🚨 Alert #1 Wed Jul-15 14:58:19

The entry thesis (regulatory clearance + China shipment growth) was directionally correct and the trade closed +2.3%, but the "REPRICING" verdict didn't actually correspond to a repricing event—price only ever dipped 0.12% before grinding steadily higher, meaning the news was likely already partially priced in rather than triggering a sharp re-rating. Tighten the REPRICING verdict threshold to require a minimum intraday volatility or gap-on-news criterion (e.g., >1% move within the first hour of the catalyst) so the label reflects an actual repricing event rather than a slow drift, which would improve signal precision and avoid overclassifying gradual trends as repricings.

The trade worked, but the "rationale" is doing zero real work here—an overnight drift strategy doesn't need a China regulatory catalyst to justify a mechanical buy-close/sell-close rule, and the entry showed a -0.50% drawdown intraday that had nothing to do with the news thesis. Improvement: strip the news rationale out of mechanical drift trades entirely (or backtest it separately as a discretionary overlay), and add a hard stop-loss threshold (e.g., -1%) to the verdict logic so the "worst unrealized" stat isn't just cosmetic—right now nothing in the entry rule actually protects against the drawdown you got lucky avoiding.