The trader behind TradersProphet says he has manually used the same market formula for nearly a decade without a failed result. The bigger challenge, he says, has not been predicting markets — it has been teaching software to obey the formula without corrupting it.
A trader who says he discovered a formula capable of determining where markets must move is making an extraordinary claim: In nearly a decade of manually trading it, he says the formula has never failed him.
Now that same methodology is pointing toward another major decline in Bitcoin.
In an extensive interview with The Raw Brief, the pseudonymous trader known as AgeOfAi said Bitcoin, which was trading around $65,000 when he submitted his answers, still needed to lose roughly another $8,000 before there could be a meaningful move higher.
“BTC will need another major drop before any chance of meaningful upside,” AgeOfAi said. “Current price is about 65k and it will need to shave off about 8k ahead.”
That would place Bitcoin around $57,000.
It is a prediction that can be tested by the market. But the Bitcoin call may ultimately be less remarkable than the claim behind it.
AgeOfAi says the proprietary formula powering TradersProphet has produced no failed result when he has correctly applied it manually, despite being used across tens of thousands of trades over nearly a decade.
He is careful, however, to draw a sharp distinction between the formula and TradersProphet, the software he is now building around it.
AgeOfAi is not claiming that software is incapable of making mistakes. Code can break. Internet connections can fail. Exchanges can experience delays, orders can encounter slippage and real-world execution can differ from what the underlying methodology identifies.
His claim is considerably narrower, but no less extraordinary: He says the formula itself has remained correct.
“When I say I have traded this system with 100% accuracy, I mean just that,” he told The Raw Brief, adding that proper risk management and reasonable leverage remain essential to producing those results.
He estimates he has encountered tens of thousands of valid trading situations during nearly a decade of manually applying the methodology.
The formula, he says, has not changed.
Not an AI trading system
The name AgeOfAi may make the next part surprising.
TradersProphet does not use artificial intelligence to make its trading decisions.
AgeOfAi says the decision engine is deterministic. Given the appropriate market conditions, it follows a defined set of rules rather than asking a machine-learning model to interpret news, sentiment or price action probabilistically.
He experimented with AI, but said it made the problem worse.
AI introduced another layer of interpretation into something he considers fundamentally exact. Instead of allowing a model to decide what the market probably means, his objective became forcing a machine to reproduce a methodology that he believes already provides the answer.
“The machine only makes things harder and not easier,” AgeOfAi said.
That distinction sits at the center of TradersProphet.
Most automated trading projects begin with the opposite problem. Developers collect enormous datasets and attempt to build models capable of discovering an edge.
AgeOfAi says he believes he already has the edge.
His engineering problem is making the computer obey it.
He compares the problem to autonomous driving. An experienced driver can accelerate, brake, steer and respond to conditions almost instinctively, yet engineers have spent years trying to make machines consistently reproduce decisions humans perform every day.
AgeOfAi says translating his trading methodology has presented a similar problem.
The formula itself contains only a handful of fundamental rules, he said. The difficulty is correctly understanding how those rules interact across different timeframes.
His description of the system centers heavily on those relationships.
“All timeframes flow into each other,” he said. A movement occurring on one timeframe, in his view, may be fulfilling what he describes as an obligation originating on another.
That means two traders applying the same formula could choose different entries or different trading frequencies while still identifying the same eventual destination.
A formula for every market
AgeOfAi says the methodology is not specific to Bitcoin.
He claims it applies to every tradable asset he has examined, including cryptocurrencies, equities, foreign exchange and zero-days-to-expiration options.
That is important because it changes what he believes he discovered.
If the same relationship exists across radically different financial markets, he argues, it cannot simply be a temporary Bitcoin inefficiency or an indicator optimized for one asset.
AgeOfAi describes it instead as something fundamental to the way markets operate.
“What I found is a backdoor to complete accuracy,” he said.
He rejects many of the tools conventional traders rely on. According to AgeOfAi, the formula does not depend on traditional indicators, support and resistance, volume analysis or publicly known trading formulas.
At any given time, he says, he can identify a direction and a minimum movement an asset must eventually complete.
“I do not project guesses,” he said. “I only take certainties.”
AgeOfAi said the methodology does require some historical chart information, but not huge datasets. Roughly 50 to 100 candles across the relevant timeframes can generally provide enough information for him to begin mapping what comes next, he said.
He also says the underlying relationship exists from the first candle of an asset's trading history onward.
Those claims depart dramatically from conventional market theory.
AgeOfAi goes further still.
He believes much of what traders interpret as market information is noise.
News comes second, he says
Economic reports, elections, geopolitical crises and breaking news are normally treated as catalysts capable of abruptly changing market expectations.
AgeOfAi sees the relationship differently.
He says he does not trade the news.
Instead, he claims the formula can identify where the market needs to move before the event that traders will later blame for causing that movement.
“The news, IMO, is used to steer the markets in the direction the formula needs it to go,” he said.
Asked whether his methodology could detect a major Bitcoin move ahead of an unexpected geopolitical event, regulatory announcement or financial shock without knowing what that event would be, AgeOfAi said yes.
“The forward-looking moves can be predicted with 100% accuracy,” he said. “Events always play into what the market must do, as strange as that sounds.”
He pointed broadly to COVID, elections and wars as examples of periods when conventional narratives were dominated by external events but his attention remained on the charts.
The implication is one of the most controversial ideas in his entire thesis: What appears to be an unpredictable reaction to news may, in his view, be the market completing a movement that was already visible through the formula.
He does not claim to know the future news event itself.
He claims to know where price needs to go.
The market is designed to fool traders, AgeOfAi says
AgeOfAi's explanation of why the methodology works is equally unconventional.
He describes financial markets through the lens of game theory, arguing that much of what traders see on their screens encourages predictable emotional reactions.
Fear, greed and fear of missing out become part of the mechanism.
He points to something as ordinary as an exchange notification telling a user that Bitcoin has jumped 3%.
For many traders, that notification can trigger the immediate feeling that they are missing a move. AgeOfAi sees something different: By the time the alert arrives, the movement has already happened.
That is frequently when he finds himself looking in the opposite direction.
He believes widely followed indicators can produce the same effect. When huge numbers of traders rely on similar information, those tools can become a mechanism for concentrating participants around the same expectations.
AgeOfAi describes that process more harshly, saying publicly known indicators are used to “herd the sheep.”
He believes the underlying market is considerably more structured than the apparent randomness traders experience.
Whether that structure was intentionally created or simply emerged because markets themselves were built by humans is something even AgeOfAi says he cannot answer.
He only argues that the relationship exists.
A private experiment
One of the obvious problems with any claim of perfect historical accuracy is verification.
AgeOfAi says he recognized that problem years ago.
About three years ago, he created a private Discord group that now includes roughly 80 members. He says part of the purpose was to determine whether his own results were the product of intuition that could not be reproduced by anyone else.
Instead, he says he successfully taught other people to apply the same underlying methodology with a high degree of success.
AgeOfAi said he has never charged the group for that knowledge and has instead remained highly selective about who receives access.
The group also became a record.
According to AgeOfAi, predictions he made there have been chronologically preserved since the group's creation, providing a historical trail of his calls.
He says none has been wrong.
The Raw Brief has not independently audited the complete Discord history, AgeOfAi's full exchange records or the claimed decade-long manual trading record. Those claims therefore remain his own unless and until the underlying records are independently examined.
But AgeOfAi says skepticism does not concern him.
His preferred response to a skeptic, he said, is straightforward: Give him an asset and ask where it is going.
Turning intuition into code
The software project created another test.
AgeOfAi says the hardest part of building TradersProphet has been quantifying actions that became intuitive after years of manually applying the formula.
Entries were particularly difficult.
He says the formula makes exits comparatively straightforward, but the timing of entries can involve judgment acquired through experience. Turning that judgment into deterministic code meant identifying what his brain was doing instinctively and expressing it through explicit software rules.
That process took years.
AgeOfAi has no formal computer science or trading education. He describes himself as a one-man operation who had to acquire the programming and security knowledge necessary to build the system himself.
His path into trading was also unusual.
AgeOfAi said he was involved in a serious car accident roughly 20 years ago and was deemed catastrophically disabled. He says he has lived with daily pain since then and began immersing himself in pursuits such as trading and programming partly as a way of focusing his mind elsewhere.
He says the formula itself was discovered almost accidentally.
What followed was months of examining different markets, relationships and timeframes until he believed he had mapped the conditions governing it.
Eventually, he said, the methodology became surprisingly simple.
The difficult part came much later, when he tried to teach a computer what had become almost instinctive to him.
TradersProphet enters live testing
AgeOfAi says that hurdle may finally have been crossed.
TradersProphet is already being tested with live trading accounts, he said, rather than relying entirely on simulated paper trading.
The current beta is capable of operating across approximately 30 assets simultaneously and around the clock, according to AgeOfAi.
He previously monitored the software closely and compared its behavior with what he would have done manually. He says he no longer believes constant intervention is necessary.
Today, he describes its decisions as nearly identical to his own, with differences typically involving which timeframe he personally might choose to trade.
The destination, he says, remains the same.
AgeOfAi also refuses to demand literal 100% realized trading performance from the software.
He says accuracy in the high 90% range would be acceptable for TradersProphet because real execution introduces variables the formula itself cannot control. A very small theoretical winning trade, for example, could become a tiny realized loss after fees or slippage.
That is why the distinction between TradersProphet and the formula matters.
A software failure would not, in AgeOfAi's view, invalidate the underlying methodology. It would mean the formula had been improperly translated or implemented.
The burden therefore falls on the software.
“If the same results aren't depicted on EVERY asset,” he said, “the system is not using the formula properly in the end.”
The Bitcoin test happening now
For all the discussion about nearly a decade of history, private Discord logs and thousands of past trades, the most useful test may be the simplest one.
A new prediction is already on the record.
Bitcoin was trading around $65,000 when AgeOfAi returned his answers to The Raw Brief.
Despite the possibility of short-term upside, he said the cryptocurrency still needed another major decline before what he considers meaningful upside could begin.
His rough requirement was another $8,000 lower.
That points toward the $57,000 area.
AgeOfAi has made similarly aggressive calls before, he said, including predictions that initially appeared absurd to him but were eventually completed.
He says that is one of the defining characteristics of the formula: Human instinct frequently disagrees with it.
When that happens, he follows the formula.
Whether Bitcoin now makes the move AgeOfAi says it must make will give the public something much easier to evaluate than a decade of private trading history.
The prediction is now outside the private group.
The market gets the final word.
From the Interview: AgeOfAi in His Own Words
The following exchanges were selected from The Raw Brief's full interview with AgeOfAi. Responses have been lightly edited for grammar and readability without changing their meaning.
The formula versus TradersProphet
The Raw Brief: You are not claiming the TradersProphet software is 100% accurate. You're saying the underlying formula you created has never produced an incorrect result in nearly a decade of you trading it manually. Is that accurate?
AgeOfAi: That is correct. The formula is 100% accurate, but there is still a difference in how it can be applied that can vary the outcome between users and techniques.
The Raw Brief: When you say you have traded this system with 100% accuracy, what does that mean?
AgeOfAi: My formula has never resulted in a liquidation or failed result. With that being said, proper trading disciplines are applied to get those results — proper risk management, no ridiculous leverage, etc.
How often has it been used?
The Raw Brief: You have manually traded this formula for almost a decade. Roughly how many valid trading setups have you seen?
AgeOfAi: It is hard to say. Tens of thousands of trades over the decade would likely be a fair assumption.
Can it work on anything?
The Raw Brief: Can it be used on Bitcoin, stocks, commodities, foreign exchange and other assets without fundamentally changing the formula?
AgeOfAi: The formula applies to ALL tradable assets — every class from 0DTE, stocks, crypto, forex. It truly doesn't matter.
What does the formula tell you?
The Raw Brief: Without revealing the formula itself, what is it actually extracting from a market?
AgeOfAi: The best way to explain the power of the formula is simple. At any given time, on any asset, I can tell you a direction and a minimum expected move it MUST make. I do not project guesses. I only take certainties.
Does news matter?
The Raw Brief: Does it care about news?
AgeOfAi: News is a touchy point. The news, in my opinion, is used to steer the markets in the direction the formula needs it to go. We always know where the news is going to take us prior to its release.
The Raw Brief: If Bitcoin is about to make a major move because of an unknown geopolitical event, regulatory announcement or financial shock, can your formula identify the move without knowing the catalyst?
AgeOfAi: The forward-looking moves can be predicted with 100% accuracy. Events always play into what the market must do, as strange as that sounds.
Is TradersProphet using AI?
The Raw Brief: Is your biggest engineering challenge preventing the software from becoming too clever?
AgeOfAi: The system uses no AI. It is completely deterministic in action. Making something deterministic in markets that are designed to depict randomness is chaotic in itself, but now proven possible.
The Raw Brief: So you're not asking a machine to discover an edge. You're asking it to reproduce an edge you believe you already possess?
AgeOfAi: Correct. The machine only makes things harder and not easier. But I believe I have gotten through that barrier finally.
Why was automation so difficult?
The Raw Brief: Is TradersProphet less about teaching a machine how to predict markets and more about teaching it to reproduce something you already know works manually?
AgeOfAi: Indeed. I found that it takes a bit of intuition to time entries, and I spent considerable lengths of time quantifying my intuition into viable code. Exits are easy because they are dictated by the formula.
Is it trading live?
The Raw Brief: Are you conducting forward tests where the software has no knowledge of what happens next?
AgeOfAi: This is the purpose of the beta testing currently going on with users of the group and myself — to validate the backtesting results in live trading conditions.
Does the software itself need 100% accuracy?
The Raw Brief: What level of signal-engine accuracy are you demanding before you consider it ready?
AgeOfAi: High 90s is acceptable to me, knowing smaller snipes and slippage or fees may make the odd trade close in a tiny loss where the backtesting called it a win.
How does he answer skeptics?
The Raw Brief: What would you say to a professional quantitative trader who says a universally 100%-accurate market formula is mathematically impossible?
AgeOfAi: They are indeed incorrect.
And what is the formula saying about Bitcoin now?
The Raw Brief: Has the formula ever predicted something so extreme that you refused to believe it yourself and then watched it happen?
AgeOfAi: Many times it has called for a movement that sounded ridiculous but always proved to be correct in the end. For example, BTC will need another major drop before any chance of meaningful upside. I don't know when this will hit the public, but current price is about 65k and it will need to shave off about 8k ahead.
Editor's note: Statements concerning the historical accuracy of AgeOfAi's formula, trading results, private group records and TradersProphet beta performance are claims made by AgeOfAi in his interview with The Raw Brief. The Raw Brief has not independently audited the complete trading record described in this story. Nothing in this article constitutes financial or investment advice.
