GO Markets’ Giant Leap into MENA; Granted DMCC and DGCX Membership
GO Markets
9/3/2021
•
0 min read
Share this post
Copy URL
MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA – 18 April 2019. GO Markets is pleased to announce its expansion into the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) region, operating as GO Markets MENA DMCC in Dubai, UAE. Located within the economic ‘free zone’ of the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre (DMCC), GO Markets MENA DMCC has obtained its membership with the Dubai Gold and Commodities Exchange (DGCX).
GO Markets CEO Christopher Gore said: “Establishing a presence in the MENA region has been on our wish list for some time, so I’m very happy to see things finally coming together. What we’re trying to achieve here is somewhat different to what we’ve done elsewhere, and I believe we’ve got the technology and talent on the ground to make it happen. The DMCC and DGCX have given us a great opportunity and we hope to be a strong contributor and innovator for them in the years ahead.” GO Markets MENA DMCC is applying for its Securities and Commodities Authority (SCA) license and in the process of establishing a physical presence in the UAE to service its new and existing clientele.
GO Markets has established a solid global reputation as a trusted and reliable CFD provider, and this expansion will help traders access a wider range of quality instruments with competitive rates. About GO Markets GO Markets is a provider of Forex and CFD trading services, offering Margin FX, Commodities trading, Indices and Share CFDs trading to individuals and wholesale clients globally. GO Markets holds an AFSL (Australian Financial Services License) with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).
Media Enquiries Zoher Janif +61 3 85667680
By
GO Markets
Disclaimer: Articles are from GO Markets analysts and contributors and are based on their independent analysis or personal experiences. Views, opinions or trading styles expressed are their own, and should not be taken as either representative of or shared by GO Markets. Advice, if any, is of a ‘general’ nature and not based on your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Consider how appropriate the advice, if any, is to your objectives, financial situation and needs, before acting on the advice. If the advice relates to acquiring a particular financial product, you should obtain our Disclosure Statement (DS) and other legal documents available on our website for that product before making any decisions.
The biggest move in 80 years We need to start with what is probably the biggest structural change Europe has seen since the formation of the European Union to its biggest member – Germany. For the first time in 80 years Germany’s Bundestag has voted to lift the country's “debt brake” to allow the expansion of major defence and infrastructure spending under new leadership of incoming Chancellor Frederick Merz. We need to illustrate how much spending Germany is going to do in defence it is up to €1 trillion over the forward estimates. 5 billion of which is to support Ukraine for this year and to continue to put European pressure on Russia.
It's also a country it has been highly sceptical of stimulating itself having suffered through the Weimar government of the 1920s and 30s that led to hideous hyperinflation and drove the country to political extremism. It is also clearly in response to Washington’s change of tact regarding Europe and the war in Ukraine. As it is now clear that Europe who need to defend itself and that NATO is becoming a dead weight that can no longer be relied upon.
Couple this with what the EU is doing itself. Last week we saw the head of the EU Ursula von der Leyen, delivered a speech that stated the continent needed to: “rearm and develop the capabilities to have credible deterrence.” This came off the back of the EU endorsing a commission plan aimed at mobilising up to €800 billion in investments specifically around infrastructure and in turn defence. The plan also proposes to ease the blocs fiscal rules to allow states to spend much more on defence.
If you want to see direct market reactions to this change in the continent’s commitments – look no further than the performance of the CAC40 and DAX30. Both are outperforming in 2025 and considering how far back they are coming compared to their US counterparts over the past 5 years – the switch trade may only be just beginning. What is also interesting it’s the limited reactions in debt markets.
The 10-year Bund finished marginally higher, though overall European bond markets saw limited movement. Bonds rallied slightly following confirmation of the German stimulus package. Inflation swap rates were little changed, while EUR swaps dipped, particularly in the belly of the curve.
EUR/USD ticked up 0.2% to $1.0960. Hopes for a potential Russia-Ukraine cease-fire also offered some support to the euro but has eased to start the weeks as Russia looks to break the deal before it even begins. Staying with currency impactors – The US saw a range of second-tier U.S. economic data releases last week all came in stronger than expected.
Housing starts jumped, likely benefiting from improved February weather. Industrial production rose 0.7% month-over-month big beat considering consensus was for a 0.2% gain while manufacturing jumped 0.9%. Import and export prices also exceeded forecasts, prompting a slight upward revision to core PCE inflation estimates, mainly due to higher-than-expected foreign airfares.
These upside surprises led to a brief sell-off in treasury bills but yields soon drifted lower as equities struggled. Looking ahead to the FOMC decision, expectations remain for the Fed to hold steady. Chair Powell has emphasised that the U.S. economy is in a "good place" despite ongoing uncertainties and has signalled there’s no rush to cut rates.
The Fed’s updated projections are expected to show a slight downward revision to growth, a more cautious view on GDP risks, and slightly higher inflation forecasts. As for rate cuts, the median expectation remains two 25bps cuts in 2025 and another two in 2026, with markets currently pricing around 56bps of easing next year. All this saw the U.S. dollar trade mixed against G10 currencies as local factors took centre stage.
Despite a weaker risk tone in equities, the DXY USD Index edged down 0.1%. The Aussie and Kiwi dollars softened (AUD/USD -0.3%, NZD/USD -0.4%) as risk sentiment deteriorated. The AUD will be interesting this week as we look to the budget that was never meant to happen on Tuesday.
Considering that we are within 10 weeks of a certain election, the budget really is not worth the paper its written on as it will likely change with an ‘election’ likely to be enacted straight after the new government is sworn in. That said, the budget is likely to show once again that Canberra is messing at the edges and not taking the steps needed to address structural issues. The AUD is likely to fluctuate on the release and then find a direction (more likely to the downside) over the week as the budget shows the soft set of numbers with little or no change in the interim.
Finally, the rally of the yen appears to be over as it continues to weaken. USD/JPY climbed from Y149.20 in early Tokyo trade to around Y149.90 as the London session got underway. With CFTC data showing significant long yen positioning, some traders likely unwound short USD/JPY bets ahead of the BoJ decision.
Other JPY pairs moved in tandem with USD/JPY. But whatever is at play out of Japan – the rally of the past 6-7 months looks to be ending and with USD/JPY facing the magic Y150 mark – will the BoJ step in like it did last year? Will the market look straight past it again?
With core CPI missing expectations and some slight deceleration in other areas such as retail sales an overall service economic activity. The RBA is likely to hold tight and not raise rates on Tuesday. We say this with some confidence, based on the communication coming from RBA governor Bullock.
She had emphasised the importance of the second quarter CPI print at the June meeting, despite providing hawkish rhetoric around the risk of rate rises and a stalling inflation story. This had led the market and many economists to suggest the possibility of a rate rise has now reduced to sub 10% coming into Tuesday's meeting. That clearly means that it's not still a possibility but all things being equal the likelihood now is negligible.
You can see that here in the charts of the Aussie dollar particularly against the JPY and the USD AUDUSD AUDJPY Given the preference for rate stability by the board, what's also interesting about the Q2 CPI figures is that it gives them a clear path to keep rate stability (their words) for the stable future. It suggests not only will August be a hold but suggests that the September meeting as well would likely be the same. However it can't be ignored that CPI was slightly ahead of forecast and thus the Statement of Monetary Policy (SoMP) coming up in a few weeks will be very interesting.
Because we expect forecast changes and are likely to show a slower progress towards target. So first and foremost, forecasts have to narrow to include the higher than expected year on year figure. The forecast for inflation at the May SoMP update didn't include the new Federal government’s $300 energy rebate or the Western Australian and Queensland governments respective energy rebate.
This will significantly lower the financial year 24 inflation rate but will simultaneously raise the financial year 25 forecast by a similar amount. Providing a bit of a catch 22 from the board. There's been upward revisions in consumer spending and are likely to challenge the forecast assumptions used in the May statement of monetary policy that was justifying a lower part of inflation.
All things therefore being considered the hawkish message coming from governor Bullock is likely to persist. Because as this chart shows core inflation and headline inflation in Australia is the highest against all major peers and despite the RBA having a 2 to 3% target band higher than its peers around 2% it is a long long way away from reaching its goal. It should therefore be pointed out that come the Tuesday decision making call “all options” as the RBA like to call it, realistically means a tight hold or a possible rate hike With the right hike being dismissed.
This means that there is a divergence going on between the RBA and the rest of the dovish global environment. You only have to look at what the Bank of England said last week to understand that something like AUDGBP has a neutral central bank with the hawkish bias dovish central bank with dovish action to see the pair likely moving slightly higher in the interim. The same argument could actually be made for the AUDUSD because post the CPI number as we explained last week The US Federal Reserve was due to meet.
And although the board didn't move the Federal Funds rate At the July meeting it is all but confirmed September is the likely start point for the Fed’s right cutting cycle. The US has seen some pretty mixed data over the last six days. Unemployment has ticked up; retail sales ticked down; inflation has moderated and forward looking indicators in consumer confidence and industrial manufacturing have both declined.
Couple this with the US election geopolitical risks and other factors explains the rally that has happened in the pair post the CPI data as seen here: AUDUSD Returning to the outlook for the US and the federal funds rate post the FOMC July meeting. 7 major economists are forecasting not just the September meeting with a rate cut but the remaining three meetings of the year will see cuts from Constitutional Ave. And if we take into consideration the FOMC’s dot plots the cuts will continue early into 2025 most likely at the February, March and May meetings. If this doesn't indeed come to fruition the impact on US indices will clearly be to the upside.
FX is likely to have to ask some serious questions around pricing in pairs such as the EUR, GBP and CAD. Which brings us back to the Aussie dollar The current sell off that we've seen in the currency is based solely on the idea the RBA is on a tight hold, and that selling is probably justified. However with the data that is currently before us it is hard to make a case that isn't bullish for the AUD as it gets left behind in the rate cut environment and dovish outlook the global economy is about to undertake.
Thus post Tuesdays meeting Michele Bullock's press conference will be key to this trade idea because it's likely to show you like she did in June that is going to have to continue on with the hawkish view and jawbone inflation lower.
Market action and underline breath of the last two and half weeks has been extreme and rather eye opening. The S&P 500 has made 38 record all time highs in 2024 so far, however since its most recent peak on July 16 it has traded lower ever since. Now we need to put that into perspective, the pullback since its July high is 4.75 percent to date.
The pullback that we saw in April was 5.7 per cent, the rally at the end of the April pullback was 14.1 per cent to that July 16 high. And overall the S&P 500 is still up 6.6 per cent year to date. But what's really catching our attention is that the pullback in the second half of July looks very much like the pullback that started in July 2023.
If we compare the SNP's year to date performance in 2023 to what we have seen today in 2024 the correlation is surprisingly tight. Have a look at this chart. Yes, the path of the market in the first quarter of 2023 was different to what happened this year but by the end of March (2023 and 2024) the S&P was up a similar amount on a year to date basis.
What we can then see is that from the start of the second quarter through to mid-July that correlation is really tight. So the question we're now asking is are we going to experience déjà vu? The pullback that began in late July 2023 went all the way through to late October 2023 Started slightly lighter than what we've seen this year.
But as the price action shows if we follow what happened last year we could be in for a couple of months of high volatility and the Bulls quickly reassessing their current trajectory. It's going to be interesting because unlike in 2023 where the issues came for monetary policy and the prospect of rate rises or cuts. 2024 has an external factor we only experience every four years and that's a U.S. presidential election. And what might be a trigger point for the bottom of the market if we are about to experience a multi month pullback would be the November 5 election.
Second to that is that all things being equal a rate cut or cuts will have happened by the end of October something that didn't happen in 2023. What's hard to equate is the impact one or more cuts will have on indices in particular as according to the market pricing it's already factored in. It's why the current pullback although close to 2023 the deja vu we are experiencing right now is just that deja vu and not something to be factored into your thinking.
What’s going on in FX? What we are watching very closely on a monetary policy and FX perspective is this coming Wednesday's CPI read in Australia. Over the last 2 1/2 weeks the AUD has been savaged.
So much so that several traders have exited their bullish positions in the Aussie. It's not hard to see why with the AUD/USD losing some two cents in this. Yes this is down to USD strength on the back of a change in the democratic candidate,risk increases in markets, and signs of economic reactivity in the world's largest economy.
But it's not only the AUD/USD but it's saying movements of this kind of magnitude news over the last week and a half of intervention by the Bank of Japan has seen the JPY recuperate some of the losses experienced this year. Again using the Aussie dollar as an example AUD/JPY moved from a high of ¥107.56 to as low as ¥100.5 inside 10 days. This all suggests that at the moment FX is probably ignoring fundamentals and is being caught up in short term external factors.
It is why this coming Wednesday's CPI numbers could be a real turning point in the trading of FX of the last few weeks. Because it should sharpen traders' minds back to the fundamentals. As this chart shows, the expectation of a rate rise on August 6 has been as high as 27 percent in fact at one point in the last two months it's been as high as 46 per cent.
This in our opinion has been fully factored out of FX trading in the Aussie over the last couple of weeks. Thus, if Australia’s trimmed mean inflation rate comes in anywhere north of 3.9 per cent year on year. This chart should rapidly change and be pricing in the probability of a rate hike as high as 80per cent for the August 6 meeting.
What this means for FX is that the current sell off in the AUD is probably overdone and will rapidly unwind itself. Those bulls that have been shaken out over the last week and 1/2 will more than likely reinstate positions. Crosses that have been savaged are also likely to face a rapid snapback because from what is currently presented in the data suggests the Aussie is more fairly valued where it was two weeks ago rather than where it is now.
The caveat If however Australia is trimming inflation rate comes in at or below 3.9 per cent. Then the current pricing of the Aussie is probably fair, and the reaction is likely to be negative. All pricing this year in the local currency has been on the premise of an improving China which is yet to materialise and the divergence that's happening at the RBA.
If inflation indeed is showing signs of finally declining in Australia then there will be a reaction to the downside because the probability of a rate increase in 2024 will drop back to almost 0, as there will be no data strong enough to convince the RBA to raise rates again is there a hesitant hawk something we discussed 4 weeks ago. We will do a full report on the CPI next week and how to trade it leading into the August 6 RBA meeting.
Artificial intelligence stocks have begun to waver slightly, experiencing a selloff period in the first week of this month. The Nasdaq has fallen approximately 2%, wiping out around $500 billion in market value from top technology companies.
Palantir Technologies dropped nearly 8% despite beating Wall Street estimates and issuing strong guidance, highlighting growing investor concerns about stretched valuations in the AI sector.
Nvidia shares also fell roughly 4%, while the broader selloff extended to Asian markets, which experienced some of their sharpest declines since April.
Wall Street executives, including Morgan Stanley CEO Ted Pick and Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, warned of potential 10-20% drawdowns in equity markets over the coming year.
And Michael Burry, famous for predicting the 2008 housing crisis, recently revealed his $1.1 billion bet against both Nvidia and Palantir, further pushing the narrative that the AI rally may be overextended.
As we near 2026, the sentiment around AI is seemingly starting to shift, with investors beginning to seek evidence of tangible returns on the massive investments flowing into AI, rather than simply betting on future potential.
However, despite the recent turbulence, many are simply characterising this pullback as "healthy" profit-taking rather than a fundamental reassessment of AI's value.
Supreme Court Raises Doubts About Trump’s Tariffs
The US Supreme Court heard arguments overnight on the legality of President Donald Trump's "liberation day" tariffs, with judges from both sides of the political spectrum expressing scepticism about the presidential authority being claimed.
Trump has relied on a 1970s-era emergency law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), to impose sweeping tariffs on goods imported into the US.
At the centre of the case are two core questions: whether the IEEPA authorises these sweeping tariffs, and if so, whether Trump’s implementation is constitutional.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett indicated they may be inclined to strike down or curb the majority of the tariffs, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned why no president before Trump had used this authority.
Prediction markets saw the probability of the court upholding the tariffs drop from 40% to 25% after the hearing.
Polymarket odds on Supreme Court upholding Trump's tariffs
The US government has collected $151 billion from customs duties in the second half of 2025 alone, a nearly 300% increase over the same period in 2024.
Should the court rule against the tariffs, potential refunds could reach approximately $100 billion.
The court has not indicated a date on which it will issue its final ruling, though the Trump administration has requested an expedited decision.
Shutdown Becomes Longest in US History
The US government shutdown entered its 36th day today, officially becoming the longest in history. It surpasses the previous 35-day record set during Trump's first term from December 2018 to January 2019.
The Senate has failed 14 times to advance spending legislation, falling short of the 60-vote supermajority by five votes in the most recent vote.
So far, approximately 670,000 federal employees have been furloughed, and 730,000 are currently working without pay. Over 1.3 million active-duty military personnel and 750,000 National Guard and reserve personnel are also working unpaid.
SNAP food stamp benefits ran out of funding on November 1 — something 42 million Americans rely on weekly. However, the Trump administration has committed to partial payments to subsidise the benefits, though delivery could take several weeks.
Flight disruptions have affected 3.2 million passengers, with staffing shortages hitting more than half of the nation's 30 major airports. Nearly 80% of New York's air traffic controllers are absent.
From a market perspective, each week of shutdown reduces GDP by approximately 0.1%. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the total cost of the shutdown will be between $7 billion and $14 billion, with the higher figure assuming an eight-week duration.
Consumer spending could drop by $30 billion if the eight-week duration is reached, according to White House economists, with potential GDP impacts of up to 2 percentage points total.
You've been using a 30-pip trailing stop for as long as you can remember. It feels professional, manageable and relatively safe.
But during volatile sessions, you see your winners get stopped out prematurely, while low-volatility winners drift back and hit stops that are relatively too tight.
Same 30 pips, different market contexts, but inconsistent in the protection of profit and overall results.
The Fixed-Pip Fallacy?
Traders gravitate toward fixed pip trailing stops because they feel concrete and calculable. The approach is easy to execute, readily automated through platforms like MetaTrader, and aligns with how most people naturally think about profit and loss.
But this simplicity masks a fundamental problem.
A twenty-five pip move in EURUSD during the London open represents an entirely different market event than the same move during the Asian session. The context matters, yet the fixed-pip approach treats them identically.
This becomes even more problematic when you consider different currency pairs. GBPJPY might have an average true range of thirty pips on an hourly chart, while EURGBP shows only ten. The same trailing stop applied to both instruments ignores the reality that volatility varies dramatically across pairs.
Timeframe introduces yet another layer of complexity. Take AUDUSD as an example: a ten-pip move on a four-hour chart barely registers as meaningful price action, but on a five-minute chart it represents a significant swing. The fixed-pip method treats these scenarios as equivalent.
The natural response might be to use something more sophisticated, like an ATR multiple. This accounts for your chosen timeframe, the instrument's normal volatility, and even session differences. But it brings its own complications.
When do you measure the ATR? Do you use the value at entry, knowing it might be distorted by sessional effects? Or do you make it dynamic, which becomes far more complex to implement in practice?
Perhaps there's another way forward that doesn't rely on abstract measures of volatility but instead responds directly to the movement of price in relation to the trade you're actually in—accounting for your lot size and the profit you've already captured.
Maximum Give Back: The Percentage Approach
Instead of asking "how do I protect profit after fifty pips," ask "how do I protect profit after giving back a certain percentage of open gains."
Consider a maximum give-back threshold of 40%. When your trade is up one hundred pips, the trailing stop activates if price retraces forty pips from peak, locking in a minimum of sixty pips.
But when that same trade reaches two hundred fifty pips of profit, the stop adjusts, and now it activates at a one-hundred-pip pullback, securing at least one hundred fifty pips. The stop distance scales naturally with the magnitude of the win you're sitting on.
This creates a logical asymmetry that fixed pip approaches miss entirely. Small winners receive tighter protection. Big winners get room to breathe.
The approach adapts automatically to what the market is actually giving you in real time, without requiring you to predict anything in advance.
You don't need to maintain a reference table where EURUSD gets thirty pips and GBPJPY gets sixty. You don't need different standards for different instruments at all.
The same 40% logic works whether the average true range is high or low, whether volatility is expanding or contracting. It survives regime changes without requiring recalibration because it's responding to the trade itself rather than to abstract measures of what the instrument normally does.
The market tells you how much it's willing to move in your direction, and you protect that information proportionally. Nothing more complicated than that.
Key Parameters to Specify in Your System:
Maximum Give Back Percent: 30-50% is typical, but is dependent on how much profit retracement you can tolerate.
Minimum Profit to Activate: In dollar amount or an ATR multiple form entry. This prevents premature exits on tiny winners, e.g., if it has moved 5 pips at 40% that would mean you are only locking in a 3-pip profit.
Update Frequency: Potentially every bar. More frequent, but there may be issues if there is a limited ability to look at the market (if using some sort of automation, this could be programmed).
Is Maximum Giveback Always the Optimum Trail?
As with many approaches, results can be highly dependent on underlying market conditions. It is important to be balanced.
The table below summarises some observations when maximum giveback has been used as part of automated exits.
The major difference isn’t likely to be an increased win rate. It is about keeping more of your runners during high-volatility price moves rather than donating them back to the market.
It may not always be the best approach, as different strategies often merit different exit approaches.
There are two obvious scenarios where fixed pips may still be worth consideration.
Very short-term scalping (sub-20 pip targets)
News trading, where you want instant hard stops
Integrating Maximum Giveback With Your System
You may have other complementary exit filters in place that you already use. Remember, the ideal is often a combination of exits, with whichever is triggered first.
There is no reason why this approach will not work well with approaches such as set stops, take profits and partial closes (where you simply use maximum Giveback in the remainder as well as time-based exits.
Final Thoughts
To use fixed-pip trailing stops irrespective of instrument pricing, volatility, timeframe, and sessional considerations is the trading equivalent of wearing the same jacket in summer and winter.
Maximum Give Back trailing adjusts to the ‘market weather’. It won't make bad trades good, but it will stop you from cutting your best trades short just because your stop was designed for average conditions.
The market doesn't trade in averages but has specific likely moves dependent on context. Your exits should not be average either.
Multi-Timeframe (MTF) analysis is not just about checking the trend on the daily before trading on the hourly; ideally, it involves examining and aligning context, structure, and timing so that every trade is placed with purpose.
When done correctly, MTF analysis can filter market noise, may help with timing of entry, and assist you in trading with the trending “tide,” not against it.
Why Multi-Timeframe Analysis Matters
Every setup exists within a larger market story, and that story may often define the probability of a successful trade outcome.
Single-timeframe trading leads to the trading equivalent of tunnel vision, where the series of candles in front of you dominate your thinking, even though the broader trend might be shifting.
The most common reason traders may struggle is a false confidence based on a belief they are applying MTF analysis, but in truth, it’s often an ad-hoc, glance, not a structured process.
When signals conflict, doubt creeps in, and traders hesitate, entering too late or exiting too early.
A systematic MTF process restores clarity, allowing you to execute with more conviction and consistency, potentially offering improved trading outcomes and providing some objective evidence as to how well your system is working.
Building Your Timeframe Hierarchy
Like many effective trading approaches, the foundation of a good MTF framework lies in simplicity. The more complex an approach, the less likely it is to be followed fully and the more likely it may impede a potential opportunity.
Three timeframes are usually enough to capture the full picture without cluttering up your chart’s technical picture with enough information to avoid potential contradiction in action.
Each timeframe tells a different part of the story — you want the whole book, not just a single chapter.
Scalpers might work on H1-M15-M5, while longer-term traders might prefer H4-H1-H15.
The key is consistency in approach to build a critical mass of trades that can provide evidence for evaluation.
When all three timeframes align, the probability of at least an initial move in your desired direction may increase.
An MTF breakout will attract traders whose preference for primary timeframe may be M15 AND hourly, AND 4-hourly, so increasing potential momentum in the move simply because more traders are looking at the same breakout than if it occurred on a single timeframe only.
Applying MTF Analysis
A robust system is built on clear, unambiguous statements within your trading plan.
Ideally, you should define what each timeframe contributes to your decision-making process:
Trend confirmed
Structure validated
Entry trigger aligned
Risk parameters clear
When you enter on a lower timeframe, you are gaining some conviction from the higher one. Use the lower timeframe for fine-tuning and risk control, but if the higher timeframe flips direction, your bias must flip too.
Your original trading idea can be questioned and a decision made accordingly as to whether it is a good decision to stay in the trade or, as a minimum action, trail a stop loss to lock in any gains made to date.
Putting MTF into Action
So, if the goal is to embed MTF logic into your trade decisions, some step-by-step guidance may be useful on how to make this happen
1. Define Your Timeframe Stack
Decide which three timeframes form your trading style-aligned approach.
The key here is that as a starting point, you must “plant your flag” in one set, stick to it and measure to see how well or otherwise it works.
Through doing this, you can refine based on evidence in the future.
One tip I have heard some traders suggest is that the middle timeframe should be at least two times your primary timeframe, and the slowest timeframe at least four times.
2. Build and Use a Checklist
Codify your MTF logic into a repeatable routine of questions to ask, particularly in the early stages of implementing this as you develop your new habit.
Your checklist might include:
Is the higher-timeframe trend aligned?
Is the structure supportive?
Do I have a valid trigger?
Is risk clearly defined?
This turns MTF from a concept into a practical set of steps that are clear and easy to action.
3. Consider Integrating MTF Into Open Trade Management
MTF isn’t just for entries; it can also be used as part of your exit decision-making.
If your higher timeframe begins showing early signs of reversal, that’s a prompt to exit altogether, scale out through a partial close or tighten stops.
By managing trades through the same multi-timeframe approach that you used to enter, you maintain logical consistency across the entire lifecycle of the trade.
Final Action
Start small. Choose one instrument, one timeframe set, and one strategy to apply it to.
Observe the clarity it adds to your decisions and outcomes. Once you see a positive impact, you have evidence that it may be worth rolling out across other trading strategies you use in your portfolio.
Final Thought
Multi-Timeframe Analysis is not a trading strategy on its own. It is a worthwhile consideration in ALL strategies.
It offers a wider lens through which you see the market’s true structure and potential strength of conviction.
Through aligning context, structure, and execution, you move from chasing an individual group of candles to trading with a more robust support for a decision.