One part of @DeepBot_ I have been meaning to follow more closely is the rebuild of the Rewards and revenue share side of the ecosystem. I have already written about $DEEPAI utility and PRO, but I think the more interesting question long term is where the revenue underneath all of this actually comes from and whether users can see it clearly. Krypt has previously outlined a new personalised Rewards system intended to bring things such as referrals, my own trading volume, referred user volume, referral earnings, holdings and revenue share into one dashboard. That interests me a lot more than simply seeing a percentage beside the words "revenue share". If DeepBot is going to build an economy around the products, I want to be able to follow the activity creating that economy. Trading fees are one part of it. Affiliate activity is another. PRO subscriptions add another revenue source. And LINK has now introduced advertising, with Krypt saying advertising revenue is also intended to contribute to the revenue pool. That last part is particularly interesting to me because it means LINK doesn't necessarily have to monetise only the people actively trading through it. If LINK keeps growing as a place people use for discovery, charts, news, portfolio tracking, Convergence, Strategy Studio and Dale, then the attention sitting inside the platform itself can potentially become another source of revenue. You can already see sponsored areas inside LINK, so the advertising side isn't just an idea on a roadmap. What I haven't seen yet is the finished Rewards dashboard showing the complete flow and breakdown Krypt described, so I am treating that part as something still being built rather than pretending it is already finished. That transparency will matter. If I am participating in something described as revenue share, I don't only want a number appearing in a wallet every so often. I would like to understand what generated it. How much platform activity occurred? How much came through referrals? What volume did those referrals create? What came from advertising? What other revenue sources are eventually being included? What portion is actually being distributed? Those are much more useful questions than watching the $DEEPAI chart and assuming price movement tells me whether the ecosystem is working. The bigger DeepBot gets, the more interesting this becomes because the product is no longer one trading bot with one obvious source of fees. There is Bobby. There is Dale. There is LINK. There is Strategy Studio. There is trading and automation. There are PRO subscriptions, affiliates, advertising and potentially other revenue producing parts of the ecosystem as it expands. If the rebuilt Rewards system eventually makes those flows visible in one place, I think that will be one of the more important pieces of LINK for people trying to understand the economics behind $DEEPAI rather than just speculating on them. I will be watching this side carefully as it rolls out. Not because a dashboard guarantees anything, but because if DeepBot wants people to take revenue share seriously, showing where the revenue originates is exactly the sort of transparency I want to see. @DeepBot_ @BobbyBuyBot @Krypt0nite8 #DeepBot #DEEPAI #LINK #Rewards #RevenueShare #Dale $DEEPAI Try Dale: t.me/traderdeepbot?start=316… Referral code: 316340FF I use DeepBot and may receive a benefit if you sign up or trade through my referral link. NFA. I hold $DEEPAI. Crypto is high risk and revenue share arrangements, eligibility, distribution amounts and programme conditions can change. Nothing here is a promise of income or investment return. Always do your own research.

Something else @DeepBot_ has started doing that I think makes a lot of sense as the product becomes more complicated is the Trading 101 content. I actually reposted one of these a few weeks ago when Rob broke down Stop Losses and Take Profits because I could immediately see the value in it. I have never tried to present myself as some professional trader. A large part of this account has been me learning by actually using Dale, checking what happens, asking questions when I don't understand something and gradually getting better at separating useful trading tools from things that just sound impressive. That is why I think education becomes more important as DeepBot adds more automation. Strategy Studio now lets somebody configure take profits, stop losses, trailing stops, liquidity limits, holder requirements, market cap ranges, token age, safety conditions, Convergence requirements and other rules that can eventually control real money. Making those settings easy to click is not the same thing as making somebody understand what they are doing. Take a stop loss. The basic idea is easy enough to explain. If the trade falls to a certain point, get me out. But once you actually start using one, there are much better questions to ask. How tight should it be for the volatility of the token? Could normal market noise trigger it before the move continues? What happens if liquidity disappears? What happens if the execution price is worse than the trigger? How does a fixed stop interact with the take profit ladder and a trailing stop? The same thing applies to take profits. Selling some of a position at +25% and another portion at +60% sounds simple, but that is also a decision about how much upside you are willing to give away in exchange for locking something in along the way. Those aren't really DeepBot questions. They are trading questions. And if DeepBot wants to make sophisticated trading tools accessible to people who haven't spent years staring at charts, I think explaining the underlying concepts is just as important as building another button. The timing also makes sense because Strategy Studio is moving a lot of these concepts from things Dale can explain into rules that people can actually automate. It is one thing to ask Dale what a trailing stop means. It is another thing to tell a Hunt to use one automatically across every position it opens. The second one comes with responsibility. I would actually like to see Trading 101 keep expanding alongside the product for exactly that reason. Explain liquidity. Explain slippage. Explain market cap versus FDV. Explain holder concentration. Explain why a token being "safe" does not mean it is a good trade. Explain paper trading versus live execution. Explain why a strategy that won last week can fail next week. The more people understand those things, the better chance they have of using all this technology properly rather than treating Dale as a magic money button. For me, that fits pretty well with what I have been trying to do publicly since I started testing DeepBot. Use the tools. Understand what they are actually doing. Then decide how much control I am comfortable handing over. @DeepBot_ @BobbyBuyBot #DeepBot #Trading101 #Dale #StrategyStudio #CryptoEducation #LINK $DEEPAI $ETH $SOL Try Dale: t.me/traderdeepbot?start=316… Referral code: 316340FF I use DeepBot and may receive a benefit if you sign up or trade through my referral link. NFA. Educational material cannot remove the risks of crypto or automated trading. Stop losses, take profits and other risk controls can behave differently under real market conditions, particularly during volatility or poor liquidity. Always understand the tools you use and never risk money you cannot afford to lose.

One of the strangest things about opening the finished @DeepBot_ Strategy Studio for the first time was seeing a chunk of my own testing history staring back at me. I had expected to open a new product and start from zero. Instead I found Hunts I had built months earlier while I was testing Dale through Telegram. ETH Fresh Degen Auto Buy. ETH Intake Diagnostic. Router Rank Control. Router Source Comparison. Clean Source Control. Manual Review Hunts across Ethereum, Solana, BSC and Base. Even some of the deliberately weird diagnostic versions I created while trying to work out which rules were actually controlling Dale's candidate funnel were sitting there as expired or paused Hunts. Those names probably mean absolutely nothing to anybody else 😂 but I remember why most of them existed. They were part of the period where I was trying to understand what Dale meant when it said it was "hunting", whether different signal sources actually changed the candidates, how age restrictions affected the funnel, whether a safety rule was being applied before or after another condition and how far I could push the automation without giving it more authority than I intended. At the time, most of that work felt like testing individual pieces of a system that hadn't fully come together yet. Now those old Hunts are sitting inside Strategy Studio alongside the new paper strategies I am creating through LINK. That continuity surprised me more than some of the flashy new features. It means I can look at an old ETH Fresh Degen experiment from August and then look at the Hunt I built this week and see how much the way of expressing the strategy has changed. Back then I was often using Dale to create or inspect the rules conversationally and then using more prompts to work out what had actually been saved. Now I can open Advanced mode and physically see the gates in front of me, including liquidity, market cap, holders, taxes, age, safety, Convergence, source requirements, developer holdings and the exit ladder. I can keep it on paper, see its activity and results, pause it, clone or share the rules, ask Dale about it and, if I ever decide the evidence is good enough, separately choose whether that Hunt is allowed to use real money. I actually like that the old Hunts haven't simply disappeared because they are a reminder of how this part of DeepBot evolved. Strategy Studio didn't appear out of nowhere in October. A lot of the underlying ideas around Hunts, screeners, Auto Buy rules and Dale building strategies were things I had already been testing earlier in the year. What has changed is how much of that is now surfaced, organised and understandable inside LINK. For someone who has been keeping a public testing journal rather than only looking at the current release, that history is useful. I can see where I started. I can see what I was trying to test. And now I can build new versions in an environment that is substantially easier to inspect. I am leaving most of those old Hunts exactly where they are for now. Partly because I want the history, and partly because opening Strategy Studio and seeing names like "ETH Router Source Comparison v0.1" sitting beside the new stuff is a pretty good reminder of how deep down this rabbit hole I went 😂 @DeepBot_ @BobbyBuyBot #DeepBot #StrategyStudio #Dale #LINK #Convergence #Automation $DEEPAI $ETH $SOL Try Dale: t.me/traderdeepbot?start=316… Referral code: 316340FF I use DeepBot and may receive a benefit if you sign up or trade through my referral link. NFA. Crypto and automated trading involve significant risk. Historical tests and paper strategies do not guarantee future results. Always understand the rules and permissions of any automation before allowing it to trade with real funds.

I particularly like the way DeepBot is approaching the League and competitions. Strategies are paper tested at the same fixed size for each chain, then ranked by median multiple after enough closed trades rather than simply putting the biggest dollar P&L at the top of the board. That doesn't magically prove the winning strategy will keep winning, but it removes one obvious distortion from the comparison because bankroll size isn't deciding the leaderboard. If Strategy Studio builds enough participation and enough closed trades, that dataset could become extremely interesting. @DeepBot_ #StrategyStudio #TradingStrategy #Dale $DEEPAI

There is another side of @DeepBot_ Strategy Studio that I haven't really written about yet, and I think it could end up being just as important as the automated trading itself. The community strategy layer. Trading strategies normally get shared in fairly useless ways. Someone posts a screenshot of a good result, gives you a few settings, tells you what supposedly works and leaves out half the information required to reproduce it. You have no idea how many failed versions came before it, how large the position was, whether the result was unusual or whether the same rules would do anything useful if you started running them today. Strategy Studio is taking a much more testable approach. A trader can share a Hunt publicly and another user can clone the actual strategy rules into their own Studio. The important part is what gets shared. The filters and exit plan can be cloned, but the original trader's wallet, trade size and private results are not handed over with it. The person cloning the Hunt gets the logic and it starts on paper, so they can see how those rules perform for themselves before deciding whether they want anything more to do with it. I like that model because it turns a trading idea into something falsifiable. If I see a community Hunt that looks interesting, I don't need to believe the person who created it and I don't need to put money behind it because somebody posted a profitable trade. I can clone the strategy, let it run against the market and build my own evidence. There are already very different approaches appearing in the Community section, particularly on Solana, ranging from tiny fresh launch strategies through to Hunts with much wider market cap ranges and very different take profit and stop structures. The next part is where this gets even more interesting. Strategy Studio has Weekly and Monthly Competitions and a League built around paper trading. Shared strategies are tested at the same fixed trade size for each chain, and the rankings use median trade multiple once a strategy has enough closed trades. That is a much better comparison than simply ranking whoever made the most dollars. If one person is effectively trading with ten times the bankroll of somebody else, total profit doesn't tell me much about which strategy was better. Normalising the trade size and ranking the strategy based on its closed trades moves the comparison much closer to the rules themselves. There is also the Winners Room, where strategy cards can be shared and cloned alongside the discussion. Put all of that together and Strategy Studio starts looking less like a normal bot configuration page and more like an experiment network for trading ideas. Build a Hunt. Run it on paper. Share the rules if you want to. Let other people clone them. Compare strategies under a more consistent methodology. Take something somebody else created and test it yourself. Then change it and see if your version performs differently. Krypt actually described Strategy Studio months ago as moving towards a social platform with automated trading, and seeing the Community, League, Competitions and Winners Room live now makes that description a lot easier to understand. I think there is a lot of potential in that because traders don't all approach the market the same way. One person might be very good at fresh launches. Somebody else might understand momentum. Another person might build around safer established tokens. Someone else might find a combination of filters nobody had considered. DeepBot doesn't need everybody to agree on the perfect strategy. It can give people somewhere to turn those different ideas into actual rules and let the results do some of the arguing. That is a considerably more interesting use of a trading community than another Telegram channel full of calls. @DeepBot_ @BobbyBuyBot @Krypt0nite8 #DeepBot #StrategyStudio #Dale #LINK #PaperTrading #TradingStrategy $DEEPAI $ETH $SOL Try Dale: t.me/traderdeepbot?start=316… Referral code: 316340FF I use DeepBot and may receive a benefit if you sign up or trade through my referral link. NFA. Shared strategies, competition rankings and paper results do not guarantee future performance. A strategy that worked previously can lose money under different market conditions. Test everything yourself and never risk money you cannot afford to lose.

Another change in @DeepBot_ that has become much more obvious since I came back is how far the multi-chain side of the ecosystem has progressed. When people say a crypto tool is "multi-chain", that can mean almost anything. Sometimes it means the website can display token prices from a few networks while the useful parts of the product still only work properly on one chain. What I am seeing inside LINK and Strategy Studio now is considerably broader than that. Strategy Studio currently lets me build Hunts across Ethereum, BSC, Base, Solana and Robinhood Chain. LINK itself reaches wider again through its discovery and market data, including Polygon alongside the other networks, so I can move between very different parts of the market without needing to rebuild my entire research workflow every time I change chains. That is useful, but the part I find more interesting is that DeepBot isn't pretending every chain behaves exactly the same way. I have been running comparable Balanced Quick Flips paper Hunts on $ETH and $SOL, and although the basic strategy can be similar, the safety logic underneath them changes. On Ethereum my Hunt can require liquidity to be burned or locked. On Solana the Hunt has a developer holding floor, a token program guard and specific handling for safe Token 2022 contracts. That difference matters because being multi-chain should mean understanding the chain you are operating on, not just translating the same checklist into another network name. The same principle extends across the rest of LINK. Discovery can surface movement across different chains, Dale can research assets across them, the portfolio gives me a combined view of holdings, and Strategy Studio is beginning to let the same broad trading idea be tested in multiple markets without forcing every chain into identical rules. That opens up some testing I am particularly interested in. If I run a broadly similar strategy on Ethereum and Solana, does one chain produce substantially more opportunities? Do the same market cap and liquidity ranges make sense on both? Does a 10 minute entry window behave completely differently depending on how quickly tokens are launching and gaining holders? Do I need different exits because the volatility profile is different? Those are questions I can now start answering with actual paper Hunts rather than treating "multi-chain" as a marketing feature. It also makes the broader DeepBot architecture more useful because Bobby and Convergence are not restricted to giving me one narrow view of the market. LINK can surface activity across different ecosystems, Dale can help investigate what I am looking at, and Studio can turn the trading logic into persistent rules for the chain I choose. For somebody who doesn't want to spend the day with six different dashboards open, that is a significant improvement. I don't expect one strategy to magically work everywhere, and I actually think it would be a mistake to approach multi-chain automation that way. What interests me is having one environment where I can build the idea, adapt the rules to the chain, test it properly and compare the results. That is much closer to what I want a multi-chain trading platform to be. @DeepBot_ @BobbyBuyBot @solana #DeepBot #Dale #LINK #StrategyStudio #Convergence #MultiChain $DEEPAI $ETH $SOL Try Dale: t.me/traderdeepbot?start=316… Referral code: 316340FF I use DeepBot and may receive a benefit if you sign up or trade through my referral link. NFA. Crypto and automated trading involve significant risk. Different chains have different technical, liquidity, smart contract and execution risks. Always do your own research and never risk money you cannot afford to lose.