XAnalytics · Backtest audit File @citrini · 31 May 2026

out of 10

@citrini · 431 verified calls backtested

Inconclusive

@citrini's calls have beaten their sector by 0.6% per month, winning 49% of the time.

+0.6%

Avg. return vs its sector

per call · over the timeframe it called (or 1 month)

+0.6%

1 day

+0.6%

1 month

+1.2%

3 months

the same calls held a fixed 1 day / 1 month / 3 months

49%

Calls that beat the market

based on 293 deduplicated bets

49% beat their sector 51% didn't

The signal is indistinguishable from noise.

What “return vs sector” means

Each call's stock vs its own sector — beating the sector, not just going up, is the fair test of skill. Averaged across 293 deduplicated bets. Calls that named their own timeframe are judged over that window (as a per-month rate); the rest over 1 month.

Indistinguishable from luck

Across 293 bets, @citrini's average call beat its sector by 0.6% — t = 0.7, not enough to tell skill from chance.

could be luckt = 2almost certain

t = 0.7 — the strength of the evidence. Above 2, there's under a 5% chance it's luck.

How the t-value works

Each call is one bet, scored by how much it beat its own sector (fairer than the whole market). The t-value is the average beat divided by its uncertainty:

t = x̄ ⁄ ( s ⁄ √M ) x̄ = avg beat · s = how much the bets vary · M = number of bets

Same-week, same-sector calls ride one move, so they prove less than fully independent wins — the 293 bets count as 271 effective ones. That's why the honest t is 0.7, not the raw 0.7. Full breakdown on the analysis page.

Performance over time

After	vs sector	vs S&P 500	Hit rate	Calls
1 day	+0.6%	+0.6%	49%	315
1 month	+0.6%	+0.2%	49%	293
3 months	+1.2%	+1.0%	47%	259
6 months	+5.3%	+4.3%	48%	232

“vs sector” compares each call to the stock's own industry — the fairest test of skill.

What drives the signal

Does conviction matter?

High conviction177 calls · 52% hit

+1.0%

Low conviction195 calls · 45% hit

+0.7%

Return by post type

Analysis69 calls · 70% hit

+6.5%

Position Disclosure81 calls · 47% hit

+0.1%

Prediction215 calls · 44% hit

-0.3%

Sarcasm5 calls · 0% hit

-9.5%

Long vs short

Long312 calls · 50% hit

+1.6%

Short60 calls · 42% hit

-3.0%

The evidence — best & worst calls

Biggest wins (after 1 month)

Exhibit A · 2024-04-10 RENT

“Now is the part of the cycle where you find businesses that are priced like they will die and then make money when it turns out they aren't going to die”

Long · low conviction · View on X ↗

Full post

Now is the part of the cycle where you find businesses that are priced like they will die and then make money when it turns out they aren’t going to die (even if the business is still kinda meh) $RENT https://t.co/eSKmdlC3JF

+83.4%vs sector

Exhibit B · 2025-12-26 SI=F

“90 this cycle”

Long · high conviction · View on X ↗

Full post

@BitcoinLifeboat 90 this cycle

+50.1%vs sector

Exhibit C · 2026-04-29 QCOM

“be long Qualcomm”

Long · high conviction · View on X ↗

Full post

@jukan05 My own approach to this has been to be long Qualcomm and short consumer electronics like laptops and PCs. Same negative memory exposure, much less of a right tail to potential edge AI breakthroughs or memory wall climbing (which may be the same thing).

+35.9%vs sector

Biggest misses (after 1 month)

Exhibit D · 2025-11-05 AIRS

“AIRS is still down from the momentum unwind going into a print that I think will be better than ESTA's and has >40% short interest”

Long · high conviction · View on X ↗

Full post

A lot of the cosmetic/aesthetics winners of the GLP-1 trend have had serious volatility and are heavily shorted on stale consumer theses. ESTA had 20% short interest going into the print and is up 15% on okay earnings. AIRS is still down from the momentum unwind going into a print that I think will be better than ESTA’s and has >40% short interest…

-70.7%vs sector

Exhibit E · 2024-03-05 MSTR

“now up 11% on the second short attempt”

Short · high conviction · View on X ↗

Full post

4% stop loss hit the first time around now up 11% on the second short attempt. do you see how this works? being wrong is fine if you make enough to make it not matter when you’re right.

-50.1%vs sector

Exhibit F · 2026-04-21 TER

“Bull case target in sight.”

Long · high conviction · View on X ↗

-30.9%vs sector

Their strongest setups — best combination at each horizon

1 day long analysis posts +4.7% vs +0.6% overall · 52 bets
1 month short analysis posts +8.9% vs +0.6% overall · 8 bets
3 months short analysis posts +7.8% vs +1.2% overall · 7 bets

Step behind the counter — every call, every chart, every time horizon. Filter by conviction or direction and chart any single trade.

Open the data room →

THE RECEIPTS

@citrini · audited 31 May 2026

calls found431

independent bets293

beat the market49%

avg edge / month+0.6%

best callRENT +83.4%

worst callAIRS -70.7%

VERDICT: INCONCLUSIVE

SCORE 4/10

Watch out for

their short analysis posts · +8.9% after 1 month

getxanalysis.net · run the receipts on anyone

Help shape XAnalytics

How we measured this · download the raw data

We pull @citrini's posts, use AI to extract each call (ticker, direction, conviction), and backtest it against real prices. A call wins only if it beat its own sector over the month after — not just if the stock rose. Headline numbers use deduplicated bets.

Download the full backtest data (JSONL)

Backtested results are computed from historical price data and do not predict future performance. Every signal here is extracted automatically from public posts and may misread intent, sarcasm, or context. This is not investment advice — verify everything independently before acting on it.