NakedPnL vs Tradervue — Verified Public Registry vs Private Trade Journal

Tradervue is a private trade-journal tool used by equities and futures traders to log fills, tag setups, and review their own performance. NakedPnL is a public registry of verified TWR. The categories barely overlap.

Verdict in one paragraph

Tradervue and NakedPnL both touch trader performance data, and that is where the similarity stops. Tradervue is a private trade-journal SaaS, used heavily by US equities day-traders and futures traders to import broker fills, tag setups, write trade-by-trade commentary, and reflect on their own results. The product is optimised for an audience of one: the trader who is trying to improve. NakedPnL is the opposite — an external publishing infrastructure built to make a trader's headline performance figure standable in front of strangers without trusting the trader. Tradervue lives behind a personal login. NakedPnL lives on a public registry, with every NAV snapshot SHA-256 hashed, chained header-by-header to the previous day, and anchored to Bitcoin once a day via OpenTimestamps. The two products solve different problems and rarely substitute for each other.

What they do differently

Tradervue's job is to make a trader's own history reviewable. The user imports trade fills from a supported broker (Interactive Brokers, TD Ameritrade-now-Schwab, NinjaTrader, Tradestation, and many more), or uploads a CSV. Tradervue stitches the fills into round-trip trades, computes per-trade P&L, attaches user-entered tags (setup name, mistake category, market context), and surfaces statistics — win rate, average win versus loss, expectancy, by-tag performance. The premium tiers add advanced reports, broker-data sharing, and access to mentor and trade-sharing features. The output is a journaling and review surface, not a public profile.

NakedPnL refuses the trade-by-trade detail entirely and instead operates at the account-NAV level. The daily snapshot cron pulls account-level NAV from each connected venue (Binance, Bybit, OKX, IBKR Flex Web Service, Kalshi, Polymarket) at 23:55 UTC. The raw response is canonicalised and SHA-256 hashed; the hash is appended to the per-account chain; the daily Merkle root of all chain heads is committed to Bitcoin via OpenTimestamps. The performance figure derived from the NAV series is time-weighted return per GIPS, computed in Decimal.js precision so the result is reproducible to 28 decimal digits. The methodology guide on how to verify a track record yourself walks the procedure end to end. Compared with Tradervue, the data captured is shallower (no per-fill commentary), but the verification surface is far stronger.

Feature comparison

Where each one is the right tool

• Reviewing your own day-trading fills with tags and commentary — Tradervue. NakedPnL has no per-trade journal.
• Showing an outside allocator a verifiable track record — NakedPnL. Tradervue's share features assume the audience is also a Tradervue user.
• Tracking R-multiples, expectancy, and by-setup statistics — Tradervue.
• Letting a fund analyst re-compute time-weighted return from raw exchange responses — NakedPnL.
• Connecting a US equities broker like Schwab or Tradestation to import every fill — Tradervue.
• Producing a multi-venue, time-weighted, GIPS-style performance figure on a single account — NakedPnL.
• Reviewing your trading psychology trade-by-trade — Tradervue.
• Establishing a programmatically verifiable historical record that strangers can re-check — NakedPnL.

Why the comparison feels lopsided but is honest

Tradervue is the better product for the job it is built for: helping an active equities or futures trader review their own behaviour. The journal-and-tag workflow, the by-setup statistics, the broker breadth, the import format support — all of it is hard, valuable engineering. Nothing here disputes Tradervue's strengths. What changes is the question. When the question shifts from 'how am I trading' to 'can someone outside my account confirm what I claim to have produced', Tradervue's design stops fitting. Its data lives in a private database; its primary outputs are not built for third-party re-derivation; its share features are intra-platform rather than open-internet.

NakedPnL is the better product for the verification surface specifically. It accepts a much narrower scope (account-level NAV instead of per-fill history) as the price for a much stronger guarantee (programmatically verified, append-only, Bitcoin-anchored). A trader who wants both can use both. Tradervue for the inward-facing journal, NakedPnL for the outward-facing proof.

How verification differs in practice

If a Tradervue user posts a screenshot of their dashboard on social media, the viewer has no path back to primary records. The data was imported by the user; the journal entries are user-typed; the platform's share-and-mentor features assume the audience trusts the import. None of this makes Tradervue dishonest — these are structural limits of any private-database product asked to function as public proof.

A NakedPnL profile carries different guarantees. Every NavSnapshot row is hashed; every header hash chains to the previous day; the daily Merkle root is committed to Bitcoin via OpenTimestamps. A viewer who cares to check can pull the chain bundle, recompute the SHA-256 of every row, verify the chain head against the Bitcoin attestation, and re-run the TWR engine on the verified NAV series. The /verify/chain/[handle] page does this in the browser using the Web Crypto API. Reference Python and JavaScript snippets live at /docs/verification.

Pricing and access

Tradervue offers a Free plan with limited trade count, a Silver plan with a higher cap and broader features, and a Gold plan with the full reporting suite, charged monthly. NakedPnL is free to view as a public registry; trader-side paid tiers exist for deeper analytics and higher verification depth (Bronze / Silver / Gold). The founding seat program is hard-capped at 100 lifetime seats and is enforced by a unique constraint at the database level.