Data From 2025-07-07 To 2025-07-13
With the current value of Synth Alpha, last week, Synth paid 20,716 Alpha tokens to miners, equivalent to $85,766. Since March 2025, a total of 410,208 Alpha tokens have been distributed to miners, worth $1,698,261. On a monthly average since Synth’s dtao launch in February 2025, Synth has paid $377,391 to miners, more than double Numerai’s average monthly payout of $186,058.
Figure 1 illustrates hourly log returns and volatility for the week, highlighting the relationship between BTC and ETH. While overall volatility remained relatively stable, two notable spikes occurred midweek (October 9th and 10th). These were instances of positive volatility, driven primarily by strong upward price movements.
This week, we monitored the performance of four key miners:
Miners 221, 32, and 129 – Finished the week in the top three on the Synth leaderboard
Miner 200 – Dropped out of the top three during the week
Miners 200 and 221 are part of axon 35.77.6.189, Miner 32 belongs to axon 3.112.97.164, and Miner 129 is part of axon 116.202.53.142. The data suggests increasing competition between axons, indicating that models from different clusters are becoming increasingly competitive—benefiting the overall health and quality of the subnet.
As usual, performance was evaluated using two key metrics:
CRPS (Continuous Ranked Probability Score) for BTC and ETH forecasts
Leaderboard Scores
Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS). Lower CRPS values indicate better predictive accuracy.
Throughout the week, CRPS values for BTC showed intense competition. Notably, Miner 129—previously the leaderboard leader—lost ground toward the weekend, particularly on Sunday the 13th, likely due to overestimating weekend volatility.Miner 129 also experienced a modest drop in ETH performance over the weekend, despite strong results earlier in the week. Conversely, Miner 200 underperformed midweek but posted much-improved ETH CRPS values during the low-volatility weekend. Miners 32 and 221 showed performance patterns similar to Miner 200.
Leaderboard Scores. These are exponentially weighted averages of past CRPS values over a 10-day window. Lower scores indicate better performance.
This week, ETH performance and weekend scores had a significant influence on leaderboard positions. Miner 129, despite a strong midweek comeback, lost the top spot by the weekend but remained in the top three. Miner 200’s fluctuations closely mirrored their ETH CRPS trajectory, with midweek underperformance and weekend recovery. Miners 32 and 221, with slightly better overall scores, secured their places in the top three.
This section analyzes summary statistics—volatility, kurtosis, and skewness—to detect potential strategic differences among top miners for both BTC and ETH.
Summary Statistic Definitions:
Volatility: Variability in forecasted returns
Kurtosis: Measures the "tailedness" of the distribution—how likely extreme events are
Skewness: Measures the asymmetry of return distributions (0 = symmetric)
Figure 4 presents these statistics for the four miners across the week.
Miners 221, 32, and 200 displayed very similar statistical profiles, with closely aligned volatility, kurtosis, and skewness, both in level and variation. In contrast, Miner 129 appeared to downplay kurtosis and skewness, focusing instead on maintaining lower volatility. This approach did not pay off in the long term, as evidenced by the loss of the leaderboard top position over the weekend.
Miners’ Ranking vs. Summary Statistics: All miners who submitted forecasts were ranked by total weekly rewards. Figure 5 shows how summary statistics vary across ranking tiers.
This week, even lower-tier miners appeared to place greater emphasis on volatility modeling. For both BTC and ETH, their forecasted volatility levels approached those of the top-tier miners—another sign of rising quality across the subnet. Kurtosis modeling is also gaining traction, with second-tier miners (ranks 10–20) increasingly emulating the modeling patterns of the top 10.
To assess performance at the group level, we analyzed:
Axon size (number of miners)
Average and total rewards per axon
Axon-level summary statistics (BTC forecasts)
Figure 6 shows the number of miners per axon at the end of the week.
As in previous weeks, axon 116.202.53.142 had the highest number of registered miners, followed by 138.201.62.165 and 95.216.99.113.
Figure 7 shows the evolution of average (per miner) and total daily rewards for the top 10 axons by average reward.
The axon-level dynamics mirrored those of individual miners. Axon 116.202.53.142 earned the highest total weekly rewards. However, its total rewards decreased toward the end of the week, and its average daily rewards were in line with others—suggesting its performance heavily depended on Miner 129. Meanwhile, axons 35.77.6.189 and 3.112.97.164 saw average daily rewards increase over the weekend, reflecting stronger miner performance compared to Miner 129.
Axon 116.202.53.142 - Total Alpha Tokens: 33,847 (= $ 140,126)
Axon 35.77.6.189 - Total Alpha Tokens: 25,375 (= $ 105,053)
Axon 186.233.184.223 - Total Alpha Tokens: 21,309 (= $ 88,218)
Axon 95.216.99.113 - Total Alpha Tokens: 19,307 (= $ 79,929)
Axon 18.183.47.137 - Total Alpha Tokens: 13,499 (= $ 55,886)
Axon 3.112.97.164 - Total Alpha Tokens: 13,073 (= $ 54,120)
Axon 95.111.205.93 - Total Alpha Tokens: 8,478 (= $ 35,100)
Axon 35.78.218.102 - Total Alpha Tokens: 7,202 (= $ 29,815)
Axon 103.88.234.233 - Total Alpha Tokens: 6,318 (= $ 26,155)
Axon 185.141.218.212 - Total Alpha Tokens: 4,902 (= $ 20,295)
Figure 8 compares the top 10 axons (by average rewards) based on BTC modeling statistics: average intraday volatility, volatility variability, and average intraday kurtosis.
This figure sheds light on Miner 129’s weekend decline. Miners from axon 116.202.53.142 generally anticipated higher volatility compared to others. While most axons reduced volatility forecasts over the weekend, this axon increased them. Additionally, its miners had some of the lowest intraday volatility and kurtosis values, possibly limiting their ability to adapt to real-time market changes. In contrast, other axons displayed higher and more variable intraday volatility and kurtosis—potentially enabling better responsiveness.
This week’s analysis reveals several noteworthy trends:
ETH performance is becoming more influential in overall miner rankings
Competition among axons is intensifying, with three different axons battling for top spots throughout the week
Lower-tier miners are improving, particularly in volatility modeling, and are starting to adopt strategies used by top performers
These developments point to a healthier and more competitive subnet, with greater emphasis on modeling distributional nuances—especially for ETH, which is playing a larger role in leaderboard scoring.
Starting last week, Gold has been added to the set of assets modeled by Synth miners. We expect miners who successfully capture meaningful dynamics in this asset’s distribution to gain a competitive edge. Beginning next week, we will start reporting miner scores for Gold forecasts.
Data From 2025-07-07 To 2025-07-13
With the current value of Synth Alpha, last week, Synth paid 20,716 Alpha tokens to miners, equivalent to $85,766. Since March 2025, a total of 410,208 Alpha tokens have been distributed to miners, worth $1,698,261. On a monthly average since Synth’s dtao launch in February 2025, Synth has paid $377,391 to miners, more than double Numerai’s average monthly payout of $186,058.
Figure 1 illustrates hourly log returns and volatility for the week, highlighting the relationship between BTC and ETH. While overall volatility remained relatively stable, two notable spikes occurred midweek (October 9th and 10th). These were instances of positive volatility, driven primarily by strong upward price movements.
This week, we monitored the performance of four key miners:
Miners 221, 32, and 129 – Finished the week in the top three on the Synth leaderboard
Miner 200 – Dropped out of the top three during the week
Miners 200 and 221 are part of axon 35.77.6.189, Miner 32 belongs to axon 3.112.97.164, and Miner 129 is part of axon 116.202.53.142. The data suggests increasing competition between axons, indicating that models from different clusters are becoming increasingly competitive—benefiting the overall health and quality of the subnet.
As usual, performance was evaluated using two key metrics:
CRPS (Continuous Ranked Probability Score) for BTC and ETH forecasts
Leaderboard Scores
Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS). Lower CRPS values indicate better predictive accuracy.
Throughout the week, CRPS values for BTC showed intense competition. Notably, Miner 129—previously the leaderboard leader—lost ground toward the weekend, particularly on Sunday the 13th, likely due to overestimating weekend volatility.Miner 129 also experienced a modest drop in ETH performance over the weekend, despite strong results earlier in the week. Conversely, Miner 200 underperformed midweek but posted much-improved ETH CRPS values during the low-volatility weekend. Miners 32 and 221 showed performance patterns similar to Miner 200.
Leaderboard Scores. These are exponentially weighted averages of past CRPS values over a 10-day window. Lower scores indicate better performance.
This week, ETH performance and weekend scores had a significant influence on leaderboard positions. Miner 129, despite a strong midweek comeback, lost the top spot by the weekend but remained in the top three. Miner 200’s fluctuations closely mirrored their ETH CRPS trajectory, with midweek underperformance and weekend recovery. Miners 32 and 221, with slightly better overall scores, secured their places in the top three.
This section analyzes summary statistics—volatility, kurtosis, and skewness—to detect potential strategic differences among top miners for both BTC and ETH.
Summary Statistic Definitions:
Volatility: Variability in forecasted returns
Kurtosis: Measures the "tailedness" of the distribution—how likely extreme events are
Skewness: Measures the asymmetry of return distributions (0 = symmetric)
Figure 4 presents these statistics for the four miners across the week.
Miners 221, 32, and 200 displayed very similar statistical profiles, with closely aligned volatility, kurtosis, and skewness, both in level and variation. In contrast, Miner 129 appeared to downplay kurtosis and skewness, focusing instead on maintaining lower volatility. This approach did not pay off in the long term, as evidenced by the loss of the leaderboard top position over the weekend.
Miners’ Ranking vs. Summary Statistics: All miners who submitted forecasts were ranked by total weekly rewards. Figure 5 shows how summary statistics vary across ranking tiers.
This week, even lower-tier miners appeared to place greater emphasis on volatility modeling. For both BTC and ETH, their forecasted volatility levels approached those of the top-tier miners—another sign of rising quality across the subnet. Kurtosis modeling is also gaining traction, with second-tier miners (ranks 10–20) increasingly emulating the modeling patterns of the top 10.
To assess performance at the group level, we analyzed:
Axon size (number of miners)
Average and total rewards per axon
Axon-level summary statistics (BTC forecasts)
Figure 6 shows the number of miners per axon at the end of the week.
As in previous weeks, axon 116.202.53.142 had the highest number of registered miners, followed by 138.201.62.165 and 95.216.99.113.
Figure 7 shows the evolution of average (per miner) and total daily rewards for the top 10 axons by average reward.
The axon-level dynamics mirrored those of individual miners. Axon 116.202.53.142 earned the highest total weekly rewards. However, its total rewards decreased toward the end of the week, and its average daily rewards were in line with others—suggesting its performance heavily depended on Miner 129. Meanwhile, axons 35.77.6.189 and 3.112.97.164 saw average daily rewards increase over the weekend, reflecting stronger miner performance compared to Miner 129.
Axon 116.202.53.142 - Total Alpha Tokens: 33,847 (= $ 140,126)
Axon 35.77.6.189 - Total Alpha Tokens: 25,375 (= $ 105,053)
Axon 186.233.184.223 - Total Alpha Tokens: 21,309 (= $ 88,218)
Axon 95.216.99.113 - Total Alpha Tokens: 19,307 (= $ 79,929)
Axon 18.183.47.137 - Total Alpha Tokens: 13,499 (= $ 55,886)
Axon 3.112.97.164 - Total Alpha Tokens: 13,073 (= $ 54,120)
Axon 95.111.205.93 - Total Alpha Tokens: 8,478 (= $ 35,100)
Axon 35.78.218.102 - Total Alpha Tokens: 7,202 (= $ 29,815)
Axon 103.88.234.233 - Total Alpha Tokens: 6,318 (= $ 26,155)
Axon 185.141.218.212 - Total Alpha Tokens: 4,902 (= $ 20,295)
Figure 8 compares the top 10 axons (by average rewards) based on BTC modeling statistics: average intraday volatility, volatility variability, and average intraday kurtosis.
This figure sheds light on Miner 129’s weekend decline. Miners from axon 116.202.53.142 generally anticipated higher volatility compared to others. While most axons reduced volatility forecasts over the weekend, this axon increased them. Additionally, its miners had some of the lowest intraday volatility and kurtosis values, possibly limiting their ability to adapt to real-time market changes. In contrast, other axons displayed higher and more variable intraday volatility and kurtosis—potentially enabling better responsiveness.
This week’s analysis reveals several noteworthy trends:
ETH performance is becoming more influential in overall miner rankings
Competition among axons is intensifying, with three different axons battling for top spots throughout the week
Lower-tier miners are improving, particularly in volatility modeling, and are starting to adopt strategies used by top performers
These developments point to a healthier and more competitive subnet, with greater emphasis on modeling distributional nuances—especially for ETH, which is playing a larger role in leaderboard scoring.
Starting last week, Gold has been added to the set of assets modeled by Synth miners. We expect miners who successfully capture meaningful dynamics in this asset’s distribution to gain a competitive edge. Beginning next week, we will start reporting miner scores for Gold forecasts.
SynthMode Synth (SN50) Subnet Whitepaper and How to Guide
The creation and use of synthetic price data has traditionally been dominated by opaque, well-funded entities such as large financial institutions, centralized technology firms, and regulatory agencies, including JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, the Federal Reserve, and PayPal. The closed-source nature of these datasets stems from the self-serving priorities of these organizations, which often lack the incentive to democratize data access. This approach exacerbates disparities, creating a wider...
SynthSynth Subnet - Inside Synth’s Accuracy Surge
IntroductionThis report provides a focused assessment of recent progress in the Synth subnet, where miners forecast BTC’s return distribution every day. Over the past month, the subnet has seen a major shift: miners prioritizing volatility accuracy have rapidly climbed the leaderboards, outperforming more complex models that previously held top positions. We analyze the performance of these top miners across multiple metrics, volatility, intraday variation, and kurtosis, using data from June ...
SynthSynth content transitioned to Synth X articles
You can stay up to date with Synth’s ongoing research, performance analysis, and ecosystem updates through our regularly published X articles. All new releases are posted directly on our X account here: https://x.com/SynthdataCo/articles.
SynthMode Synth (SN50) Subnet Whitepaper and How to Guide
The creation and use of synthetic price data has traditionally been dominated by opaque, well-funded entities such as large financial institutions, centralized technology firms, and regulatory agencies, including JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, the Federal Reserve, and PayPal. The closed-source nature of these datasets stems from the self-serving priorities of these organizations, which often lack the incentive to democratize data access. This approach exacerbates disparities, creating a wider...
SynthSynth Subnet - Inside Synth’s Accuracy Surge
IntroductionThis report provides a focused assessment of recent progress in the Synth subnet, where miners forecast BTC’s return distribution every day. Over the past month, the subnet has seen a major shift: miners prioritizing volatility accuracy have rapidly climbed the leaderboards, outperforming more complex models that previously held top positions. We analyze the performance of these top miners across multiple metrics, volatility, intraday variation, and kurtosis, using data from June ...
SynthSynth content transitioned to Synth X articles
You can stay up to date with Synth’s ongoing research, performance analysis, and ecosystem updates through our regularly published X articles. All new releases are posted directly on our X account here: https://x.com/SynthdataCo/articles.
Subscribe to Synth
Subscribe to Synth
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
No activity yet