M5 at real cost: disable XAU_PB, squash partial EMA alignment

Both validated at the measured $0.65 spread on Oanda bars (12mo halves +
PF, OOS 2024-06->2025-03, 5yr; full evidence in pair_signals/xauusd.py
M5 overrides 4-5):

- m5_pullback_enabled False on M5: loss forensics identified XAU_PB as
  the largest wrong-direction loss source; 12mo PF 1.26 (failing the
  acceptance bar) -> 1.44, max DD 23.9R -> 13.9R. PB code stays for
  future regime-gated experiments.
- New TechnicalConfig.ema_partial_neutral (default False), True on M5
  only: partial 4-EMA ribbon alignment (2-3 of 4 checks) scores NEUTRAL
  instead of a weak BUY/SELL (-0.008R/84 vs +0.230R/341 fully aligned).
  Squash mirrored in the backtester's precomputed EMA scorer in this
  same commit (live==backtest parity). 12mo +97.6R/556 PF 1.48 DD
  10.7R halves +47.8/+49.8; 5yr +127.4R PF 1.38; OOS one-trade tie.
- Rejected and logged (memory + docstring): hour-19 block (OOS fail),
  hours-14/15, trail dist 0.75, confirm-TF swaps incl M15+H4 (OOS
  ordering), divergence/candlestick weight changes, bollinger removal.
- Tests 296 -> 302: partial-alignment fixture test, factory-equivalence
  mirrors, per-TF isolation test, BC-gate fixture force-enables PB.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01H1eKWZsAVapJ1C4winYLqX

pair_signals/xauusd.py

@@ -117,6 +117,54 @@ campaign: an M5 hour-22 block (+4.8R on 12mo — the burst-heavy
 specific); M15 hour-16 unblock (+0.8R/+57 trades 12mo but -18.3R
 DD +34% on 5yr); every SELL-gate/vol/TP-size relaxation retested
 negative (see memory notes for the full grid).
+
+M5 override 4 — XAU_PB disabled (validated 2026-08-04, Oanda bars,
+$0.65 REAL spread — first campaign validated at measured cost on the
+live feed, per the 2026-08-04 re-pin baseline): m5_pullback_enabled
+False on M5. Loss forensics on the Oanda books identified XAU_PB as
+the largest wrong-direction loss source (12mo: -43.5R of the -156.6R
+wrong-direction bucket; 5yr: -274.5R). Disabling: 12mo +96.6R/588
+PF 1.44 max DD 13.9R halves +51.2/+45.4 vs +82.3R/788 PF 1.26 DD
+23.9R shipped (which FAILS the PF>=1.3 clause at real cost); OOS
+2024-06-01 -> 2025-03-30 +9.5R PF 1.34; 5yr +123.9R/956 PF 1.35 vs
+PF 1.16 with PB. PB's 5yr net contribution (+23.6R) was almost
+entirely the 2022 chop year (+36.1R vs -2.2R without) — a regime
+earner that has been a drag on trend-regime bars since; its tight
+stops are also the most cost-punished at $0.65. PB code and the
+pb_trail_* params STAY for future regime-gated experiments (same
+pattern as cp_enabled). Rejected in the same campaign (4 candidates
+total, N logged): hour-19 block (+3.7R 12mo but -3.3R OOS, -1.5R
+5yr — OOS gate, the classic trap); hours-14/15 block (-6.9R 12mo
+once PB is removed — their raw negativity WAS the PB losses);
+trail_dist_r 0.75 (-2.6R 12mo; the 0.88R average give-back is the
+validated price of riding trends, exits confirmed NOT the loss
+driver: exit-management accounts for 1-2% of lost R vs 50%
+wrong-direction / 49% entry-timing).
+
+M5 override 5 — EMA partial-alignment squash (validated 2026-08-04,
+Oanda bars, $0.65 real spread): ema_partial_neutral True on M5 —
+partial 4-EMA ribbon alignment (2-3 of 4 checks) scores NEUTRAL
+instead of a weak BUY/SELL. Motivated by the indicator audit: partial-
+alignment trades averaged -0.008R/84 vs +0.230R/341 fully aligned.
+Replay (knob mirrored in the backtester's precomputed EMA scorer in
+the same commit — live==backtest parity): 12mo +97.6R/556 PF 1.48
+DD 10.7R halves +47.8/+49.8 vs control +96.6R/588 PF 1.44 DD 13.9R;
+5yr +127.4R/912 PF 1.38 DD 12.8R vs +123.9R/956 PF 1.35 DD 13.2R,
+2022 improves -2.2 -> -1.1; OOS 2024-06-01 -> 2025-03-30 +9.4R
+PF 1.33 vs +9.5R PF 1.34 — a one-trade tie, documented as such (the
+OOS window holds up; it neither prefers nor punishes). Net effect:
+32 fewer marginal trades, every risk-adjusted measure better.
+Rejected in the same round (trial-logged): confirmation-TF swap
+M5->[M15,H4] (12mo +104.0R PF 1.51 DD 10.3 but OOS +7.8R PF 1.27
+vs control +9.5R PF 1.34 and 2022 3x worse — the H4 confirm keeps
+endorsing stale direction in chop; OOS-ordering rejection, same
+precedent as trail dist 1.0); confirm [H1,H4] (-31.8R 12mo);
+triple-confirm [M15,H1,H4] (-4.9R); divergence weight -1/3
+(-3.8R 12mo); candlestick weight +50% (-3.0R 12mo). The weight
+vector keeps proving calibrated as a system: divergence/candlestick/
+bollinger all look mis-weighted in-book and all replay worse when
+"fixed" (bollinger weight-0: +80.9R PF 1.29 DD 23.8 — its constant
+oppose vote is a load-bearing quality bar, like ROC).
 """
 
 from typing import Optional, List
@@ -152,6 +200,12 @@ def make_config(
         # BUY-only chart patterns on M5 — see module docstring.
         config.xau_strategy.cp_enabled = True
         config.xau_strategy.cp_patterns = ["inv_hs", "double_bottom", "bull_flag"]
+        # XAU_PB pullback entries OFF — largest wrong-direction loss
+        # source at real cost on Oanda bars — see module docstring.
+        config.xau_strategy.m5_pullback_enabled = False
+        # Partial EMA-ribbon alignment scores NEUTRAL on M5 — its
+        # trades carried no edge — see module docstring.
+        config.technical.ema_partial_neutral = True
         # Wider trailing distance on M5 only — see module docstring.
         config.signals.trail_arm_r = 0.60
         config.signals.trail_dist_r = 0.85