AI Crypto Trading Showdown: DeepSeek and Qwen3 Dominate as GPT-5 and Gemini Implode

2025-11-10 10:46:29

AI crypto trading competition just wrapped a brutal 18-day battle, and the results are in: DeepSeek and Qwen3 crushed the field with 130% and 100%+ profits, while GPT-5 and Gemini lost 63% and 56%, respectively. This nof1.ai AlphaZero showdown tested six leading AI models on Hyperliquid perpetuals—BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, DOGE, BNB—with $10K each, revealing AI’s trading edge and pitfalls in real-money action.

The Setup: No-Info, Pure Technical Duel

From October 18 to November 3, 2025, DeepSeek Chat V3.1, Qwen3 Max, Grok 4, Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, and Gemini 2.5 Pro traded autonomously using identical technical data: price, 20-day MA, MACD, RSI, open interest, funding rates, 3-minute and 4-hour sequences. No internet access. No fundamentals. Just pure TA. The goal? Maximize Sharpe ratio on risk-adjusted returns. This “offline” format eliminated info asymmetry, testing if AI can out-trade humans on charts alone—and it did, with winners surpassing 90% of retail traders.

The Winners: DeepSeek (130%) and Qwen3 (100%+) – Discipline Over Hype

DeepSeek led with ~130% gains, embodying a quant fund’s calm: low-frequency trades, long holds, 6.71 profit-loss ratio, and rigid small-loss/big-win execution. Diversified across BTC, ETH, SOL, it avoided overexposure, with 43.4% win rate and small stop-losses ($491 average). Qwen3 Max trailed at 100%+, aggressive with 5.6x leverage and 43.4% win rate, but high stop-losses ($491) showed risk tolerance. Both thrived on trend-following and discipline, using limited data for 80%+ accuracy—outpacing 95% of humans.

Rank	Model	Profit	Win Rate	Strategy Key
1	DeepSeek	+130%	43.4%	Low-freq, high P/L ratio (6.71)
2	Qwen3	+100%+	43.4%	Aggressive leverage, long BTC

The Losers: GPT-5 (-63%), Gemini (-56%), Claude (-30%), Grok (Flat) – Frequency and Greed Kill

GPT-5 cratered 63% to $3,578, with high-frequency shorts on all assets and $1,000+ fees. Gemini 2.5 Pro lost 56% to $4,408, favoring short biases and low P/L ratios. Claude Sonnet 4.5 held long-only for 25% gains but low P/L (1.2) limited upside. Grok 4 broke even at 20% win rate, struggling with multi-directional bias. High-frequency, short-term bets and ignoring small losses doomed them, contrasting winners’ patience—highlighting AI’s need for disciplined, trend-aligned thinking.

Rank	Model	Loss	Win Rate	Strategy Flaw
6	GPT-5	-63%	Low	High-freq shorts, fee overload
5	Gemini	-56%	Low	Short bias, low P/L
4	Claude	-30%	Medium	Long-only, low P/L (1.2)
3	Grok	Flat	20%	Multi-direction imbalance

Key Lessons: Low-Frequency, High P/L, and Deep Review Win – AI Beats 90% of Humans

Low-Frequency, Long Holds: Winners traded 139 times (Qwen3), focusing on trends vs. high-frequency losers’ 500+ trades.
High Profit-Loss Ratio: DeepSeek’s 6.71 P/L averaged $491 stop-losses; losers chased small gains with big losses.
Deep Review and Discipline: Winners used detailed detection; losers ignored signals, amplifying greed.
AI’s Edge: With identical data, top models outpaced 90% of humans—AI’s strength is rule adherence, not emotion.

In DeFi’s $150B+ TVL, this validates AI for trading, but discipline trumps speed.

2025 AI Trading Prediction: 20% Adoption, $50B Market

AI trading prediction for 2025: 20% DeFi adoption, $50B market. Bull: Quant models like DeepSeek; bear: Fee risks testing 10% share.

For traders, how to use AI for crypto trading via tools like DeepSeek ensures edge. AI trading strategies and DeepSeek vs GPT provide insights.

Trading Strategy: AI-Inspired Longs

Short-term: Long BTC above $108K targeting $115K, stop $105K (3% risk). Swing: Accumulate dips, staking for 5% APY. Watch $110K breakout; below $105K, exit.

In summary, DeepSeek and Qwen3’s 130% and 100%+ wins in the AI crypto trading showdown highlight discipline’s power, powering 2025’s $50B AI trading surge.

BTC-3.22%

ETH-0.05%

SOL-0.43%

XRP-1.03%

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.