alphaledger

A trial ledger for factor research.

_{Every factor you evaluate is a draw from a lottery. alphaledger counts the draws —
and it will not judge one without knowing how many came before it.}

---

The problem, in one table

	What you see	What you conclude
One factor, on its own	RankIC 0.0105, t 3.03, p 0.0027	Significant. Ship it.
The same factor, 200 draws deep	the same numbers, plus p_family = 0.346	It is luck. Drop it.

Nothing about the factor changed. Only the count did.

That count is the one thing an agent cannot keep. A researcher tests five ideas a day and remembers them. An agent tests two hundred an hour, and every session starts with a blank context.

---

See it in twenty seconds

One command, on a panel of 300 names × 250 dates where every factor is pure noise:

$ python demos/noise_200.py

  best factor     fp=v1:32625af66…
  RankIC          +0.0105
  t (iid / NW)    3.03 / 3.27
  p_single        0.00273   <- looks publishable
  family          200 trials
  bar_q95         3.67      <- what a real factor needed
  p_family        0.346     <- it is luck
  verdict         REJECT

  "Trial #200 of 200 — REJECT. IC=+0.0105, t=3.03, p_single=0.0027, p_family=0.346."

A RankIC of 1% is an ordinary magnitude for a real factor, so the size of the effect cannot tell you whether it is real. The only discriminating information is how many times you drew.

---

How it works

flowchart LR
    F["factor panel"] --> IC["RankIC series<br/>one value per date"]
    R["forward returns"] --> IC
    IC --> ID["fingerprint<br/>rank pattern, hashed"]
    IC --> ST["t, p_single"]
    ID --> L[("ledger")]
    L --> FAM["family<br/>N trials on this panel"]
    FAM --> NUL["null of max abs(t)<br/>block bootstrap"]
    ST --> G{"p_family ≤ α ?"}
    NUL --> G
    G -->|yes| P["PASS"]
    G -->|no| X["REJECT"]

Four tools sit on top of that loop:

Tool	Question it answers	Cost
fingerprint	Have I tried this factor before?	free — no trial consumed
evaluate	What is its RankIC, and what is its trial number?	one trial
gate	Does it survive the family correction, and how far off was it?	free
ledger_stats	How much have I tried, and where am I going in circles?	free

A PASS requires p_family ≤ α. p_single is reported and is never evidence.

---

Install

alphaledger is an MCP server, wrapped in a four-file dsh plugin. One implementation, two ways in; nothing leaves the machine and no API key is involved.

DeepSeek Harness — one command:

$ dsh plugin --profile web add dsh-alphaledger

The bundle only writes the config that launches the server. If you would rather see it:

- insert:
    - id: alphaledger
      name: '@deepseek-ai/dsh-mcp-client'
      config:
        serverName: alphaledger
        transport: stdio
        command: uvx
        args: ['alphaledger-mcp']
        failOnStartupError: true

Claude Code, Codex, or any other MCP client:

claude mcp add alphaledger -- uvx alphaledger-mcp

Tools appear as mcp__alphaledger__evaluate, mcp__alphaledger__gate, and so on.

_{Both routes need uv once (curl -LsSf https://astral.sh/uv/install.sh | sh), because dsh deliberately does not manage Python environments. Neither package is on PyPI or npm yet: until the release, use dsh plugin add ./dsh/alphaledger and uv pip install dist/alphaledger_mcp-0.1.0-py3-none-any.whl.}

Dependencies are numpy and the standard library. scipy would double the install and add seconds to a cold start, and the two things we needed from it — rank correlation and Student-t tails — are a few dozen lines. See docs/METHOD.md.

---

Three things the ledger refuses to do

It will not count rank(x) as a new factor. Identity is the factor's rank pattern, hashed as integers. x, rank(x), log(x) and 2x+3 rank identically, so they are one trial with four evaluations. Flipping the sign is the same trial too — recorded as a sign_flip, which is the cheapest way a family quietly grows.

It will not merge near-duplicates. Two factors correlating at 0.97 are reported as NEAR_DUPLICATE and left alone. Merging them would let "I only changed one parameter" escape the count, which is the entire problem.

It will not pass a leaked factor. A factor ranked identically to the forward return is LABEL_CONTAMINATION, checked before significance — because that is the one case where the numbers look best.

---

What it does not do

No data layer — you bring a panel, and an akshare adapter is planned. No backtest engine, no portfolio construction, no UI. It judges one factor's IC series and keeps the books, and that is all.

---

Documentation

docs/METHOD.md	Every formula, with the function and the test that pins it
docs/TOOLS.md	Schemas, error codes, host wiring
docs/AUDIT.md	Three existing dsh quant tools, read at source level
docs/CALIBRATION.md	Measured false-positive rate and power
ROADMAP.md	What shipped, what is v0.2

---

Status

0.1.0. The repository is public; the PyPI and npm packages are not published yet. Statistics, identity, ledger and the MCP surface are implemented and tested: 104 tests, ruff and mypy clean, false-positive rate 8.3% (1 in 12 studies), power 4 of 4 on a planted IC of 0.03.

v0.2: akshare adapter, one-shot OOS test lock, full look-ahead perturbation.

_{MIT © 2026 Zhenhao Fu}