Back in 2019, AltSignals published a year-in-review covering performance across BitMEX, Binance and Forex signals. That original report captured a specific moment in the market: a recovery year after the 2018 bear market, rising interest in leveraged crypto trading, and growing demand for structured trading signals.
This updated version keeps the historical context but adds something more useful for readers in 2026: what those results actually mean, how to read old trading reports properly, and why exchange-specific performance should never be treated as a promise of future returns.
If you want the broader market context first, start with our crypto trading guide.
What This 2019 AltSignals Review Covered
The original article focused on three areas:
- BitMEX trading signal performance during 2019
- Binance trading signal activity during 2019
- The early rollout of Forex signals later that year
At the time, BitMEX was still one of the most talked-about derivatives exchanges in crypto. Binance was expanding quickly, and many traders were comparing spot-style opportunities with leveraged futures trading. That matters because signal performance is heavily shaped by market structure, volatility, liquidity, fees, and whether leverage is involved.
So while the 2019 report is still part of AltSignals history, it should be read as a historical case study rather than a current performance benchmark.
2019 Crypto Market Context: Why Results Looked the Way They Did
2019 was not a straight-line bull market. Crypto rallied strongly in the first half of the year, then gave back a large part of those gains in the second half. Bitcoin, Litecoin and Binance Coin were among the assets that drew the most attention during that period.
That kind of environment can create plenty of trading opportunities, but it also changes the type of setups that work best. Trend-following trades may perform well during strong directional moves, while shorter-term tactical trades become more important when momentum fades and volatility turns choppy.
This is one reason old signal reports need context. A strong year in one market regime does not automatically carry over into another. Setup quality, risk controls, and execution discipline matter just as much as the headline win rate.
Historical 2019 Results Mentioned in the Original Article
The original post reported the following headline figures for 2019:
- BitMEX: 513 signals, 416 winning trades, roughly 81% profitable trades
- Binance: 582 signals, roughly 72% win rate
- Forex: 69 signals, 55 profitable trades, close to 80% win rate
It also highlighted monthly snapshots for BitMEX, including stronger and weaker months across the year.
Those figures are part of the original report and should be treated as historical claims tied to that period, that exchange mix, and that methodology. They are not a forecast, not a standing average, and not a guarantee of what any trader would achieve in live conditions.
Why BitMEX and Binance Results Were Different
The original article noted that Binance results were generally smaller than BitMEX results. That makes sense on a structural level.
BitMEX was known for leveraged derivatives trading. Leverage can amplify gains, but it also amplifies losses and liquidation risk. Binance trading opportunities, depending on the market and product used, may behave differently because the instruments, liquidity conditions, and risk profile are not identical.
In plain English: a signal on one platform is not automatically comparable to a signal on another.
When reviewing any exchange-specific signal history, traders should ask:
- Was leverage used?
- Were results based on spot or derivatives?
- Did the report include fees, slippage, and execution delays?
- Were stop-loss rules followed consistently?
- Was the market trending or range-bound?
Without those details, headline percentages can look cleaner than real trading usually feels.
How to Read Trading Signal Performance Reports Properly
A win rate on its own is never enough.
Two signal services can both report a 70% win rate and still produce very different outcomes. The difference usually comes down to average reward-to-risk, drawdowns, position sizing, and whether traders actually followed the plan.
That is why experienced traders look beyond the top-line number. A useful performance review should help you understand:
- how trades were selected
- how risk was managed
- whether results came from a few outsized winners or steady execution
- how performance changed across different market conditions
If you want to compare signal-based trading with other approaches, our guide on top crypto signals is a good next read.
What Still Matters From This Year-in-Review
Even though the article is based on 2019 data, it still highlights a few useful ideas:
- signal performance depends heavily on market regime
- exchange choice changes the risk profile
- leveraged trading can distort headline profit figures
- consistency matters more than one standout month
That last point is worth underlining. Traders often get distracted by the biggest monthly gain in a report, but the more important question is whether the process is repeatable and risk-aware over time.
A More Realistic Take in 2026
Crypto trading has changed a lot since 2019. Exchange competition is broader, regulation is tighter in many regions, and traders are generally more aware of execution risk, custody risk, and the dangers of overusing leverage.
That means older BitMEX-era performance reports should be read with caution. They can still be useful as part of AltSignals’ track record and brand history, but they are not a substitute for current due diligence.
If you are evaluating a signal provider today, focus on transparency, risk controls, market coverage, and whether the service fits your trading style. If you want to explore the current offering, you can review AltSignals trading signals. For a broader look at historical reporting and verification, see our trading results page.
Risk Reminder
Trading crypto, forex, and leveraged products involves substantial risk. Past performance does not guarantee future results, and historical reports can never reflect every real-world variable, including slippage, fees, latency, or trader error.
If you use signals, treat them as part of a trading process rather than a shortcut to guaranteed profits. Risk management still does the heavy lifting.
Final Take
The original AltSignals year-in-review was a snapshot of 2019, not a promise for the future. As a historical report, it shows how the service described its performance across BitMEX, Binance and Forex during a volatile year. As an updated article in 2026, the more useful takeaway is how to interpret those numbers with proper context.
Read old performance reports for insight, not certainty. If you want a practical next step, compare them with current methodology, current markets, and a clear risk plan before placing a single trade.
