DJCUSD.c, EURUSD, GBPUSD, NACUSD.c, SPCUSD.c, XAUUSD · H4→M15

REGULATOR — Break & Retest Log

Every setup the EA reached a decision on, and why it did or did not take it.

live
Trading enabled and journalling.
built 29 Sep 2026 17:27 UTC

Live book brt-upcomers-costgate · Upcomers Thunderbolt 1M real money · since 2026-09-29

The books — every account this rule has run on
epochaccountfromtoclosedmoneystate
brt-ftmo-demoFTMO demo, 100k2026-09-232026-09-2711+1,694.25retired
brt-upcomersUpcomers Thunderbolt 1M · real money2026-09-282026-09-291+2,305.42retired
brt-upcomers-costgateUpcomers Thunderbolt 1M · real money2026-09-29—00.00current

A book is its rule and its account together: change either and the epoch is retired and a new one opens. ⛔ Results from two epochs are never pooled — a different account is a different broker, different spreads and a different cost per trade. A retired book’s own journal is kept under journal/archive/.

What is this? — start here if you have not seen it before

The short version

This is a trading program that watches six markets — gold, two currency pairs and the three big US stock indices — and takes a specific kind of trade automatically. This page is its diary: every setup it looked at, and why it did or did not take it.

The trade it looks for

Prices tend to stall at particular levels — places where the market has turned before. The program finds those levels by itself, on the four-hourly chart, with no lines drawn by hand, and then watches the 15-minute chart for the trade.

Then it waits for three things in order. Price has to break through a level and close beyond it. It has to travel away, so a brief poke through does not count. And then it has to come back and touch that level again and hold. That last part is the retest, and it is the whole idea: a level that used to stop price should now support it from the other side.

Why most setups are refused

⭐ This is the part worth understanding, because it is most of what you will see here. A setup can look perfect and still be declined — the spread is too wide that second, the trade would be against the bigger trend, a position is already open, the level simply is not good enough, or the level was broken and never came back to be retested.

Every refusal is written down with its reason. A strategy is defined as much by what it declines as by what it takes, and a filter nobody can see is a filter nobody can improve.

What happens once it is in

It risks half a percent of the account on each trade, and never guesses the size — it is calculated from the distance to the stop-loss.

When the trade is up by the amount it originally risked, it banks a third. The remainder runs for twice the risk. The stop does not move.

⭐ The break-even move is switched off, and that was a finding. On fourteen months of history it lifted the win rate from 34% to 48% and cost about 12R: it turned losers into scratches, which flatters the win rate, while cutting short the few large winners the shape depends on. Win rate is exactly the number a break-even rule is built to improve, and it is the number that fooled us for a day. ⚠ A win rate on this page that looks low is the rule working, not failing — the remainder runs to about 3.1× what it risks, so the break-even point is about 24.5%, not the 33% a 2:1 target would need.

⚠ What this does not claim

It is running on a demo account, not real money. The numbers on this page are from a handful of trades, which is far too few to say whether the strategy makes money.

⛔ Measured properly, it has no demonstrated edge. Over 27 months and 357 trades the edge before costs is zero — and costs are about −0.03R a trade, so the account loses at roughly the price of trading. Seven configurations in a row looked good on the data they were chosen on and reversed on data they had not seen. ⚠ An earlier version of this page said the raw signal was positive on every instrument before costs. That was arithmetic error, not a finding: the tool computing it added the commission back onto a number that never contained it. Corrected, the edge before costs is +0.018R across 481 forex trades, which is indistinguishable from nothing, and it is negative on one of them.

⭐ So this page is not a claim that the strategy works. It is a record of a system whose entry rule has no measured edge, running unchanged so that the question can be answered once, honestly, on data nobody can search afterwards.

The point of all this machinery is not to prove it works. It is to make the thing answerable: when there are enough trades to judge, the answer will come from a record rather than a feeling.

Reading the page

Right now is live state. The record is the totals. The pack breaks it down per instrument. R means multiples of what was risked — a trade that makes 1R made exactly what it stood to lose.

1,003,050.00
Balance · USD
+2,034.93
Today, realised
+2,034.93
Today, incl. open
0.00%
Open risk · cap 0.2%
2.00%
Daily headroom · halt at 2%
read 12m ago from the EA · the broker's own figures
⚠ 1 closed trades over 1 days. These are risk figures, not a track record — judging the edge needs about 1,159 trades.
Right now
Trading
ON
EnableTrading, as journalled
Instruments
6
6 have decided · DJCUSD.c, EURUSD, GBPUSD, NACUSD.c, SPCUSD.c, XAUUSD
Last decision
SKIP BIAS
htf close 1.32241 ema 1.32973 swing 0
Journal
22
27m ago newest
Equity
1,003,050
USD · today +2,034.93 · as of 12m ago
Live configuration — reported by the EA itself, not read from a file: bias=ON retest=32 score=55 brkpos=0.00 deep=0.00 minstop=0.00 tighten=0.65 session=OFF news=OFF risk=0.10% tp=2.0R [email protected] [email protected]/33% trail=OFF dd=3.0% maxopen=0.2%/1
⭐ The spread cap is per symbol on purpose: each is 12% total cost − that symbol’s own commission, so one ceiling holds across all six. DJCUSD.c maxspr=0.12R · EURUSD maxspr=0.03R · GBPUSD maxspr=0.03R · NACUSD.c maxspr=0.12R · SPCUSD.c maxspr=0.12R · XAUUSD maxspr=0.11R
The record
Setups seen
22
1 passed every gate, 21 refused
Taken
1
orders actually sent
Refused
21
95% of everything seen
Net R
+2.40
1/1 won
Net USD
+2,305.42
profit, commission and swap
The trades

Every closed trade, one row each

Aggregates hide the shape. Five trades averaging a third of an R could be five small winners or four losses and a windfall, and only the second of those tells you anything about what to expect next.

bars: each trade in R · line: running total · now +2.40R
#OpenedInstrumentSideScoreRMoneyBestWorstAfterExit
12026.09.28 17:30GBPUSDshort100+2.401+2,305.42+3.09-0.40···PARTIAL → FULL TP

⭐ Best and Worst are how far the trade ran in each direction before it closed, in R. A trade that reached +1.9R and closed at +0.3R gave something back; one that never left −0.3R was never right. ⚠ A positive Worst marked * means the EA restarted mid-trade and the excursion tracker was reseeded — it is not a real reading.

⭐ After is how far price ran once we were OUT, tracked by the EA against the original stop with no target. It is the only number that says whether an exit was early, and it is what a manual close gets scored against. ··· means the shadow is still running — it holds for up to 400 bars, so a recent trade has no reading yet. That is pending, not missing.

⭐ FULL TP means the trade ran the whole way. There is only one target: it sits at 2R of the untightened stop, which is about 3.09R of the stop actually sent. PARTIAL → FULL TP means a third was banked at 1R first, so the blended result is 0.33×1R + 0.67×3.09R = +2.40R — which is why R reads lower than Best on a complete winner. ⚠ The stored code is still TP1; it is a name, not a first of several.

The picture

Every closed trade, drawn from the broker's own bars

⚠ 11 chart(s) from retired books are cached and deliberately not drawn here — this section is this book only.

The shaded band is the holding period, the gold dashes mark the entry and the white dashes the exit. Both exit levels are drawn: the scale-out at +1R, where a third is banked, and the target the remainder runs to — about 3R of the stop actually sent, because it is priced off the untightened zone. ⚠ The EA calls that target tp1 because it is its first and only one; there is no second target, and a trade marked FULL TP ran the whole way. Dots are the real fills, so a partial and a runner show as two. ⭐⭐ An amber ring marks a target we were NOT paid at, that price reached after we were out — a level the partial or the runner already filled is not a target we missed. On a scale-out strategy that is the single most informative mark here, and it is the whole reason these are drawn after the fact.

GBPUSDshortPARTIAL → FULL TP+2.40R+2,305.42
target 3.1R 1.32323scale-out 1.0R · 33% 1.32547stop 1.32761entry 1.3265428 Sep 11:3018:3029 Sep 01:3008:30UTC · M15
Price continued to 3.4R after the target filled.
The pack

Each instrument, on its own

The four run the same logic with one thing changed per instrument — the spread cap, which is measured rather than carried across. ⛔ They also share a single Magic, which is what lets the account-wide risk cap see all of them at once: separate magics would make each instance blind to the others.

InstrumentDecisionsTakenRefusedTop reasonMedian spreadClosedNet RNewest row
DJCUSD.c505BIAS 44000—4h ago
EURUSD404BIAS 210—10h ago
GBPUSD312BUSY 111+2.4027m ago
NACUSD.c202BUSY 13500—3h ago
SPCUSD.c404BIAS 21140—42m ago
XAUUSD404EXPIRED 4470—2h ago

⚠ An instrument with decisions but zero taken and one dominant refusal code is usually a gate set wrong for that symbol, not a quiet market. The median spread column is there to make the commonest cause — a spread cap carried over from another instrument — visible at a glance.

Refusals

Why setups did not become trades

⭐ This is the point of the journal. A strategy is defined as much by what it declines as by what it takes, and a gate nobody can see is a gate nobody can tune. Every code below was written by the EA at the moment of the decision, before any order existed.

CodeCountShareWhat it means
FAILBREAK210%
The break failed outright: price closed back through the far side of the zone before displacing. ⭐ Also silent until 2026-09-29.
EXPIRED733%
The retest never arrived inside the window, or the break failed and price closed back through the far side.
BIAS943%
The trade was against HTF bias — price the wrong side of the EMA, or structure making lower highs and lower lows.
BUSY314%
A position or pending order already existed, or the EA was still standing down from the last decision.

Were we right to refuse?

Every declined setup is kept running on the same rule, through the same code, to find out what it would have done. Nothing here was traded — and a shadow long pays the spread, so it is not flattered against the trades that were.

CodeRefusedFollowed upNever came backWould have wonWould have lostTheir R
EXPIRED74400—
BIAS98—17-3.92
BUSY33—12+1.08

⭐ A negative figure in the last column is the gate working: the trades it turned away lost money. A positive one means that gate cost us something. ⛔ Never add this column up across rows — the codes resolve at wildly different rates, so a pooled total says nothing.

Stops

Three recipes, one of them live

Every candidate records where all three stops would have sat. Only the zone-based one is ever sent to the broker. The other two cost nothing to record and are the only honest way to compare them later — on the same setups, not on a different backtest.

RecipeMean stop distanceTotal RMean RTrades
Zone + buffer
the one actually sent
0.00165+2.01+2.011
ATR
entry ± 1.2 × ATR(HTF)
0.00267+1.24+1.241
Retest wick
beyond the retest candle + a tick
0.00101+3.28+3.281
⚠ Every row here assumes the same exit. The journal records where each stop would have sat, not what price did on the way there — so a wider stop that would have survived an excursion, and a tighter one that would have been hit first, both look identical to this table. It ranks stop placement on trades that happened. It does not simulate the trades that a different stop would have produced. For that, run the Strategy Tester with the recipe swapped.
Structure

Does the zone score mean anything

Zones are scored 0–100 on touches, age, width and last reaction, and anything under MinScore is refused as WEAK. That threshold is a guess until this table disagrees with it.

Zone scoreSeenPassed gatesClosedTotal R
below 55 — WEAK200—
55–69100—
70–841200—
85+711+2.40
Latency

Where the time goes

⛔ The bar is the latency. Confirming on a closed M15 bar means the entry can be up to fifteen minutes after the retest actually touched — a mean of about seven and a half. Nothing in this table comes close to that, and no amount of tuning here will. It exists so the claim can be checked rather than assumed. Working: docs/LATENCY.md.

TermMeanWorstSample
Bar close → decision
ticks reaching the EA
0.0 s0.0 s22
Our own work
gates, sizing, all three stops
3.4 ms49.9 ms22
OrderSend round trip
us to the broker and back
328 ms328 ms1
The record

Every decision

Straight from the EA's own journal. Nothing here is derived, reconstructed or inferred — the row was written at the moment the decision was made, on the closed bar that produced it.

Time (UTC)SymbolDirZoneScoreDecisionReasonEntrySLLotSpreadBiasOutcomeR
2026.09.29 17:00GBPUSDlong1.32028
1.32054
15 / 1tskipBIAS1.320571.3201423.321againstskipped—
2026.09.29 16:45SPCUSD.clong7659.12
7662.08
92 / 6tskipFAILBREAK0.000.000.0095againstskipped—
2026.09.29 15:15XAUUSDlong4164.15
4167.61
72 / 4tskipEXPIRED0.000.000.0041againstskipped—
2026.09.29 14:15NACUSD.cshort30311.77
30329.83
72 / 5tskipFAILBREAK0.000.000.00350againstskipped—
2026.09.29 13:45SPCUSD.clong7676.58
7679.42
72 / 5tskipBIAS7681.047675.3717.69114againstskipped—
2026.09.29 13:15DJCUSD.clong51465.60
51526.95
80 / 8tskipBIAS51546.8551474.251.38400againstskipped—
2026.09.29 09:30XAUUSDlong4116.08
4120.28
73 / 5tskipEXPIRED0.000.000.0047againstskipped—
2026.09.29 07:00EURUSDlong1.13533
1.13591
80 / 4tskipBIAS1.136101.1354314.971againstskipped—
2026.09.29 04:00EURUSDlong1.13617
1.13639
94 / 6tskipEXPIRED0.000000.000000.001againstskipped—
2026.09.29 01:45DJCUSD.cshort51465.60
51526.95
80 / 7tskipBUSY51417.9051510.271.08400withskipped—
2026.09.28 20:45XAUUSDshort4163.98
4167.78
62 / 3tskipEXPIRED0.000.000.0050withskipped—
2026.09.28 19:15GBPUSDshort1.32625
1.32649
32 / 2tskipBUSY1.325491.3263711.381withskipped—
2026.09.28 18:30NACUSD.clong30311.59
30330.01
92 / 4tskipBUSY30343.6030304.132.53350withskipped—
2026.09.28 17:30GBPUSDshort1.32734
1.32786
100 / 4tentry—1.326541.327619.353withTP1+2.40
2026.09.28 17:30DJCUSD.clong51579.25
51600.45
72 / 9tskipBIAS51608.3051568.752.53400againstskipped—
2026.09.28 16:30SPCUSD.cshort7695.30
7698.20
92 / 15tskipEXPIRED0.000.000.00114againstskipped—
2026.09.28 16:30EURUSDshort1.13774
1.13823
80 / 11tskipEXPIRED0.000000.000000.003withskipped—
2026.09.28 12:45DJCUSD.clong51465.60
51526.95
80 / 6tskipBIAS51581.8551486.431.04400againstskipped—
2026.09.28 08:45XAUUSDshort4251.87
4255.01
92 / 4tskipEXPIRED0.000.000.0041withskipped—
2026.09.28 06:30DJCUSD.clong51579.34
51600.36
72 / 8tskipBIAS51621.3551574.172.12400againstskipped—
2026.09.28 05:00SPCUSD.cshort7715.11
7718.09
72 / 13tskipBIAS7714.107719.6018.19133againstskipped—
2026.09.28 01:15EURUSDlong1.13774
1.13823
100 / 10tskipBIAS1.138491.1378114.711againstskipped—

Newest first. Showing the last 22 of 22 rows.

Read this before you trust a number

What this page cannot tell you

Paper rows are not trades. A row with enable_trading=false passed every gate and was never sent. It says the EA would have acted; it does not say the fill would have been there, at that price, with that spread.

R is price-based. It measures the distance travelled against the distance risked. It does not carry commission, swap or slippage on the exit.

Sample size beats cleverness. Every cut on this page — by refusal code, by stop recipe, by zone score — is arithmetic on whatever rows exist. At small counts that arithmetic is a shape, not a finding.

Ages come from time_utc, not the broker's clock. Three clocks run in this estate and the broker's is nobody's idea of UTC. The server time is kept in its own column for exactly that reason.