Everyone talks about win rate and profit factor. Nobody talks about how much you’re paying to trade — or, if you’re short, how much funding is quietly paying you back. We measured both.
Correction (2026-08-12): An earlier version of this article presented funding as a cost for these SHORT strategies and added it to the fee bill. That read the engine’s sign convention backwards: for shorts, the funding line is negative because it is received, not paid — shorts collect funding whenever the rate is positive, which is its long-run norm. We re-ran both presets and rewrote every number below from those runs (2026-08-12, preset defaults). Same-day follow-up: the MACD column was re-run at its stated SL 12% / TP 10% after we found the first pass had silently fallen back to engine defaults (SL 8 / TP 6) — a request-field mismatch on our side, not an engine bug.
Two Strategies, Real Numbers
We ran BB Squeeze SHORT 1H (SL 10% / TP 8%) and MACD Cross SHORT 4H (SL 12% / TP 10%) on the top-50 coin universe over ~2.8 years (Nov 2023 – Aug 2026). Same cost model: 0.02% maker / 0.05% taker per side, plus a flat 0.01% per 8h funding rate — the long-run average for major perpetuals, credited to shorts while it’s positive.
| Metric | BB Squeeze SHORT 1H | MACD Cross SHORT 4H |
|---|---|---|
| Total Trades | 2,416 | 3,511 |
| Gross Return | ~22.70% | ~54.38% |
| Fees Paid | -5.03% | -7.02% |
| Funding Received | +1.92% | +9.14% |
| Net Return | +19.59% | +56.50% |
| Fees as % of Gross | 22.2% | 12.9% |
| Net Cost Drag (fees − funding) | 3.11% | -2.12% |
BB Squeeze made ~23% gross but kept ~20% after costs. Fees alone took 5 percentage points — over a fifth of the gross profit gone to the exchange. Funding gave back +1.92%, softening the bill.
MACD Cross 4H traded more (3,511 vs 2,416) and held positions longer (4H timeframe = more funding periods per trade). Those long holds collected +9.14% in funding — more than its entire 7.02% fee bill. Its net cost drag was negative: funding paid for the fees and then some.
Funding: the Cost That Isn’t (When You’re Short)
Fees are always a cost. Funding depends on which side you’re on.
| Line Item | BB Squeeze 1H | MACD Cross 4H |
|---|---|---|
| Trading Fees | -5.03% | -7.02% |
| Funding | +1.92% | +9.14% |
| Net Drag | -3.11% | +2.12% |
Perpetual futures charge funding every interval (typically 8 hours). When the rate is positive — the usual state, since perpetuals tend to trade at a premium — longs pay shorts. When it’s negative, shorts pay longs. Both strategies here are SHORT, so under the flat positive rate in our model, every 8 hours in a position earned funding.
MACD Cross holds through many 8-hour marks on its 4H timeframe. Over 3,511 trades across ~2.8 years, that added up to +9.14% received. BB Squeeze on 1H enters and exits faster — less funding exposure, so it collected only +1.92%.
The mirror image applies to LONG strategies: the same holding pattern that pays a short bleeds a long. Direction decides the sign.
What This Means for Your Strategy
A strategy with PF 1.17 and 2,000+ trades sounds profitable. But look at the cost structure:
- Gross PF at these fee levels becomes a thinner edge — fees scale with trade count, relentlessly
- Higher frequency = more fees — 2,416 trades × two sides each is a fee event stream no win rate can ignore
- Longer holds = more funding exposure — income for shorts in a positive-rate regime, cost for longs. A 4H short collected almost 5x the funding of a 1H short here
The break-even point shifts. A strategy that shows +5% gross return might be negative after fees — or, if it’s a slow short, funding might quietly carry it.
How to Reduce the Damage
- Trade less frequently — Fewer trades = fewer fee events. But too few trades means low statistical significance.
- Use limit orders — 0.02% maker vs 0.05% taker. On 2,000 trades, that’s a meaningful difference.
- Know your funding side — Positive rate: longs pay shorts. Negative rate: shorts pay longs. Check the rate and your direction before assuming funding is a cost — for these shorts it was income.
- Get fee discounts — Exchange referral programs cut fees 10-20%. On 2,000+ trades, that compounds.
The Number to Remember
For high-frequency strategies on crypto futures: expect roughly 5-8% of your capital to go to fees over a multi-year period (these two runs paid 5.03% and 7.02%). If your strategy doesn’t gross more than that, you’re trading for the exchange, not for yourself — unless you’re short and funding is footing part of the bill.
Run your own cost analysis on the PRUVIQ Simulator — every result includes fees and funding breakdowns.