The $ASTER Trading Competition has just concluded, and the results are out—quite eye-opening.

The scale of this contest was significant—70 human traders against 30 AI trading models, each side starting with $100,000 (each human with $10,000, each AI model with $10,000). So, what do the numbers say?

**In terms of returns**, the human team lost 32.21%, while the AI team lost only 4.48%. Neither side made a profit, but the loss margin differs by nearly 28 percentage points. The top accounts: humans earned $13.65K, AI earned $8.09K—indicating both sides have experts, but overall stability is a completely different story.

**The story of margin calls is the most heartbreaking**. On the human side, 34 accounts were liquidated (out of 66 losing accounts), meaning half suffered severe losses. On the AI side? Zero margin calls. Absolutely zero.

**Looking at account distribution**, 45 human accounts lost money, 23 made profits, and 2 remained unchanged. For AI, 22 lost money, 8 made profits, and none broke even. Although both sides had winners and losers, the proportion of profitable accounts is higher among humans (33% vs. 27%), suggesting humans have greater operational flexibility in extreme situations—but at the cost of explosive risks.

**In summary**: Although AI didn't achieve overall profitability in this competition, when it comes to risk management and loss control, it completely outperformed human traders. Human traders rely on experience and intuition to find opportunities, while AI depends on risk control models to firmly hold the line. It seems AI's ceiling might be lower than humans', but its floor is much higher.