LIQUIDITY MATRIX
THE LAB

The lab: what we tested, and what we found

Every trading idea we test runs on years of data and is compared with random entries that use the same stop, target, session and costs. If it does not clearly beat them, we write it here, even when it is our own idea.

Compared with luck

A thousand random traders per test, entering at random times under the same conditions as the idea.

Locked data

Part of the history stays closed until the very end, so an idea cannot be tailored to it.

Number of tries

The more ideas we try, the harder the bar, because luck alone makes good-looking results if you try enough.

Test log

IdeaDataAverage trade after costsVersus luckVerdict
Trend following (8 daily rules)Gold 2018–2026+0.85RBetter than 98.7%Beat it
The same rulesEUR/USD 2018–2026−0.04RBetter than 0.2%Failed
Trend following on every marketFrom November 2026—Measured in the public testPublic test running
Scenario rule (liquidity sweep)Gold 2018–2022−0.15RWorse than mostDid not beat it
Scenario ruleEUR/USD 2018–2026−0.02RNo betterDid not beat it
Golden zone and OTE (H4 → H1)Gold 2018–2026−0.07 / −0.10RBetter than 6–7%Failed
Daily bias + liquidity ideasGold and EUR/USD 2018–2026—None beat it (5 ideas)Failed
Opening-range breakout3 markets, 16 months−0.10 to +0.01RNone beat itFailed
Strategy factory (1,584 ideas)13 markets 2018–2022—All under the luck barNothing passed
Multi-confirmation SMC bot (V4)6 markets 2018–2022−0.41RWorse than random (−0.23R)Failed

R = the profit or loss divided by the trade's risk. Results come from historical tests and do not represent any real account.

What does this tell us?

Short chart patterns on their own did not beat luck after costs in our tests. That is why we offer the liquidity map as a tool to understand and learn the chart, not as an entry signal. When an idea passes the public test, it appears here first.

Follow the public test: trend following.