We use a small number of essential cookies to keep you signed in. With your consent, we also use anonymised analytics (PostHog) to improve the product. Read our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.

    Transparency & mechanics

    How the Public Signal Ledger works, step by step

    "Check the track record yourself" only means something if you know what you are checking. This guide walks through the mechanics of the [Public Signal Ledger](/snapshot): what gets recorded when a directional call is issued, what settlement against the market actually involves, why the record shows counts rather than a headline percentage, and how to audit it with your own eyes.

    Written by
    Intel Core Strata Research
    Reviewed by
    Intel Core Strata Editorial Desk
    Published
    Last reviewed

    Signal ledger

    An append-only public record of directional calls, where each entry is timestamped when issued, frozen so it cannot be edited afterwards, and later settled against what the instrument actually did. A ledger is defined by what it cannot do: it cannot delete a losing call, cannot restate an old one, and cannot show you only the winners.

    Step 1 — a call is issued and frozen

    Every ledger entry starts life as a directional read — up, down, or neutral — on a specific instrument over a specific horizon (24h, 48h, or 72h). At the moment it is published, three things are recorded: the direction, the timestamp, and the market reference at that instant. From that point the entry is frozen.

    Frozen matters more than it sounds. A record you can edit after the fact is marketing, not evidence. The ledger's answer to "how do I know you didn't clean this up later?" is structural: entries are written once, before the outcome is knowable, and the settlement column stays empty until the horizon has actually elapsed.

    Step 2 — settlement against what the market did

    When a call's horizon expires, it is settled: the market's actual move over that window is compared with the recorded direction, and the entry is marked accordingly. There are only a few honest outcomes:

    • Settled correct — the instrument moved in the called direction over the horizon.
    • Settled incorrect — it moved against the call. This entry stays on the ledger, permanently, exactly like a correct one.
    • Scratch / not evaluable — the move was too small to grade meaningfully, or the data needed to settle honestly was not available. Marking these separately matters: quietly counting ambiguous calls as wins (or dropping them) is one of the classic ways published records get flattered.

    Settlement is mechanical on purpose. Nobody "reviews" a losing call to decide whether it really counts. The rule is fixed before the outcome exists, which is the only ordering under which a track record means anything.

    Why counts, not a headline percentage

    The ledger publishes wins and losses as counts — it deliberately does not advertise an aggregate accuracy percentage. That choice tends to surprise people, so here is the reasoning:

    • A single percentage hides the base. "70%" over 10 calls and over 1,000 calls are entirely different claims. Counts carry their own sample size; a percentage strips it away.
    • Windows can be cherry-picked. Any record has flattering sub-periods. A permanently displayed percentage invites choosing the window that looks best; raw counts over the full record leave nowhere to hide.
    • Direction-only grading is a low bar. A settled-correct call says the direction matched over the window — it does not say the move was tradeable after spreads, timing, and risk. Advertising a percentage would imply more than the measurement supports.

    If you want a rate, you are free to compute one — the entries are all there. The point is that *you* choose the window and do the division, rather than being handed a number selected for you.

    How to audit the ledger yourself

    A transparency claim you cannot check is just a claim. Here is a concrete audit procedure that requires no account:

    1. Open the Public Signal Ledger and pick any settled call — ideally a losing one, since losses are what selective records remove.
    2. Note the instrument, the direction, the issue timestamp, and the horizon.
    3. Pull the same instrument's chart from any independent source you trust, and check what price did between the issue time and the horizon's end.
    4. Confirm the settlement label matches what you see. Repeat across a handful of entries and dates of your choosing, not ours.
    5. Watch the ledger over a few days: new calls should appear before their outcome is knowable, and settled entries should never change afterwards.

    If a record passes that procedure repeatedly, you have evidence — not proof of future results, but evidence of honest bookkeeping. What you do with the calls is a separate question: a ledger grades directions, and a bias is still not a signal.

    Frequently asked questions

    Does a public ledger guarantee the signals are good?
    No. It guarantees the record of the signals is honest — wins and losses both stay visible, timestamps precede outcomes, and nothing is deleted. Whether the calls are useful for your process is a judgement the ledger equips you to make; it never makes it for you.
    Why would a platform publish its own losing calls?
    Because the alternative is asking to be trusted on faith. Publishing losses costs something in the short term and buys the only kind of credibility that survives scrutiny. It also imposes discipline internally: a system whose misses are public has nowhere to hide from them.
    What stops the losing entries from being quietly removed?
    Structure, then verification. Entries are frozen when issued and settlement is mechanical — but you do not have to take that on trust: the audit procedure above (spot-check settled calls against an independent chart, watch entries over time) is exactly how you would catch a record that edits itself.

    Informational and educational only — not financial advice. Trading involves risk of loss.