What is the biggest red flag in a crypto signal service?

A win rate quoted with no sample size and no losing trades shown. It costs nothing to publish a percentage, and a record without a denominator cannot be checked by anyone.

How can dropping undecided trades change a win rate?

Substantially. Positions that expire without hitting target or stop are neither wins nor losses; excluding them from the count while keeping the wins can move a headline figure by tens of percentage points.

Why does a calibration curve matter more than accuracy?

Because confidence is what you size a position on. A service can be reasonably accurate while its confidence scores carry no information at all, and only a reliability diagram will show you that.

Does BlofinX pass its own six checks?

It passes on publication and method: sample size, interval, expired trades, average win and loss, timestamping and calibration are all published. It does not pass on flattery — the win rate is 35.29% and the calibration curve shows material overconfidence. Both are on this site rather than hidden.

How to Verify a Crypto Signal Service

The uncomfortable thing about crypto signal services is that the good ones and the fraudulent ones advertise identically. Both quote a win rate, both show green screenshots, and neither is checkable. These six questions are the ones that actually separate them — and because it would be absurd to publish this without answering them ourselves, our own answers are underneath each one.

Expectancy calculatorRun the numbers a service quotes you through the break-even bar its own payoff sets.

1. Over how many resolved trades?

A win rate with no denominator is not a statistic. Twenty trades can produce almost any percentage by chance. Ask for the count of resolved positions, not the count of signals sent. Ours, as at 20 August 2026: 121 forecasts published, 112 resolved, 85 of those decisively. That is a moderate sample and we describe it as one.

2. What is the confidence interval?

Every measured win rate is an estimate with an error band, and the band is wide at these sample sizes. A service quoting a bare figure either does not know this or is relying on you not to ask. Ours: 35.29%, with a 95% interval running from about 26.0% to 45.9%. The honest reading is the range, not the point.

3. Were undecided trades dropped?

This is the cheapest available manipulation. A position that reaches neither target nor stop before the horizon expires is neither a win nor a loss — and quietly removing those from the denominator can move a headline win rate by tens of points. Ours: 27 of 112 resolved forecasts expired undecided. We report them separately and exclude them from the rate rather than counting them as wins.

4. Are average win and average loss published?

Without these, the win rate cannot be turned into an expectancy, and expectancy is the only figure that says whether the strategy makes money. Ours: an average winner of 4.11% against an average loser of 1.38%, a realised reward-to-risk of 2.97 and a profit factor of 1.65. This is why our low win rate is still a positive expectancy.

Expectancy = (Win% x Average_Win) - (Loss% x Average_Loss)

// If a service will not give you Average_Win and Average_Loss,
// this cannot be computed — and they know that.

5. Were the calls timestamped before the outcome?

A record assembled after the fact proves nothing at all, and a screenshot proves less. What you want is forecasts published with entry, target and invalidation levels attached, timestamped at publication, and scored automatically against what happened. Ours are recorded when issued and resolved by rule rather than by judgement, which is also why 27 of them sit in an 'expired' column that nobody would invent.

6. Will they show you a calibration curve?

This is the question almost nothing survives. Accuracy asks how often they were right; calibration asks whether their confidence meant anything. Ours is published and it is bad: stated confidence averaged 68.3% against a 27.8% outcome rate on 54 forecasts, and our highest-confidence bucket resolved at 0%. We changed what we display because of it. A service that has never measured this is asking you to size positions on an unchecked number.

What none of this can tell you

Passing all six checks means a record is real and readable. It does not mean the next fifty days will look like the last fifty, and no measured history carries a promise about future results. Anyone converting a track record into a projected return is doing something the data does not support, ourselves included.

Summary

Sample size, confidence interval, treatment of undecided trades, average win and loss, timestamping, and a calibration curve. Six questions, all cheap to ask, and most services fail at the first. Run them on us: the answers are above and the live figures are at /track-record.

How to Check Whether a Crypto Signal Service Is Telling the Truth