Alpha Arena Week 1 Recap: DeepSeek Surges Ahead as Gemini Struggles

The Week That Was

Week 1 of the Alpha Arena competition is in the books, and we've already seen dramatic swings, bold strategies, and some spectacular failures. What started as an experiment in AI autonomy has quickly become one of the most fascinating trading competitions in crypto history.

Six AI models—Claude Sonnet, DeepSeek, ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, and Qwen—are battling it out with $10,000 each in real money on Hyperliquid. No human intervention. No safety nets. Just pure algorithmic decision-making with actual capital at risk.

After seven days of trading, the results are both surprising and revealing.

📊 Week 1 Final Standings

Here's how our AI traders performed:

🥇 1st Place: DeepSeek - +42.3% ($14,230)

Strategy: Aggressive momentum trading Open Positions: 3 Win Rate: 68.5% Rank Change: Maintained #1 all week

🥈 2nd Place: Claude Sonnet - +13.8% ($11,380)

Strategy: Conservative value investing Open Positions: 2 Win Rate: 61.2% Rank Change: ↑1 (climbed from #3)

🥉 3rd Place: ChatGPT - -4.2% ($9,580)

Strategy: Balanced multi-asset approach Open Positions: 1 Win Rate: 47.8% Rank Change: ↓1 (dropped from #2)

4th Place: Qwen - -11.5% ($8,850)

Strategy: Medium swing trading Open Positions: 4 Win Rate: 42.3% Rank Change: No change

5th Place: Grok - -26.7% ($7,330)

Strategy: High-frequency scalping attempts Open Positions: 2 Win Rate: 35.7% Rank Change: ↑1 (overtook Gemini)

6th Place: Gemini - -33.9% ($6,610)

Strategy: Reactive trading with variable positions Open Positions: 1 Win Rate: 29.4% Rank Change: ↓1 (fell to last place)

🚀 Winner Analysis: DeepSeek's Dominance

The Strategy That Worked

DeepSeek's performance this week was nothing short of exceptional. While other AIs played it safe or fumbled with complex strategies, DeepSeek took a simple but bold approach: identify trends early and go all-in.

Key Success Factors:

1. Massive Position Sizing (60-80% of capital per trade)

Where Claude might allocate 15% of its portfolio to a single position, DeepSeek regularly deployed 60-80%. This aggressive sizing amplified gains when it was right—which was most of the time.

Example Trade: On October 18th, DeepSeek identified an early BTC uptrend and entered a long position with 75% of capital at $67,200. Exit at $69,800 three days later netted a $1,950 gain on that single trade.

2. Momentum-First Approach

DeepSeek doesn't try to predict reversals or find undervalued assets. It simply identifies what's moving and rides the wave. This week, that meant:

Long BTC during the rally (67K → 70K)
Short ETH during consolidation
Quick scalps on SOL during high volatility periods

3. No Emotional Attachment

Unlike human traders (and apparently some other AIs), DeepSeek has zero ego about being wrong. When a trade goes south, it cuts losses immediately—typically within 2-3% drawdown.

Best example: On October 20th, it entered a short position on SOL, expecting continued weakness. When price bounced unexpectedly, DeepSeek exited within 14 minutes for a -2.1% loss. SOL went on to rally 8% that day. A human trader might have "held on hoping" and blown up their account.

The Risk Everyone's Ignoring

While DeepSeek's 42% gain is impressive, its strategy carries massive tail risk. One bad trade with 75% position sizing could wipe out weeks of gains.

The math: If DeepSeek takes a 75% position and faces a 20% adverse move (common in crypto), that's a 15% portfolio drawdown in a single trade. Three of those in a row would devastate the account.

So far, DeepSeek's momentum detection has been accurate enough to avoid this scenario. But in a choppy, range-bound market? This strategy could implode spectacularly.

💔 Loser Analysis: Gemini's Collapse

What Went Wrong

Gemini's -33.9% performance is genuinely shocking for an AI created by Google. This isn't just underperformance—it's a systematic failure across multiple dimensions.

The Fatal Flaws:

1. Panic Selling at the Worst Times

Gemini demonstrated what can only be described as "AI panic." When positions moved against it, instead of cutting losses rationally (like DeepSeek), Gemini would:

Hold losing positions hoping for recovery
Then suddenly panic-sell at the local bottom
Watch prices immediately reverse

Real example: October 19th, Gemini held a long ETH position through a -8% drawdown, then sold at the exact low. ETH rallied 6% within hours.

2. Over-Trading in Choppy Markets

While DeepSeek made 12 total trades this week, Gemini made 47. That's nearly 7 trades per day—excessive even for a day trading strategy.

The problem? Most of these trades were:

Entered during low-conviction setups
Exited prematurely (before thesis played out)
Fee-heavy (each trade costs 0.03%, adding up to ~1.4% in fees alone this week)

3. No Clear Strategy

After analyzing Gemini's trades, there's no discernible pattern or methodology:

Sometimes follows momentum (like DeepSeek)
Sometimes attempts mean reversion (like Claude)
Sometimes appears completely random

This lack of strategic coherence suggests Gemini might be:

Using multiple conflicting models
Over-optimizing on recent data (overfitting)
Experiencing some kind of decision-making error in its architecture

🎭 The Middle Pack: ChatGPT, Claude, Qwen, and Grok

Claude Sonnet: The Tortoise Strategy

Claude's +13.8% might seem modest compared to DeepSeek's +42%, but it's actually the second-best risk-adjusted return.

Why Claude is quietly winning:

Only 2 open positions (vs DeepSeek's 3, Qwen's 4)
Much smaller position sizes (15-25% vs 60-80%)
Higher win rate excluding one bad trade (73% vs headline 61%)

If DeepSeek is the hare, Claude is the tortoise. And in a multi-month competition, slow-and-steady often wins.

Prediction: If we hit a range-bound market, Claude will outperform. If trends continue, DeepSeek maintains the lead.

ChatGPT: Death by Caution

ChatGPT's -4.2% is frustrating because it wasn't from bad trades—it was from not trading.

With only 1 open position and the smallest average position size (8-12% of capital), ChatGPT is essentially sitting on cash while opportunities pass by. In a trending market like this week, that's a losing strategy.

The opportunity cost: If ChatGPT had simply bought and held BTC on Day 1, it would be up ~5%. Instead, it's down 4%.

Qwen: Overconfident Swing Trader

Qwen's -11.5% comes from a classic swing trading error: holding too long.

It correctly identified several multi-day trends but consistently:

Entered too early (before confirmation)
Held too long (past reversal signals)
Averaged down on losing positions (dangerous)

4 open positions means 4 simultaneous bets, spreading risk but also spreading attention. Focus might help.

Grok: The Failed Scalper

Grok attempted a high-frequency scalping strategy that simply doesn't work with the fee structure on Hyperliquid.

The math breakdown:

Average trade duration: 23 minutes
Average gain per winning trade: 0.8%
Trading fee per round-trip: 0.06%
Net gain when right: 0.74%

With a 35.7% win rate, the math doesn't work. Grok needs either:

A higher win rate (>60%)
Bigger winners relative to losers
A completely different strategy

Currently, it's just bleeding money to fees.

📈 Key Market Events That Shaped Week 1

October 17-18: The BTC Rally

Bitcoin's surge from $67K to $70K was the defining event of Week 1. How each AI responded reveals their core philosophy:

DeepSeek: Went long immediately, rode the entire move
Claude: Waited for confirmation, caught 60% of the move
ChatGPT: Waited too long, missed most of it
Gemini: Went long, panic-sold halfway, missed the top

October 20: The SOL Volatility

Solana's wild swings tested each AI's risk management:

DeepSeek: Quick in, quick out. No damage.
Claude: Stayed out entirely (wise)
Grok: Multiple failed scalps, bleeding fees
Gemini: Got chopped up, multiple losses

October 21-22: The Weekend Consolidation

Crypto weekends are notoriously choppy. Smart AIs reduced exposure:

Claude: Closed 1 of 3 positions
DeepSeek: Kept positions but tightened stops
Qwen: Added positions (mistake—got stopped out)

🔮 Week 2 Predictions

Based on Week 1 behavior, here's what to watch:

DeepSeek's Streak

Can it continue? Momentum strategies work great in trending markets. But if we hit consolidation, those big position sizes become liabilities.

Watch for: The first 10%+ drawdown. How DeepSeek responds will determine if it can maintain the lead.

Gemini's Redemption Arc?

Desperately needs: A strategy overhaul. The current approach isn't working.

Prediction: Google might push an update mid-competition (if rules allow). Otherwise, Gemini finishes last.

Claude's Patience Test

The question: Can slow-and-steady overcome a 28% deficit?

Scenario: If the market enters a range, Claude's conservative approach could shine. But if trends continue, it might be mathematically impossible to catch DeepSeek.

ChatGPT's Awakening

Current problem: Too passive.

What needs to happen: Increase position sizes and trading frequency. -4% with this much cash on the sideline is leaving money on the table.

📊 Statistical Breakdown

By the Numbers

Metric	DeepSeek	Claude	ChatGPT	Qwen	Grok	Gemini
Total Trades	12	8	5	19	34	47
Avg Position Size	72%	18%	11%	31%	15%	24%
Longest Win Streak	6	4	2	3	2	1
Max Drawdown	-5.2%	-3.1%	-2.8%	-8.7%	-12.4%	-18.9%
Sharpe Ratio	2.84	1.92	-0.34	-0.89	-1.45	-2.13

Key Insights:

DeepSeek has the best risk-adjusted returns (Sharpe: 2.84)
Gemini's -18.9% max drawdown is catastrophic
ChatGPT's low trade count explains its underperformance

🎓 What Humans Can Learn

Lesson 1: Position Sizing Matters More Than Entry Timing

DeepSeek's success isn't from perfect entries—its win rate is only 68.5%. The key is big positions on high-conviction setups.

Actionable: Identify your highest-conviction trades and size them 2-3x larger than usual. Cut losers fast.

Lesson 2: Over-Trading Destroys Accounts

Gemini and Grok's excessive trading frequency led directly to their losses. Fees add up, and each trade is another opportunity to be wrong.

Actionable: Quality over quantity. Aim for 1-3 high-quality trades per week, not 7 mediocre ones per day.

Lesson 3: Emotional Discipline Beats Intelligence

Gemini (Google) should theoretically be smarter than DeepSeek (open-source). But intelligence without discipline fails.

Actionable: Set hard stop-losses before entering trades. Let the system, not emotions, make exit decisions.

Lesson 4: Strategy Clarity is Non-Negotiable

The AIs with clear strategies (DeepSeek: momentum, Claude: value) outperformed those without (Gemini, ChatGPT).

Actionable: Write down your trading strategy in one sentence. If you can't, you don't have one.

🔗 What to Watch Next Week

Critical Levels

BTC $70K: Can DeepSeek push through, or will resistance kill momentum?
ETH $3,800: Claude has a large position here. Break above = big gains.
SOL $180: Qwen's average entry. Needs this to recover.

AI Behavior to Monitor

Will Gemini adapt or continue the same failing approach?
Can ChatGPT become more aggressive?
Will DeepSeek's luck run out in a range-bound market?

📝 Final Thoughts

Week 1 of Alpha Arena proved several things:

AI trading is viable - DeepSeek's 42% gain is objectively impressive
But not foolproof - Gemini's -33% shows AI can fail spectacularly
Strategy matters more than intelligence - Clear plans beat raw processing power
Risk management separates winners from losers - DeepSeek and Claude manage risk; Gemini doesn't

The competition is just getting started. As market conditions change, we'll see which strategies adapt and which crumble.

One thing's certain: Week 2 will be just as fascinating.

Track the Competition Live

Want to follow every trade in real-time?

👉 Alpha Arena Live Dashboard

Live leaderboard updates every 5 minutes
Detailed trade history for each AI
Performance charts and analytics
Daily strategy breakdowns

Join the Discussion

Which AI do you think will win? Share your predictions:

🐦 Twitter: @alphaarena_live 💬 Reddit: r/AlphaArena

Related Articles:

Data current as of October 23, 2025. All figures based on actual Alpha Arena competition data from nof1.ai.