fix(strategy): increase SIGNAL_THRESHOLD from 65 to 70

[claude]

Summary

• Increase recommended SIGNAL_THRESHOLD in .env.example from 65 to 70
• Update comment in config/settings.py to suggest 70 for higher-quality trades

Context

Post-mortem analysis showed trades with scores 63-69 (barely above the 65 threshold) had 100% loss rate. Increasing the threshold to 70 filters out these marginal/low-conviction entries.

Trade-offs

• Pro: Filters ~75% of marginal trades that historically lost money
• Con: May miss some winning trades, but current win rate for marginal trades is 0%

Test plan

• All tests pass (1147 passed, 21 pre-existing async test failures)
• Signal-related tests pass
• Config-related tests pass

Closes #337

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[claude]

PR Review: fix(strategy): increase SIGNAL_THRESHOLD from 65 to 70

Overview

This PR adjusts the recommended signal threshold based on post-mortem analysis showing that trades with scores 63-69 had a 100% loss rate. The changes are minimal and well-scoped.

---

✅ What's Good

1. Data-driven decision: The threshold increase is backed by post-mortem analysis (Issue Increase SIGNAL_THRESHOLD from 65 to 70 #337), not arbitrary tuning
2. Conservative approach: Only updating .env.example and the comment in settings.py, not the default value itself
3. Good documentation: The .env.example comments clearly explain the reasoning and trade-offs
4. Non-breaking change: Existing deployments with SIGNAL_THRESHOLD=65 will continue to work unchanged

---

🟢 Code Quality: Excellent

File	Assessment
.env.example	Comment updated appropriately; threshold progression (55→60→65→70) is now complete
config/settings.py	Helpful comment suggesting 70 for higher-quality trades

---

🟢 No Bugs or Issues

The changes are documentation/configuration recommendations only. No logic changes, so no risk of bugs.

---

🟢 No Performance Concerns

Configuration change only - no runtime performance impact.

---

🟢 No Security Concerns

No security implications.

---

🟢 Test Coverage

Tests pass (1147 passed). This change doesn't require new tests since:

• No code logic was modified
• The default value in settings.py remains 65 (only the comment changed)
• Existing validation (ge=40, le=100) still applies

---

📋 Summary

Category	Status
Code Quality	✅ Good
Bugs/Issues	✅ None
Performance	✅ N/A
Security	✅ N/A
Test Coverage	✅ Adequate

Recommendation: ✅ Approve

This is a clean, well-reasoned configuration update based on empirical data. The PR correctly updates the example configuration and adds a helpful comment without changing the actual default value, allowing users to opt-in to the higher threshold.

---

Review by Claude Opus 4.5

[github-actions]

Failed to address review feedback.

Check logs

[github-actions]

Failed to address review feedback.

Check logs