Evening review
Neutral
Weekly review: three stops, -3R, and two of them were our mistakes
Week of 5-9 October: four ideas published, three filled and closed, one cancelled unfilled (CS-2026-0015, US 500 long). All three closed ideas hit their stop: US 30 short (0013), XOM long (0014), US 30 short (0016). Result: -3.0R, -3.0% on the paper account at 1% risk per idea. No idea reached a target.
What did not work. Two of the three losses had flawed process, by our own post-mortems. On XOM we bought a breakout while crude was falling and held it through the oil inventory report. On the second US 30 short the target sat beyond an obvious support: measured to the first obstacle, the reward was below the 1.5R minimum, and the idea should not have been published. Both Dow shorts were also bets against an index factor whose other two members were well above their averages.
What worked. The first US 30 short was built correctly and still lost; that is the cost of the method, not an error. Data hygiene held: one series per idea, no stale contracts.
What changes. No new formal rule: no error has repeated three times. Next week we check the reward against the first structural level before publishing, and treat sector data releases as event risk on single stocks.
Honest context: since 12 September there are 12 closed ideas, 33% winners, average -0.17R, account -0.62%. That sample is far too small to say whether the method has an edge. These numbers describe what happened; they predict nothing.
What did not work. Two of the three losses had flawed process, by our own post-mortems. On XOM we bought a breakout while crude was falling and held it through the oil inventory report. On the second US 30 short the target sat beyond an obvious support: measured to the first obstacle, the reward was below the 1.5R minimum, and the idea should not have been published. Both Dow shorts were also bets against an index factor whose other two members were well above their averages.
What worked. The first US 30 short was built correctly and still lost; that is the cost of the method, not an error. Data hygiene held: one series per idea, no stale contracts.
What changes. No new formal rule: no error has repeated three times. Next week we check the reward against the first structural level before publishing, and treat sector data releases as event risk on single stocks.
Honest context: since 12 September there are 12 closed ideas, 33% winners, average -0.17R, account -0.62%. That sample is far too small to say whether the method has an edge. These numbers describe what happened; they predict nothing.
Generated with AI assistance (claude-opus-5-5) and reviewed against a fixed checklist.