The whole premise of this strategy is that the perp leg and the hedge leg cancel out in price, leaving funding as the only real driver of profit. In practice, that cancellation is never perfect — and this site shows two different numbers so that gap is never hidden.
Net P&L is the strategy's own accounting: funding earned, minus fees, plus only the price movement that happened during a naked window — the period, if any, when the hedge leg had to sit unhedged while its market was closed. This is the number that drives this project's win/loss counts, because it reflects what the strategy's rules are actually responsible for.
True P&L (all-in) reconciles the entire hold: funding minus fees, plus both legs' full price movement from entry to their own exit — including the portion that happened while both legs were supposedly hedged and should have cancelled. This is closer to what a real brokerage statement would show.
A real example
In the week of September 1–8, 2026, five INTX positions closed. All five showed a positive Net P&L. But True P&L was mixed: SNDK's Net P&L was +$15.88 while its True P&L was −$109.30 — a hundred-and-twenty-five-dollar difference driven entirely by hedge-leg price movement over the full hold, not by anything the naked-leg accounting captured. AMD showed the same pattern in miniature. Two of the five, INTC and MU, actually did better on a True P&L basis being close to their Net P&L, meaning the hedge held up well.
See the full breakdown in Weekly review: September 1–8, 2026.
Why not just report one number
Reporting only Net P&L would look better on average but hide real hedge slippage. Reporting only True P&L would blur what the strategy's rules actually control versus what's just market noise during a fully-hedged window. Both are shown, always side by side, on the Lab Portfolio page and on every closed position — see Methodology for the exact formulas.