I see there has been a lot of interest in Hedge bots lately, and this is a topic that I am interested in myself.
Right now, developing hedge strategies requires a lot of manual work, and I am developing a bot that could automate this process as much as possible. This is how I think it could work:
The bot will have two parts: Long and Short
Long and short settings are independent. The interface will be a simplified version of the DCA settings. At the end you can see the coverage for long, short, and the total UDST necessary per coin.
In the short section, we should have an option “Automatically rebuy for shorts”. That is when the base value goes under a certain value (say $100) buy additional base (say $200). More options could be added later on to optimize the point of buying base (using indicators).
The bot can be multi coin. At the start of the bot it will buy all the necessary base for all the shorts and place the orders for the longs.
The deals section will display the value of the long+short combined (one position per coin). We can see long and short stats separately if necessary.
Example:-
Pair A start long.short at 100$
As per the standard settings the guys use they cover -90% and +400%
Day 1
If say we had a really red Day 1 and price fell to 30$
Say long avg price is 75$ of long . Now you need a + 150% rise to get to avg long price
Short side has closed lots of deals and followed the price to 30$ base order price now
Day 2
Now this day is very green
Price pumped to 55$
Short deal started at 30$ and avg price is at 40$
Lets summarise
Long avg price 75$ Short avg price 40$ current price is 55$
Gap created 40 - 75$ and current price 55$
In this gap you can,
Wait till price reaches either side TP
Start new long or short or both deals whose coverage ranges dont exceed the gaps
I say this so that we use our capital the best way.
if new long deal started at 55$ then downward coverage should end at 40$ ( -27.5%)
if new short deal started at 55$ then upward coverage should end at 75$ (+37.5%)
Now to automate it you provide what % away from long avg and what % away from short avg do the user want to fill the gap.
Some might be aggressive and choose lower %.
Update
The wkk guy mentioned new deals use profits made.
So a probably Maksym can read the profit of the hedge bot and add new long/short for the pairs with average price most far away from current price based on %.
This part is a big difficult to automate as coverage %s for new deals are dynamic and profits made are also dynamic
The number of SOs for a gap filling deal can control this part.
If standard deal has 18/32 long/short SO then gap filling deals should have less SO based on coverages
Again complicated for sure
I tried myself to create a multicoin version of the Hunter strategy but I’m confronted some problems so I had to stop it. I feel like the multicoin is having more issues and is harder to solve each problem independently without changing all bot configurations. There are some of the troubles that I had :
Bot is automatically changing from 33 DCAs to 19 DCAs- and then coming back to 33DCAs if it feels like
Some deals are stuck because it needs to sell let’s say 4.00 POPCATS- but only 3.997 are available.
Some coins changed the minimum value necessary and I had to change this value for everyone
When tried to change ASAP to manual (to stop buying but still taking profit at 2%) it didn’t sell anymore when reaching 2% so I have to manually close each deal going over 2%.
The bot I used is this one : Gainium app. I will not create a bug report as the first problem was already published there but it didn’t got solved
I would be super excited to use a functional hedge strategy on a multicoin bot but for now I don’t feel like it’s ready for me. I’m eager to see how you solve these problems with this feature request
Hi Perez, i use Hunter Strategy but with single DCA(1 long and 1 short). maybe it can help ur problem. im just sharing dont get angry if my answer not right in your mind
33 DCA to 19 DCA, maybe u can look this chart
for Long
Actually now that I am thinking about this, The gaps wouldn’t exist if we use a combo strategy. The issue with the gaps is that DCAs are only working in one direction. The grid/combo fills the gaps as the price moves. So having one long and one short combo would solve the issue?
I was a long only bot, it should be selling what it bought no? I mean it buys x BTC then it sells the same amount and pays the fees, if the bot stops only for this is not optimal…
Yes it is expected to not open more deals but at least sell the ones that are open when they reach 2% if the TP is at 2%. I used this before and it worked nicely
Long bot only should not have this issue, unless you are taking TP with indicators and in the meantime another bot uses part of the base. I don’t see how it’s possible to have an issue with long bot and % since the TP is sent as a limit order immediately. It may be something else, maybe you clicked on “Ignore fees” on the exchange page but not paying with BNB or KCS.
well dont you want this to be purely DCA bots like how the guys do it?
Combo bots run into their own set of issues like slippage fees and diluting the DCA power of existing deals
As you can see on the bot that I shared, I am not using indicators to TP, only %. Also haven’t clicked on ignore fees or paying them in BNB or other coin. I just posted that in order to be aware that this kind of problems may happen more often on a multicoin bot than in single coin but I do not know the reason why.
I don’t think that you start with quote $100 for long and base for $200 for “short”. If you look at the configuration you have to buy the amount of base that the “short” requires and that costs around $100 as for the long bot, when it is bought upfront.
I also wonder whether Combo bots are the correct context for this strategy as they introduce a lot of overhead. Also it requires additional steps to introduce a multi-pair “short” bots, that offer the same pairs as their opposite long bot for e.g. USDT_ALL.
Hi Ares, since you have created this topic, I have been exploring ways to really benefit from hunter separate long/hort dca bot strategy.
I definitely agree with you regarding the combined hedge where we can define long and short parameters separately.
Looking to integrate the min/max price compounding still not clear to me although I tested it in a couple of coins manually and it seems it is working but to me better solution is to use combo bot with TP functionality. Why?
Initially I tried combo instead of dca long/short version but it needs minimum twice the initial cost and it is not closing as fast as dca bot so I stopped them and started with 10 coins on a live test.
I know it is early to analyze but so far if there is going to be a hedge version where it will manage to buy coins when needed for short (both at the start or later are ok with me) and if we want to eliminate the need for min/max price recovery, the dca bot can be replaced with combo but TP should be enabled with %2 as well to make it close deal even if it is going sideways and the grid profit accumulated to %2. This way when the price goes against the profit and makes a lot of dca grid will continue to work and minimize the need for a min/max price recovery.
I knew combo bots are costly to you and to us (in terms of numbers allowed in plans) but a hedge combo and/or multi pair combo may be a great new way of this passive income strategy.
If you need a brainstorm group to work on/detail this bot, I am ready to help/support/engage to the team although English is not my 1st language.
Below is a strategic overview of how you might handle “gaps” or “uncovered price ranges” when running simultaneous DCA Martingale bots in Long and Short mode. This is based on the example you provided, where each bot has its own average price, and the market is currently sitting in between both bots’ averages. That “gap” is effectively a new, untraded zone where the old bots are inactive. You’ve suggested starting a new pair of trades (Long and/or Short) whose coverage precisely fits that gap, so as to capture any sideways or partial reversals.
Understanding the Gap Scenario
Long Bot:
• Has an average (break-even) price at $75.
• The current market ($55) is below that, so the bot is in an unrealized loss (“red bag”), waiting for price to rally +36% (from 55 to 75) to close at profit
Short Bot:
• Has an average price at $40.
• The current market ($55) is above that, so the short is also in an unrealized loss, needing a -27% move (from 55 down to 40) to break even.
So the price is sitting at $55, in between two “trapped” average prices (Long ~$75, Short ~$40). The question is how to “use capital best” in this range.
Potential Strategies for Deploying a New DCA Bot (or Pair of Bots)
A. Wait for Existing Bots to Resolve
A more conservative approach is to do nothing. Just let the existing Long/Short deals eventually close in profit. This avoids complexity but ties up capital in possibly slow or stuck positions. If you don’t mind the idle time and want simpler risk management, it’s valid. However, it misses potentially profitable oscillations in that $40–$75 gap.
B. Add a New Long/Short Sub-Bot for the Gap
You propose starting a new bot (or two new bots) specifically covering $40–$75:
New Long Bot
• Base Order around $55 (current price).
• Downward coverage from $55 down to $40 (that’s ~-27.5%).
• Potentially aim for a moderate upward take-profit, say +X% from the average within that range.
New Short Bot
• Base Order also around $55.
• Upward coverage up to $75 (+37.5%).
• Once it covers that top boundary, if it hits, it can close in profit.
By adding these sub-bots, you exploit the possibility that price might drift between $40 and $75 multiple times, enabling you to capture profits inside the gap—rather than waiting for a full reversal to $75 or a fall all the way to $40.
Risks and Considerations
Capital Overextension
• You now have 4 “positions” effectively:
Old Long bot with average $75,
Old Short bot with average $40,
New Long bot covering $55 → $40,
New Short bot covering $55 → $75.
• If you have a limited budget, adding more DCA coverage can create large margin requirements if price lingers or trends away from any new positions.
Overlapping Orders
• The new sub-bots might overlap with your original bots’ coverage. For example, if the old Long bot has partial coverage down to $50, while your new Long sub-bot covers $40–$55, you could double-up on orders in the $50–$55 zone, inadvertently increasing risk.
• Make sure your coverage zones do not “double-dip” unless you explicitly intend to scale up exposure.
Potential for Confusion
• Multiple DCA bots can be tricky to track. It’s easy to lose sight of total exposure or guess incorrectly how close or far you are from triggering additional safety orders. If each bot is carefully documented, that’s fine—but the complexity is non-trivial.
Trend Breakout Risk
• If the market breaks strongly above $75 or below $40, the older bot might eventually close at profit, but the new sub-bot could be trapped. For example, imagine price rockets to $100:
• Old Long closes happily around $75 in profit.
• Old Short is very red, but maybe it used up all safety orders (you need a big reversal).
• The new Short from $55–$75 might also get stuck in a red bag.
Hence, you still face typical Martingale dangers if the price makes sustained moves in one direction without retracing.
Best Practices for Implementing the “New Gap Bots”
Set Strict Capital Limits
Before launching new sub-bots, decide how much extra capital you’re willing to allocate. This ensures you don’t over-leverage if the market whipsaws.
Non-Overlapping Ranges
If possible, try to precisely define the new bots’ safety order ranges so they don’t conflict with existing coverage. E.g., if your old Long covers $0–$50 effectively, then start the new Long from $50 to $40. Or if old Short covers $75–$400, maybe your new Short can limit coverage to $55–$75 specifically.
Use Tighter TP
Because these new sub-bots are range-based, consider a quicker take-profit. If your old Long or old Short has a bigger target, your new sub-bots could have tighter (like 2–5%) TPs, repeatedly capturing micro-swings.
Watch for Trend Breakouts
Keep an eye on key support/resistance. If price blasts out of the range quickly, your sub-bot might be stuck. You might set a max safety order count or a stop-loss for those sub-bots in the event price escapes the gap.
Consider Time- or Condition-Based Deactivation
If the gap is no longer relevant (e.g., the old Long eventually gets close to $75 and the short near $40 simultaneously), you can close or pause the sub-bots to avoid confusion.
Conclusion & Expert Opinion
Launching additional DCA sub-bots to trade a newly formed price gap (where the original bots are dormant) can be profitable in a sideways or choppy market, capturing extra micro-swings. It’s essentially a “layering” approach to DCA: one layer for the high range, one layer for the low range, and a new layer in the middle gap.
Pros:
• Extracts more from a ranging market.
• Potentially shortens the time to realize partial profits.
Cons:
• Increases complexity and potential overexposure.
• If a strong trend emerges, you can end up with multiple red bags across old and new bots.
Key: Manage risk by restricting how many sub-bots you open, avoid overlapping grids, and prepare to accept a “stop” or “pause” if price trends out of the gap. If done properly, you can enhance returns in a sideways environment while maintaining an acceptable risk profile.
sorry about formatting i have uploaded document well formatted here:
