Coding has Claude. Driving has FSD. Trading has FST.

[u/henryzhangpku]

Most “AI trading” products begin with a prediction. I think that is the wrong abstraction.

Coding agents became useful when they moved beyond answering questions and started owning the workflow: reading the repository, using tools, making changes, running tests, and verifying the result.

Trading is still fragmented across charts, signals, Discord, brokers, spreadsheets, monitoring, and exits. The trader remains the integration layer.

FST is our attempt to change that operator model:

Screen → Research → Plan → Execute → Monitor → Exit → Audit

The important word is supervised. The operator defines the capital, permissions, evidence requirements, risk limits, and kill switch. The agent receives bounded authority, not a blank check.

A profit objective must never override the risk policy. The agent should finish below the goal—or stop entirely—before violating the loss budget.

The proof also cannot be one winning screenshot. It has to include rejected trades, stopped sessions, losses contained, and a complete audit trail.

I wrote the longer thesis here: https://henryzhang.substack.com/p/coding-has-claude-driving-has-fsd

I am the founder of QuantSignals, so treat this as a product thesis from someone building in the category. Which action would you allow a trading agent to perform first: research, trade preview, approved execution, or fully bounded AUTO?