IntroductionSo, what is a Trading Edge?There is much written and many videos on social media that are out there singing the praises of developing a trading edge, and why it is a must if you want trading success, BUY in terms of practical “how do a get one” advice, most that is written seems to fall short of something substantive that you as a trader can work with.When you read articles discussing the concept of an "edge," they're talking about having some kind of advantage over other market participants; after all, there are always winners and losers in every trade.However, many traders are often mistakenly informed that edge relates solely to a system, but the reality is that it encompasses so much more than that. While systems certainly matter, your edge also includes how you think, act, and execute under pressure when YOUR real money is on the line.Your advantage may stem from speed, knowledge, technology, or experience, or better still a combination of all of these, the key point here is that you're not trading like so many others without the appropriate things in place and the consistency that is required when trading any asset class, on any timeframe to achieve on-going positive outcomes.Here's something worth considering before we have a deeper dive into your SEVEN secrets. Simply having a plan, trading it consistently, and evaluating it regularly gives you an advantage over more than 75% of traders out there. Most market participants lack these basic but critical elements of good trading practice. Just doing these fundamental things already puts you ahead of most, but refining further will truly set you apart from the crowd.At its core, a trading edge can be defined as a consistent, testable advantage that improves your odds over time. It's not about achieving perfection but developing repeatability in results and establishing statistically positive, i.e. evidence-based action that will work in your favour.So, despite what you may have seen or heard previously, a complete edge combines idea generation, timing, risk management, and execution; it's not just about focusing on high probability entries. It's a whole process, not a single isolated rule or signal.Just to give an example, a trading system that wins only 48% of the time may not seem that impressive on the surface to many, but if it consistently delivers a 2.5:1 reward-to-risk ratio can still achieve long-term profitability. The key issue in this example is the combination of numbers that creates the result, AND the word consistently.That IS an edge.In this article, we will explore SIX things that are not so regularly talked about in combination, this is the difference, and an approach that can move you towards creating such an edge.As we move through each of these, use this as your trading checklist for potentially taking action on the things that you need to take to the next level, and so take affirmative steps to sharpen your edge.Secret #1: An Edge Is Something You Build, Not Something You FindAs traders, we are always looking for the “holy grail”, that system or indicator that means we will be a success. As previously discussed, that is NOT what constitutes an edge. We need to let go of the idea that there's something magical waiting to be discovered and get to work on the things we need to.Your edge comes from testing, refining, and aligning strategies with your personal strengths and market access. The best edges are customised to your specific goals and circumstances, not simply downloaded from someone else's playbook, you may have heard on a webinar, conference or TikTok post.Your strategies should be a natural fit with your daily routine, available tools, trading purposes, and emotional style. If your approach you choose clashes with your lifestyle, mindset or experience, your execution and results will invariably suffer when you are in the heat of the market action and have decisions to make. For example, if you are a trader working a full-time job, it may be wise to either build a 4-hour chart trend model that matches your limited availability, consider some form of automation or restrict yourself to small windows of opportunity on very short timeframes for times that you can ringfence.We often come across systems that look attractive on the surface. When you copy others, you might get their trades, but you won't have their conviction (belief in your trading system is critical in terms of execution discipline) or context, e.g., their access to markets, and so you will find that you won't match their published results.Without the required deeper understanding of why a strategy works, you'll struggle to stick with it through the inevitable trades that don’t go your way, and drawdowns that WILL always test your resolve to keep with any system.So, the key takeaway is that you must make the investment in time, in yourself as a trader and do the work as you move towards building your edge. There are no shortcuts!Secret #2: Probability of Your Edge Is Only as Good as Your DataData that you can use in your decision-making for system development and refinement can come from accessing historical test data, but more importantly, YOUR results in live market trading (whether from journaling or automated tracking).The strength of this in developing an edge depends directly on two key things.Firstly, on data being clean, i.e. the key numbers relating to what happened, and sufficient detail with a sufficient critical mass of results that allows you to see beyond the profit/loss of a handful of trades. The meticulous recording to a high quality of this evidence makes it a priority if you are to create something meaningful on which to base decisions.Poor data creates false confidence in any system developed on such with fragile strategy and forces you to rely on guesswork to fill in any gaps or because you simply haven’t got enough numbers on which to make a strategic decision.Think about this for a moment, if you have 60 trades, across three strategies, and then of those 20 trades per strategy, 10 are FX and 10 are stock CFDS, and of those 10, 5 are long and 5 are short trades, to make substantive decisions on 5 trades hardly seems like enough evidence on which to base something so important. To think that this is ok, go full tilt into the market, your confidence based on a sample so small, there is a high chance your strategy will likely break under real market pressure.Always ensure the market conditions in your testing environment reasonably match your live trading environment.Even when using backtests to try to get more evidence, which on the surface seems worthwhile, it is not without pitfalls unless due care is taken. For example, back tests performed exclusively during trending market periods won't adequately prepare your system for range-bound price action.Secret #3: Simplicity May Beat Complexity Under PressureSimple systems prove easier to create, allow you to find errors when they are occurring, and of course follow in the heat of inevitably volatile market moments. The more clarity you have about exactly what to do and when, significantly reduces hesitation and increases follow-through when decisive trading action may matter most.A complex system, as a contrast, increases your “thinking load”, slows your reaction time when speed of decision may count, and if you have 14 criteria to tick before action, may lead to the “that’s close enough” temptation for trade actions. Adding more indicators without evidence rarely does anything but make your charts look more impressive and typically leads to more doubt and “short-cutting” rather than better results.As a formula, more rules = more system and trader fragility, which is potentially a good rule of thumb to have in place.Consider how some automation, for example, the use of exit-only EAS, can help simplify the execution of otherwise complex situations and achieve consistency.It is not inconceivable that a trader using a simple price-only breakout strategy consistently outperforms another with a 12-indicator system by executing cleanly during volatile news events when others freeze with so-called “analysis paralysis”.Secret #4: Edge Disappears Without Execution DisciplineYou could have the most brilliant, robustly tested, evidence-based strategy on the planet and yet the reality of why many traders fail to reach their potential is at the point of action. Plans are often skipped, rushed, or mismanaged, and the harsh reality is that your system of systems that you have invested a considerable amount of effort and time to develop may crumble without precise, consistent and disciplined execution.Emotional interference in decision making is something we discuss regularly at education sessions, whether from fear of loss, greed, revenge trading or the fear of missing out on potential profit, can kill performance, even when presented with textbook setups and times when price action is telling you it is time to get out. Even momentary lapses in judgment and actions originating from cognitive biases can undo hours or days of careful preparation or remove the profit from several previous trades.Recency bias can creep in quickly, even after a couple of losses, where hesitation in action in an attempt to avoid the same again costs you the opportunity that the “plan-following” trade can give you.What brings your edge to life is consistency in action, not just having a good plan. The discipline of follow-through can transform a considered and carefully developed system into actual profits, and quite simply, to fail to do this is unlikely to deliver the results you seek.Secret #5: Evolve or Expire — Markets Consistently Change, So Should YouMarket circumstances, fundamental drivers and shifts in these create different conditions not only in price action and direction, but volatility and effects in sentiment can be changed for the long term, not just the next hour. If markets evolve to a new way of acting, it is logical that your systems must, at a minimum, be able to accommodate this. This is part of your potential edge that few traders master (or even look at!), but your systems must evolve accordingly when markets change. What works brilliantly in the last few months may not necessarily work forever—diligently monitor changes and adjust your approach.Static systems will potentially degrade in outcomes without regular review and adaptation, or at best have significant periods of underperformance. Perhaps think of your strategy as requiring a review and maintenance plan like any sophisticated machine.In practical terms, system evolution means identifying when strategies do well and not so well, including evaluation of performance in different market conditions. With this information, you can make informed changes based on evidence, not random tinkering or looking for the next new indicator to add.Remember, you always have the ultimate sanction of switching a strategy off completely during specific market conditions that may mean risk is increased.Secret #6: Effective Risk Management Is an Edge MultiplierIt is difficult when talking about a multi-factor approach to hone down on the most influential factor, but this may be it.Your position sizing approach in not only single but multiple trades determines whether your edge, even when followed to the letter, can scale profitably or self-destruct dramatically. The same system can either give you ongoing positive outcomes or destroy an account based depending on how you size your positions.Risk too much, and you'll potentially blow your account up; risk too little, and you'll generate gains that make little difference to the choice you can make with any trading success.Your sizing should align with both your system's statistical properties as we discussed before and your psychological comfort zone, as the latter is equally something that will develop over time with sufficient belief in your system – a key factor as we have discussed at length in other articles, in the ability to be disciplined in trade execution.Only scale your position sizing after accumulating a critical mass of trades and establishing a clear set of rules based on a record of positive trading metrics for doing so. Premature scaling should only be done when you have proved not only that your system looks as though it performed favourably but also that you have the consistency to move to the next level.Finally on this point, and perhaps the topic of a future article in more detail, concerning the previous point relating to market conditions, once you have developed a way of identifying market conditions and fine tune strategies accordingly, there is of course the possibility of using this information to position size more effectively, To give a simple example something like market condition A =1% risk, market condition B = 2% risk.Summary and Your Actions...As stated earlier, a good approach to this article is to use it as a checklist. Invest some time to review the material covered here and make a judgment of where you are right now with some of the things covered.For some of you, there may be a few things to work on; for others, it may be just some checking and fine-tuning. Either way, identify at least one specific area to work on immediately. One insight that you implement properly is worth far more in terms of the difference it can make than a few insights you just acknowledge but forget to take action on.Ask yourself honestly: "On a scale of 1-10, how do I perform on each of the above in the pursuit of my current trading edge?Or perhaps where would I like it to be six months from now?"Build yourself a roadmap to achieve these, and of course, commit to and follow through in making it happen.
The 6 Secrets of Developing a Trading Edge – What it is and how you get one!

Related Articles

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.

You have just identified a breakout above $50 resistance that historically wins 65% of the time — with a degree of confidence, you decide to take the trade.
Minutes later, the market starts to stall. Volume fades, price begins to hesitate, and eventually, your stop loss is hit, leaving you to wonder why your “65% setup” didn’t work.
The root cause of what happened is not your setup, but rather the fact that you assume that the probability of a specific trade outcome stays constant after entry.
This assumption locks you into a “static probability trap.”
There is a tendency to treat probability as frozen in time after entering a trade, when in practice it shifts continuously throughout the life of a trade as new evidence enters the market.
Even if this new evidence may not be particularly dramatic, it can still have profound implications for the likelihood of a continuation of current sentiment and price action.
Unconditional Probability: Your Pre-trade State.
What you can rely on as part of your pre-entry decision-making is unconditional probability.
This is your measured historical performance of a setup under similar conditions. It is your expected win rate and previous evidence of hitting a take-profit level.
The pre-trade belief that “This pattern works 60% of the time” is a backward-looking statement, and although based on some evidence, it shapes your belief about how this type of setup behaves on average.
However, as soon as you enter, the truth is that you are no longer dealing with a statistical average, but with this specific trade, unfolding before your eyes in this market environment, right now.
Conditional Probability: After You Enter
Once in the trade, your question becomes “Given what’s happening now with current price movement, volume, time, and volatility, what’s the probability of success?”
This live review of your pre-trade expectation is the conditional probability — your new probability estimate conditioned on the actual market response that is unfolding.
Each new candle, volume shift, or volatility change is new information, irrespective of the underlying cause, and information changes probability.
You are looking to see if:
- Trading volume is confirming or rejecting your entry expectations.
- If “time in the trade” supports further price moves in your favour or decay in market enthusiasm, evidenced in a drop in momentum.
- There are volatility changes that may be indicative of market sentiment accelerating or rejecting the initial move.
This is all about you recognising that some of these changes may result in adverse price moves. Having timely interventions that aim to protect capital and not donate much of your profit back to the market.
Emotional Resistance to Conditional Probability Thinking
As with many trading situations, there is a psychological component of decision-making that can get in the way.
Emotional “demons” that may influence this may briefly include the following:
- Anchoring: “I have done my analysis — it should work.”
- Sunk-Cost Bias: “I’m already in, I might as well wait and see what happens next.”
- Ego: Some may view that exiting means admitting they were wrong.
- Lack of knowledge: “I don’t know how to update probabilities or take appropriate actions.”
- FOMO (fear of missing out): “What if I exit and then runs in my favour?”
These biases keep traders fixed at entry from mental, emotional, and statistical perspectives.
Updating Probability in Real Time
When you boil it all down into absolute core principles, three critical factors dominate the “in the trade” probability landscape after trade entry.
1. Trading Volume — Conviction or Rejection
Volume is the purest signal of conviction. It shows the strength behind the move and how much belief the market has in your trade direction.
- High volume in your direction = strong confirmation; probability rises.
- Fading or below-average volume = weak conviction; probability erodes.
- High volume against you = rejection; probability collapses.
You can think of volume as your real-time market feedback gauge. It is the purest real-time evidence, in combination with price, of what other traders are thinking.
When price and volume disagree, this is a signal that the odds may (or already have) changed.
2. Time Elapsed — Pattern Decay
Every trade setup has a shelf life. A breakout that has not moved after a few candles can become statistically weaker than one that fired almost immediately.
The potential scenarios are:
- Quick follow-through: expected behaviour; your entry probability is likely to be intact.
- Extended stagnation: increasing probability decay due to trades losing confidence in the trade direction
- Delayed reversal: final evidence of pattern failure.
Each candle that passes without confirmation can be viewed as a ‘vote’ against your trade from the market.
This dissuades further trading interest in your desired direction, as opposed to when a market is enthused and buying seems to create ever-increasing interest as those who are fearful of missing out jump on board.
3. Volatility Regime — The Environment Shift
Volatility defines your market environment, and this environment can change fast.
- Volatility expansion in your favour confirms momentum; the probability of desirable and expected outcomes increases.
- Volatility expansion against you suggests a potential structural shift in the market, resulting in a fast drop in probability.
- Volatility contraction suggests market consolidation or exhaustion. This may be seen as a flattening of price action and a move from strongly directional to a more neutral price move.
Volatility regime shifts are a potential market indication that “the game when you entered is no longer the same.”
Putting It All into Practice: Your End-of-Candle Review
Managing conditional probability doesn’t mean reacting to every tick. It is formalising a systemised reassessment at defined intervals, often doing an “End-of-Candle Review”, on your chosen trading timeframe as a start point.
At the close of each bar on your trading timeframe, you need to pause and ask the following key questions:
- Has price behaved as expected?
- Yes → maintain or increase confidence.
- No → reduce exposure or prepare to exit.
- Is volume confirming or fading?
- Rising with direction → edge intact.
- Falling or reversing → edge weakening.
- Is volatility expanding or contracting?
- Expanding in your favour → stay the course.
- Contracting or reversing → reassess.
- Has too much time passed without progress?
- Yes → probability decay in play; consider exiting or scaling out.
- What’s the appropriate action?
- Hold, reduce, tighten, or exit — but always act in alignment with the evidence.
This simple routine keeps your decision-making informed by data, adaptable to market change, and unemotional.
None of the above is particularly ‘rocket science,’ but as with most things in your trading, it will require some work at the front end.
Measure the “what if” scenario against previous trades and comparatively measure your old way versus your new system over time to allow for confirmation of this as an approach, but also to allow refinement based on evidence.
Final thoughts
The probability of a trading outcome in a single trade is never static. It evolves with every candle, every shift in volume, and every minute of market time as new information is released.
It does require a mindset shift. As traders, we need to move from the standard “It’s a 65% setup, so I’ll hold.” To an approach that adopts the approach of “It was a 65% setup on entry, but what is the market evidence suggesting now?”
You are reacting to evolving information, and effective probability management becomes something beyond having one good trade (or avoiding a bad one) that compounds small improvement over hundreds of trades into measurable performance.
Recent Articles

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.

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.