I like to use zero lower wing incidence and zero horizontal stab incidence on my own design aerobatic bipes, and no zero thrust offset. A degree, or at most, two degrees negative upper wing incidence seems to slightly help aerobatic line holding. I try to get as much of the vertical tail area under the thrust line by use of large subfins and subrudders, removing the need for right thrust.

Wind tunnel tests that were conducted back in the 1920s revealed that giving the upper wing slightly more incidence reduced the induced drag of the combination a bit, whether stagger was used or not. Very little effect was noted on stall characteristics as a result of positive stagger. This may be because when a wing stalls, its lift decreases slightly, but its drag goes through the roof, which would tend to produce pitch-up, opposing the pitch-down caused by the loss of lift.

The same tests also revealed that downwash from the upper wing evidently kept the lower wing in business long after the upper wing had stalled, even with zero stagger, although positive stagger slightly increased the effect. Negative stagger, where the upper wing is slightly rearward of the lower wing produced only slightly more abrupt stall and slightly increased induced drag. The lower wing was found to remain largely unstalled up to about 30 degrees angle of attack.

A bipe with positive stagger has, in effect, negative stagger when flying inverted, and I have noted only slightly more abrupt stall when inverted, and a faster rotation rate in inverted spins.