You’re losing money because you trade movement.
You see a green candle, you buy.
You see a red candle, you sell. That’s not a strategy. That’s a donation. I don't trade movement. I trade setups.
My entire framework is built on three things.
If one is missing, I don't take the trade.
First, I need pressure.
I want to find where someone is forced to act. Forced to sell. Forced to buy.
This isn't about predicting the future.
It’s about identifying trapped participants.
Breakout buyers underwater.
Shorts squeezed on good news.
Options dealers forced to hedge. Pressure is the fuel.
Without it, the market is just noise.
If I can't identify who is about to be forced into a bad decision, I do nothing.
Second, I need structure.
Pressure tells me a move is coming.
Structure tells me exactly where I am wrong.
Structure is a hard line on the chart. A prior day’s high. A VWAP level. A gap fill.
It’s my invalidation point.
Before I ever think about entering, I must be able to say, “If price does X, I am wrong and I am out.” If you can't define
Finally, I demand asymmetry.
This is where the money is made.
It’s not about finding trades that could go up a lot.
It’s about finding trades where my risk is small and my potential reward is large.
Can I risk twenty cents to make two dollars?
Is my stop—my structure—tight?
Is the path of least resistance clear if the pressure builds?
If the risk is a dollar to make a dollar, I pass.
The market offers better odds than that if you’re patient.
For example, a stock fails to break out over $100.
All the buyers at $100.05 are now trapped. That's the pressure.
The structure is the $100 level.
I can go short and place my stop at $100.20.
My risk is defined and small.
The asymmetry is betting that those trapped buyers will be forced to sell, pushing the stock back to $98.
I'm risking pennies to make dollars. That’s a setup.
Anything less is a waste of capital.