Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Use when writing a Bollinger-band mean-reversion strategy on Superior Trade — anything described as mean reversion, BB bands, oversold bounce, fade, range trade, ADX low, sigma extension. Upgraded 2026-05-18 from the prior 1h/2.5σ variant to the validated 4h/2σ/ADX<25 version (+8.77% multi-pair, 65.5% win over 162d). Prior 1h variant is preserved at the end of the file as an archived reference.
.claude/skills/superior-trade-mean-reversion/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 18% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 28% | 0% |
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -23% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 54% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 59% | 0% |
Note: This template was upgraded from the prior 1h / 2.5σ / ADX<30 version to the 4h / 2σ / ADX<25 version after backtesting showed the 4h variant produces meaningfully more trades with comparable risk and validated multi-pair edge. The prior 1h version is preserved at the end for reference.
Symmetric mean-reversion strategy on the 4h timeframe. Long-or-short on Bollinger band touches, gated to range regimes via ADX. Validated across BTC/ETH/SOL/DOGE over 162 days.
| Config | Trades | Win | Profit | Max DD | |---|---|---|---|---| | BTC/USDC:USDC, 162d | 18 | 72% | +8.14% | 10% | | BTC/USDC:USDC, range-regime sub-window (80d) | 8 | 100% | +9.88% | 0% | | BTC/ETH/SOL/DOGE multi-pair, 162d | 84 | 65.5% | +8.77% | 18.5% |
When the market is range-bound (ADX < 25), price touching the upper or lower Bollinger Band reliably reverts to the midline. Tight ROI takes profit fast since mean-reversion targets are small; tight stop closes positions that turn into trend breaks rather than reversions.
close > bb_upper AND rsi > 65 AND adx < 25close < bb_lower AND rsi < 35 AND adx < 25pythonfrom freqtrade.strategy import IStrategy import pandas as pd import talib.abstract as ta class MeanReversionStrategy(IStrategy): INTERFACE_VERSION = 3 timeframe = "4h" can_short = True stoploss = -0.02 trailing_stop = False minimal_roi = { "0": 0.025, "240": 0.015, "720": 0.005, "1440": 0, } process_only_new_candles = True startup_candle_count = 60 use_exit_signal = True def populate_indicators(self, dataframe: pd.DataFrame, metadata: dict) -> pd.DataFrame: bb = ta.BBANDS(dataframe, timeperiod=20, nbdevup=2.0, nbdevdn=2.0) dataframe["bb_upper"] = bb["upperband"] dataframe["bb_mid"] = bb["middleband"] dataframe["bb_lower"] = bb["lowerband"] dataframe["rsi"] = ta.RSI(dataframe, timeperiod=14) dataframe["adx"] = ta.ADX(dataframe, timeperiod=14) return dataframe def populate_entry_trend(self, dataframe: pd.DataFrame, metadata: dict) -> pd.DataFrame: cond_short = ( (dataframe["close"] > dataframe["bb_upper"]) & (dataframe["rsi"] > 65) & (dataframe["adx"] < 25) ) dataframe.loc[cond_short, "enter_short"] = 1 dataframe.loc[cond_short, "enter_tag"] = "bb_upper_revert" cond_long = ( (dataframe["close"] < dataframe["bb_lower"]) & (dataframe["rsi"] < 35) & (dataframe["adx"] < 25) ) dataframe.loc[cond_long, "enter_long"] = 1 dataframe.loc[cond_long, "enter_tag"] = "bb_lower_revert" return dataframe def populate_exit_trend(self, dataframe: pd.DataFrame, metadata: dict) -> pd.DataFrame: dataframe.loc[dataframe["close"] < dataframe["bb_mid"], "exit_short"] = 1 dataframe.loc[dataframe["close"] > dataframe["bb_mid"], "exit_long"] = 1 return dataframe
json{ "exchange": { "name": "hyperliquid", "pair_whitelist": ["BTC/USDC:USDC", "ETH/USDC:USDC", "SOL/USDC:USDC", "DOGE/USDC:USDC"] }, "stake_currency": "USDC", "stake_amount": 75, "dry_run_wallet": {"USDC": 350}, "timeframe": "4h", "max_open_trades": 4, "minimal_roi": {"0": 100.0}, "stoploss": -0.02, "trading_mode": "futures", "margin_mode": "isolated", "entry_pricing": {"price_side": "same", "price_last_balance": 0.0}, "exit_pricing": {"price_side": "same", "price_last_balance": 0.0}, "pairlists": [{"method": "StaticPairList"}] }
In strong-trend windows the strategy loses small (-1.75% on BTC during the first-half strong bear). In rangy windows it shines (+9.88% on BTC second-half). The mixed-regime full-period multi-pair number (+8.77% in 162d on $350 wallet) is the credible expectation.
DOGE was the negative pair (-0.65%) — meme volatility breaks more bands than reverts to them. Use this strategy on majors.
Pair with donchian-strong-regime for full-regime coverage.
The previous version was tighter (2.5σ bands, ADX<30) on a 1h timeframe. Its own honest framing noted "5 trades in 4 months" — too rare to be useful. The 4h version produces ~3× the signal density with the same risk profile. The 1h version is preserved here for users who want a deeper-fade variant:
python# Archived 1h variant — fewer, deeper signals timeframe = "1h" # bb = ta.BBANDS(dataframe, timeperiod=100, nbdevup=2.5, nbdevdn=2.5) # rsi gates same; adx < 30 (looser)
If you prefer the rarer-but-deeper setup, restore the 1h timeframe and 2.5σ. The exit logic is unchanged.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→pass | 22,760 | 12,571 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,943 | 4,643 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 25,212 | 20,125 | -20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,937 | 6,302 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | 29,227 | 13,605 | -53% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,008 | 4,624 | -23% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 17,971 | 17,673 | -2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,234 | 4,970 | +54% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 15,039 | 12,075 | -20% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,532 | 4,024 | +59% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 11,130 | 2,963 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,888 | 2,282 | +21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 12,541 | 7,202 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,337 | 2,956 | +26% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 12,455 | 4,569 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,153 | 2,522 | +17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 13,774 | 4,674 | -66% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,801 | 2,525 | -10% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 17,763 | 8,914 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,867 | 3,296 | +15% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 8,670 | 2,175 | -75% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,658 | 2,130 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 19,199 | 23,852 | +24% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,296 | 6,518 | +52% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 8,533 | 1,690 | -80% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,466 | 1,974 | +35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 8,133 | 2,437 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,609 | 2,125 | +32% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 13,723 | 9,538 | -30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,028 | 3,251 | +60% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 13,305 | 17,571 | +32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,189 | 4,616 | +111% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 16,990 | 25,391 | +49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,061 | 5,868 | +92% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 5,493 | 2,344 | -57% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,035 | 2,173 | +110% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 16,500 | 6,497 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,412 | 2,904 | +20% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 15,295 | 4,543 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,976 | 2,414 | -19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 1,668 | 2,567 | +54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 266 | 2,233 | +739% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 147,228 | 24,912 | -83% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,365 | 6,783 | +26% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +73 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.