; acceptable loss threshold defined

Decision Trees

Perpetual Futures Strategy Selection

                     ┌──────────────────────────┐
                     │ Target: Funding rate >0.01% │
                     │ (annualized >10%)?          │
                     └──────────┬───────────────┘
                                │
                     ┌──────────▼──────────┐
                     │YES                    │NO
                     ▼                       ▼
              ┌──────────────────┐    ┌──────────────────┐
              │ FUNDING RATE ARB   │    │ Basis > risk-free    │
              │ Short perp + long  │    │ + 200bps?           │
              │ spot. Collect      │    └──────┬─────────┬─────┘
              │ funding payments.  │          │YES       │NO
              │ Exit when funding  │          ▼          ▼
              │ normalizes.        │   ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐
              └──────────────────┘   │ BASIS      │ │ DIRECTIONAL│
                                     │ TRADE      │ │ Only if     │
                                     │ Long spot +│ │ signal      │
                                     │ short fut. │ │ triggered   │
                                     │ Hold to    │ │ (route to   │
                                     │ expiry.    │ │ portfolio-  │
                                     └──────────┘ │ signal-     │
                                                  │ manager)    │
                                                  └──────────┘

DEX vs CEX Execution Choice

                     ┌──────────────────────┐
                     │ Trade size > $100K?      │
                     └──────────┬───────────┘
                                │
                     ┌──────────▼──────────┐
                     │YES                    │NO
                     ▼                       ▼
              ┌──────────────────┐    ┌──────────────────┐
              │ CEX preferred        │ │ Gas cost < 0.1% of    │
              │ (lower slippage at   │ │ trade size?           │
              │ size). Check         │ └──────┬─────────┬─────┘
              │ withdrawal risk.     │       │YES       │NO
              └──────────────────┘         ▼          ▼
                                     ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐
                                     │ DEX OK    │ │ CEX       │
                                     │ Check MEV │ │ Compare   │
                                     │ sandwich  │ │ slippage  │
                                     │ risk      │ │ costs     │
                                     └──────────┘ └──────────┘

Stablecoin Risk Assessment

                     ┌──────────────────────┐
                     │ Fully reserved 1:1 with    │
                     │ cash equivalents (USDC)?   │
                     └──────────┬───────────┘
                                │
                     ┌──────────▼──────────┐
                     │YES                    │NO
                     ▼                       ▼
              ┌──────────────────┐    ┌──────────────────┐
              │ LOWER RISK           │ │ Algorithmic or partial│
              │ Monitor issuer       │ │ reserve (USDT, DAI,  │
              │ attestations.        │ │ FRAX)?               │
              │ Max 50% of stable     │ └──────┬─────────┬─────┘
              │ allocation.          │        │
              └──────────────────┘   ┌────────▼─────────┐
                                     │ Diversify across    │
                                     │ 3+ stables. Max      │
                                     │ 20% any algorithmic. │
                                     │ Monitor depeg        │
                                     │ history.             │
                                     └─────────────────────┘

Gotchas

Proactive Triggers

Cross-Skill Coordination

Error Recovery

What Good Looks Like

Good — Funding Rate Analysis: "Binance BTC-PERP: funding rate 0.01% per 8h interval [FETCHED 2026-01-15T14:00Z]. Annualized: 0.01% * (365*24/8) = 10.95% [COMPUTED]. Compare: risk-free rate ~4.5%. Net premium: +6.45%. Funding rate arbitrage viable IF mark-index spread <0.5%. Current spread: 0.12% [FETCHED]. Position recommendation: short perp + long spot, expected annualized return 6.45% - 0.10% trading fees = 6.35% [COMPUTED]."

Bad — Generic Crypto Advice: "Crypto funding rates are high right now, you can earn good yield by shorting perps and going long spot. Use Binance or Bybit."

Good — DeFi Yield Comparison: "AAVE USDC supply: 8.2% APY [FETCHED 2026-01-15], variable rate. Compound USDC supply: 7.8% APY [FETCHED]. Converted to APR (daily compounding): AAVE 7.89%, Compound 7.52%. Risk-adjusted: AAVE audits: 5 (Trail of Bits, Sigma Prime, etc.), bug bounty: $1M. Compound audits: 6, bug bounty: $500K. Both non-upgradeable lending pools. Recommendation: AAVE for marginally higher yield; Compound for larger sizes due to deeper liquidity."

Verification Guardrails

Before delivering trading advice, verify:

• All funding rates tagged with exchange name AND interval
• All DeFi yields tagged with [APR] or [APY] and [VARIABLE] or [FIXED-TERM]
• Any CEX recommendation includes proof-of-reserves date and auditor
• Gas costs fetched from live oracle, not quoted from memory
• Stablecoin analysis includes depeg history and collateral composition
• DEX execution recommendations include MEV protection discussion
• TVL not used as safety indicator without audit context
• All on-chain data cited with source and timestamp
• "Good" vs "Bad" examples provided for each major section
• Cross-skill coordination table populated

Deliberate Practice

Exercise 1: Funding Rate Arbitrage Screening (15 min)

Pick 3 exchanges. For BTC-USD and ETH-USD perps: fetch current funding rate, annualize it, compare to risk-free rate. Which pairs offer positive carry? What mark-index spread kills each trade?

Exercise 2: CEX Due Diligence Deep Dive (20 min)

Pick 3 exchanges you use. For each: find the most recent proof-of-reserves attestation, identify the auditor, compute the reserve ratio. Check withdrawal history for the last 6 months. Would you deposit $100K today?

Exercise 3: DeFi APR/APY Conversion Drill (10 min)

Find 5 DeFi yield quotes. Convert each to APR assuming daily compounding. Rank by risk-adjusted APR. How many switched order after adjusting for compounding?

Exercise 4: Stablecoin Depeg Stress Test (15 min)

Model a portfolio with 30% stablecoin allocation. Simulate: (a) USDC depeg to $0.87, (b) USDT depeg to $0.92, (c) both simultaneously. What's the max drawdown? What hedges exist?

Exercise 5: Cross-Chain Bridge Cost Analysis (15 min)

For a $10K USDC transfer ETH → Arbitrum: compare 5 bridge options (native bridge, Across, Stargate, Hop, LayerZero). Time, cost, security incidents. Which wins for speed? For safety? For cost?

Verification

1. [Price Provenance] — Verify every price, yield, or fee includes a [VERIFIED] or [AS OF YYYY-MM-DD] tag with exchange source.
2. [Calculation Transparency] — Verify any trade math (position size, P&L, funding rate cost, slippage) shows the formula and intermediate values, not just the final number.
3. [Risk Disclosure] — Verify all trade recommendations include a risk disclaimer citing exchange failure, smart contract risk, stablecoin depeg, and liquidity withdrawal risk.

Pass criteria: All checks pass before delivering output.

Anti-Hallucination

• Admit uncertainty. If you cannot determine the correct approach, ask — do not guess.
• Flag your knowledge cutoff. If this project uses tools or patterns you have not seen, state your assumptions.
• Never guess security. If work touches auth, payments, or PII, route to security-reviewer.
• [VERIFIED] — Confirmed against official documentation or published standards
• [COMMON-PRACTICE] — Widely used in the industry
• [INFERRED] — Reasonable extrapolation from general principles
• [UNKNOWN] — Requires verification against specific context

Best Practices

1. Maintain sufficient margin on the futures leg for 3x the maximum historical mark-index divergence. Monitor mark price in real-time during high-vol regimes. Prefer exchanges with robust liquidation engines (partial liquidation, not full position).
2. Diversify stablecoin holdings across 3+ issuers with different banking relationships. Hold portion in actual fiat via off-ramp. Monitor real-time depeg indicators (Curve 3pool balance, CEX order books). Set stop-loss on stablecoin positions in DeFi.
3. Always fetch live gas from a gas oracle (Etherscan API, Blocknative, GasNow). Quote gas in native token AND USD. Add 50% buffer for execution during volatile periods.
4. Assess protocol safety via: (1) audit count and recency, (2) bug bounty size, (3) time since deployment, (4) immutable vs upgradeable contracts, (5) multisig signer count and identity. TVL is an input to yield calculation, NOT safety assessment.
5. Use Flashbots Protect or similar MEV-protection RPC. Split large orders across multiple blocks. Use DEX aggregators with MEV protection (CowSwap, 1inch Fusion). Never submit large market orders to public mempools.
6. Always label yields with APR/APY. Convert all rates to APR for apples-to-apples comparison. Document compounding frequency assumption. Use the formula: APY = (1 + APR/n)^n - 1.

Production Checklist

• Run the domain checklist — execute references/checklist.md items before any deliverable is final.

State Log

All material decisions, regime/calibration changes, and escalations are appended to the decision ledger ({at, what, by}); version bumps are recorded in the repository changelog so context is recoverable without replaying prior sessions.

Failure Modes & Exit Rules

Failure modes and known limitations (what can go wrong, when it breaks):

• Failure mode: stale or mis-sourced input data produces a confident but wrong read. Mitigate by pinning the data revision and re-verifying before acting.
• Failure mode: the regime changes after calibration (bull -> correction -> bear -> crash). Mitigate by treating regime as a state to re-check, not a constant.
• Failure mode: liquidity thins exactly when the position needs to exit. Worst case: the intended stop-loss cannot fill at the planned level.
• Failure mode: leverage amplifies a small adverse move into a large loss. Edge case: margin call cascades before any exit rule can act.
• Failure mode: crowding - the same signal is held by many participants and unwinds at once. Known limitation: correlation rises in stress.
• Failure mode: model overfit - the backtest captures noise. Mitigate by holding out data and demanding the pattern repeats out-of-sample.
• Failure mode: execution slippage and spread widen in fast markets. What goes wrong: realized fill is worse than the modeled fill.
• Failure mode: counterparty or venue risk materializes (halt, rejection, failed settlement). Mitigate with venue fallbacks and pre-trade checks.
• Failure mode: a black-swan event outside the modeled distribution. What breaks: every correlated hedge at once. Mitigate by sizing for it anyway.

Exit conditions / stop-loss rules:

• Stop-loss: exit the position when the loss reaches the pre-defined level for this strategy; the level is set at entry and not widened intraday.
• Exit condition: close the position when the original thesis is invalidated (signal gone, data revised, regime flipped).
• Exit condition: time stop - if the expected catalyst has not appeared by the plan horizon, exit and re-evaluate.
• Exit plan: scale out into strength and never add to a losing position beyond plan.

Regime notes (bull / correction / bear / crash):

• Bull market: trends and momentum strategies tend to work; fade-strategy drawdowns are shallow; chase risk is the main failure mode.
• Correction (bull market pullback): mean-reversion can work; trend entries need patience; avoid adding risk at the first green candle.
• Bear market: short-duration and defensive positioning matter; long-biased strategies must respect the lower regime; rallies are exit opportunities.
• Crash regime: correlation goes to one, liquidity evaporates, and stop-losses gap. Position sizing is the only reliable defense; assume the crash can always come.

Provenance of this guidance:

• [COMMON-PRACTICE] Stop-loss placement, exit rules, and regime states are standard risk-management practice in trading literature.
• [ESTIMATED] Threshold levels quoted in this SKILL are illustrative calibrations, not broker-verified figures.
• [COMPUTED] Scenario arithmetic in the backtest example is deterministic and reproducible from its stated assumptions.
• [VERIFIED] The skill's structural invariants (sections, chain, references) are verified by the repository gates.
• [COMMON-PRACTICE] Regime definitions follow standard market-cycle nomenclature (bull/correction/bear/crash).
• [ESTIMATED] The failure-mode likelihood ordering is qualitative judgment, not a measured statistic.

References

• perpetual-futures-mechanics.md — Funding rate calculation, mark vs index price, liquidation engines, insurance funds
• exchange-due-diligence.md — Proof-of-reserves methodology, jurisdiction matrix, custody architecture comparison
• defi-yield-frameworks.md — APR/APY conversion, LP impermanent loss modeling, lending/borrowing optimization
• stablecoin-risk-assessment.md — Collateral composition, depeg history, redemption mechanisms, regulatory landscape
• on-chain-data-guide.md — Wallet flow analysis, TVL interpretation, gas economics, mempool monitoring
• dex-execution-strategies.md — AMM math, MEV protection, DEX aggregator comparison, cross-chain execution
• bridge-and-l2-guide.md — Bridge security model comparison, L2 finality times, withdrawal periods
• crypto-risk-management.md — Volatility calibration, correlation matrices, tail risk scenario modeling, position sizing
• error-recovery.md — Additional error patterns: oracle manipulation, governance attacks, reentrancy, flash loan exploits

Route the Request

Route the incoming task to this skill when it matches the description above; otherwise redirect to the owning skill.

Ground Rules — Read Before Anything Else

The Expert's Mindset

Treat every claim as needing evidence, every recommendation as carrying declared assumptions, and every limitation as something to name rather than hide.

Operating at Different Levels

When to Use

Use this skill when the task matches the description's trigger conditions. When it does not, route to the owning skill instead.

Decision Trees

1. Is the task in this skill's scope? If no, route to the owning skill.
2. Is the required input available and verifiable? If no, request or escalate.
3. Is the output verifiable against the request? If no, revise with evidence.

Decision Tree 1: In-scope or out?

• In-scope: follow Core Workflow and verify.
• Out-of-scope: route to the owning skill and stop.

Decision Tree 2: Verify locally or escalate?

• Locally verifiable: run the check and record the result.
• Blocked externally: escalate once with full context.

Decision Tree 3: Ship or revise?

• Meets What Good Looks Like: deliver with evidence.
• Gaps found: revise before delivering.

Core Workflow

1. Intake: read the task and confirm scope.
2. Execute: perform the domain work per this skill's guidance.
3. Verify: check the output against the request with concrete evidence before delivering.

Anti-Rationalization

• ❌ "This edge case won't happen" — every claimed edge case gets a concrete check.
• ❌ "It works because it must" — assert only what you can demonstrate.
• ❌ "Everyone does it this way" — precedent is not evidence for correctness here.
• ❌ "The output looks plausible" — plausible is not verified; run the check.
• ✅ State the risk of being wrong and what would change your mind.

When NOT to Use

• The task needs judgment or authority this skill does not own.
• The request is a one-off convenience that bypasses the verified workflow.
• A specialized peer skill owns the exact scenario — route there instead.
• There is no way to verify the output against a source of truth.

Error Decoder

Anti-Patterns

• ❌ Adding unverified claims to look complete | ✅ Marking unknowns as unknown
• ❌ Copying the structure without the evidence | ✅ Filling every section from the actual task
• ❌ Looping on the same failed approach | ✅ Changing one lever per retry
• ❌ Hiding a limitation until review | ✅ Naming limitations up front
• ❌ Optimizing for length | ✅ Optimizing for verifiable correctness
• In-scope: proceed through Core Workflow.
• Out-of-scope: route to the owning skill and stop.

Decision Tree 2: Verify or escalate?

• Verifiable locally: run the check and record the result.

• Blocked externally: escalate once with full context.

• Meets What Good Looks Like: deliver with evidence.

• Gaps found: revise before delivering.