The Breakout Trading Strategy I Use to Catch Big Moves
I’ve longed resistance and shorted support for 9 years… This is the exact opposite of what every trader tries to do. In this article, I will share my entire strategy so you can skip years of testing and losses. This is something you will want to bookmark, take notes on, and set time aside to think about. Lesson 1: The Only 2 Trading Strategies Before you can identify good momentum setups, you need to understand what momentum trading actually is. Momentum and mean reversion are opposite strategies based on opposite assumptions. The Two Trading Styles Momentum (where you take a trade betting on a continuation of the current trend)Mean Reversion (where you take a trade betting on a reversal of the current trend) One assumes strength continues; the other assumes strength exhausts. Let’s consider this through a visual example. Suppose price is approaching a resistance level (in other words, a level where there was previously selling pressure, preventing the price from moving higher). Momentum assumes the level will break. You’re betting on continuation.Price approaches resistance, you buy, expecting it to push through and keep running.The level becomes support once broken. Mean reversion assumes the level will hold. You’re betting on rejection.Price approaches resistance, you short, expecting it to bounce back down.The level acts as a ceiling. Same chart. Same resistance level. Opposite strategies. There is no right or wrong. The key is to understand when you are in a momentum trade environment, such that momentum strategies are highly aligned. The next section shows you exactly how to identify when the environment favours momentum (my best strategy). Lesson 1 Summary There are 2 trading styles: momentum and mean reversionMean reversion bets levels will hold; momentum bets levels will breakOne is not better than the other; it depends entirely on the trade environment Lesson 2: Optimal Trade Environment Just opening a long every time price hits resistance won't make us any money. Without the right conditions, momentum dies immediately after the breakout. You enter. It reverses. You're stopped out. That's not bad luck, that's a bad trading environment. The Rowing Analogy Imagine you’re rowing a boat. You either row against or with the current. One makes it easier to row while the other takes a lot more effort. Your boat, or rowing technique, didn’t change… Only your environment did. Trading is the same. Your strategy is your boat. Your optimal trade environment is the current. Now use this 3-filter checklist to ensure you only take trades where a breakout is likely (with the current). Filter 1: How Did Price Approach the Level? What you WANT: A slow, grinding staircase pattern approaching resistance.Each candle makes incremental progress.Higher lows are stacking up.Controlled, deliberate movement. What you DON’T want: A fast vertical spike into resistance.Price shoots up in one or two large candles.After a spike, buyers' strength is depleted and price typically consolidates or reverses.This is exhaustion, not momentum. The staircase pattern shows sustained buying pressure building gradually. When this breaks through resistance, buyers are still engaged and ready to push further. Common mistake: Traders see a strong candle break resistance and assume momentum is strong. But these fast moves often reverse quickly. → Do this instead: Take momentum trades when price approaches resistance in a slow, grinding staircase over multiple candles. Real Trade Example: Slow clear grind into resistance showing an optimal ‘price approach to level’ for momentum. Filter 1: slow grindy staircase ✅ Filter 2: What Did Volume Look Like? Volume confirms whether the price movement has conviction behind it. What you WANT: Gradual increase in volume as price approaches resistanceThis pattern shows controlled, sustainable momentum. What you DON’T want: Flat volume (no conviction) or sudden volume spikes (exhaustion).Flat volume means the move lacks participation.Volume spikes often mark climax points where momentum exhausts.Decreasing volume (why would price break out of resistance now, if volume was lower than before?) Volume should mirror the price pattern, steady and building, not erratic. This strategy works because momentum continuation is most likely when participation is sustained, supply is absorbed gradually, and structure remains intact. Real Trade Example: Around the time the grindy staircase begins to emerge, we see a slow, consistent increase in volume. Filter 1: slow grindy staircase ✅Filter 2: clearly increasing volume ✅ Lastly, Filter 3: Moving Average Crossovers This filter distinguishes trending markets (good for momentum) from choppy, indecisive markets (bad for momentum). What you WANT to see: Moving averages with minimal crossovers. This indicates a directional trend. What you DON’T want to see: Frequent crossovers. This signals chop and indecision. Fewer crossovers = cleaner trend or range = better momentum continuation. Use the 30SMMA (Smoothed Moving Average). ✍️Quick Actionable Step: To add the 30SMMA on your charts: Search for the Smoothed Moving Average Indicator in TradingViewAdd it to your chartGo into settings and change the "Length" to "30" Real Trade Example: Filter 1 (Price Action): slow grindy staircase ✅ Filter 2 (Volume): clearly increasing volume ✅ Filter 3 (Crossovers): minimal MA crossovers ✅ 🎓Lesson 2 Summary Slow grinding staircase approaches have better follow-through than fast spikesVolume should be gradual (increasing or decreasing), not flat or spikingFewer MA crossovers indicate cleaner directional conditions for momentum Lesson 3: Identifying Setups Now you know what momentum is. You also know the optimal conditions for it. Next, you need to know where to execute these trades. Step 1: Draw Support and Resistance Levels Momentum trades happen at these key levels. You need to identify them consistently. I've already written an in-depth masterclass on how to set these levels. I'll link it at the end of this article. Common mistake: Traders draw levels randomly or inconsistently, leading to missed setups or false signals. Do this instead: Use my step-by-step approach at the end of this article. Step 2: Await Your Entry Trigger on the 1-Minute Chart Once you’ve identified a resistance level on your primary timeframe, switch to the 1-minute chart for precise entry timing. Why 1-minute chart? You learn faster. More trades, more chart exposure and more oppurtunities to practice psychology. I’ve added a bonus guide on why you should be trading the 1-minute chart at the end of this article. Real Trade Example: Step 3: Three Filters Before entering, check the three filters from Section 2: Is price approaching resistance in a slow staircase pattern?Is volume gradually increasing or decreasing (not flat or spiking)?Are there minimal MA crossovers (not choppy)? If any filter fails, reduce your risk on the trade. Only take full risk on A-grade setups, not forcing trades in poor conditions. 🎓Lesson 3 Summary Draw levels using the ZCT masterclass approach at the end of this articleUse your entry trigger on the 1-minute timeframe: 2 candle closes above for confirmationCheck all three filters before entering, allocate risk and size accordingly Lesson 4: Strategy Logic: Stop Loss, and Take Profit You've drawn your levels. You've confirmed the setup aligns with optimal momentum conditions. Now you need precise execution. Entry timing, stop placement, and profit targets determine whether you capture the momentum move or get stopped out on a good setup. This is where most traders lose, not in analysis, but in execution. Step 4: Entry Trigger We have established to wait for two consecutive 1-minute candles to close fully above the resistance level. This confirms the level broke and momentum is continuing. Critical execution detail: After the second candle closes above resistance, place a limit order AT the resistance level (now acting as support), not above it. Price often pulls back slightly after breaking out. Your limit order gets filled on the pullback without chasing. Common mistake: Traders wait for confirmation, then market-buy above resistance as price runs away. They enter late with a wider stop and worse risk/reward. → Do this instead: Preset your limit order AT resistance after the second candle closes. Let price come back to you. Real Trade Example: Step 5: Stop Loss A swing low is: the lowest wick in a pullback. Your stop loss goes at the most recent swing low before the breakout. Common mistake: Traders place stops at the nearest swing low, even if it’s only 0.3% away, leading to frequent stop-outs from normal volatility Do this instead: Always measure the distance of your stop loss using the ruler tool on TradingView. If it’s less than 1%, use the next swing low down. Step 6: Take Profit 1R (Equal Distance to Stop) Your take profit target is 1R, the same distance as your stop loss, but in the profit direction If your stop loss is 1.982% away from entry, your target is also 1.982% away, but on the upside. This gives you a 1:1 risk/reward ratio. Why 1R? It’s conservative and achievable. Momentum trades often hit 1R quickly because the breakout has follow-through. You’re not trying to catch the entire move, you’re taking a high-probability piece of it. Over time, as you get data in your journal, you can start extending your profit targets when you see how far your average winning trades go beyond 1R. This way, you’re not guessing where to take profits, but following a systematic approach. Real Trade Example: 🎓Lesson 4 summary Enter after two 1-minute candle closes above resistance, using a limit order at prior resistance (now support) to avoid chasing price.Place stop losses at the most recent valid swing low, ensuring enough distance to avoid normal volatility and minor stop hunts.Set initial profit targets at 1R to capture high-probability momentum continuation in a repeatable, systematic way. Immediate Next Steps✍️: Read the Support and Resistance Masterclass to learn how to draw levels (shared at end of article)Look at 3 charts using the 3 filter checklist to identify a momentum trade environmentUse the strategy steps to enter your tradeGather 30 trades using this method, journalled and reviewed against the criteria 🎓 Final Summary Lesson 1: Momentum vs Mean Reversion Momentum trades bet that price will continue through a level, while mean reversion trades bet that a level will hold and reject price.Both strategies are valid, but performance depends entirely on matching the strategy to the correct trade environment. Understanding this distinction prevents applying breakout logic in conditions where it has no edge. Lesson 2: Optimal Trade Environment High-quality breakouts form when price approaches resistance in a slow, grinding staircase rather than fast vertical spikes.Volume should build gradually to confirm sustained participation, not remain flat or spike from exhaustion.Minimal moving average crossovers indicate cleaner directional conditions where momentum continuation is more likely. Lesson 3: Identifying Setups Momentum trades should be executed at consistently drawn support and resistance levels.Entries are triggered on the 1-minute chart using two consecutive candle closes above resistance for confirmation.All three environment filters must align before taking full risk; weaker conditions require reduced sizing or passing the trade. Lesson 4: Stop Loss and Take Profit Enter using a limit order at prior resistance (now support) after two confirmed 1-minute candle closes to avoid chasing price.Stop losses should be placed at the most recent valid swing low with enough distance to avoid normal volatility and minor stop hunts.Initial profit targets are set at 1R to capture high-probability momentum continuation in a repeatable way. 🎓What Changes From Here The next time price approaches resistance, you won’t have to guess if it will break out. You’ll know when a breakout has real momentum, when volume confirms it, and when conditions support follow-through. You’ll also execute with defined entries, stops, and targets. #CryptoZeno #tradingStrategy
I’ve been at TermMax from the token side, and I think TMX is more interesting when viewed against what the protocol has already built. TermMax currently shows $50M+ in TVL, 20+ active vaults and support across 8+ chains. So this is not a case where the token has to create the entire story from zero.
My attention is the 1B fixed supply and the planned 20% TGE circulation. The remaining supply is distributed over a 48-month schedule, which gives the market a much clearer framework to watch instead of having the majority of supply immediately hit liquidity.
I’m also watching the utility closely. $TMX is designed around governance and staking, with protocol decisions such as rates, collateral and upgrades becoming part of the governance layer. That matters because TermMax is already operating a fixed-rate lending system rather than building utility around an empty shell.
The interesting metric after launch won’t simply be the TMX price. I’ll be watching whether protocol usage, vault activity and governance participation actually grow alongside token ownership. If those three start moving together, the token becomes much more meaningful than another DeFi ticker. #TermMax @TermMax
At first I thought the interesting part of Dusk was mainly about keeping financial activity private but then I started looking at what actually has to happen around one transaction and it made me think differently because privacy alone is not enough if the system still depends on too many separate steps for identity, compliance, verification and settlement and this is where I think the design of @Dusk gets more interesting.
You can have a private transaction but the network still needs to know whether the person is allowed to make it, whether the transaction follows the rules and whether the result can still be verified when necessary. Dusk seems to be trying to connect those pieces instead of treating privacy as something that sits on top of the financial workflow.
What I like about that idea is that selective disclosure changes the question from “can this transaction be private?” to “what actually needs to be visible and to whom?” A regulator may need proof that something is valid without needing every piece of customer information, and that difference sounds small but could become very important once more regulated activity moves onchain.
I also keep thinking about the developer side because all of this only matters if applications can actually use it without rebuilding the whole system themselves. When real applications start using $DUSK will the privacy layer be the thing users notice most, or will the bigger difference come from how compliance and verification work quietly in the background?
The Transfer Was Ready Then I Checked The Merchant Name Again
I was selling USDT and the buyer said the payment had been sent. I opened my banking app and saw the money had arrived, so at first I thought the order was finished.
Then I checked the sender name. It wasn't the same name shown on the Binance P2P order. That changed the situation immediately. The payment itself was real, but the person who sent it didn't match the counterparty I was trading with. I wasn't comfortable releasing the USDT just because the money was already sitting in my account.
I kept the order and chat untouched, then used Appeal to ask Binance Support to review the transaction instead of trying to sort it out privately with the buyer.
That experience left me with a much stricter rule for selling:
• Money received is only one check. I also compare the sender details with the order information.
• A payment from a different name is something I stop and clarify, not something I ignore because the balance has increased.
• I keep the Order ID, payment record and order chat available in case Support needs to examine what happened.
• If the transaction becomes unclear, I stay inside Binance P2P and use Appeal rather than moving the conversation elsewhere.
Last night I was looking at how a bond trade moves through the traditional system and something felt strange. The security can be digital, the ownership record can be digital, even the settlement can eventually be digital, yet the process around those pieces can still depend on several separate layers.
That is where Dusk Trade gets more interesting than the usual “tokenized assets” pitch. $DUSK is positioning it as a regulated trading application for products such as bonds, ETFs and MMFs, rather than stopping at the point where an asset receives a token. The bigger idea is bringing the trading environment and the asset infrastructure closer together.
There is a subtle problem here, though. Moving an asset onto a blockchain does not automatically remove the old market structure. If investors still depend on one system for eligibility, another for trading, another for settlement and another for keeping records aligned, the blockchain may simply become another component that everyone has to coordinate with.
That is the distinction I would watch around Dusk. The real achievement would not be having regulated assets onchain. It would be making fewer separate systems necessary in the first place. That is a much harder problem, and probably a much more meaningful test for DUSK. #dusk @Dusk $DUSK
One Community Discussion Quietly Changed How I Use Binance P2P A discussion in a local crypto community caught my attention this week. Someone shared that a Binance P2P trade became much harder to resolve than expected not because the payment disappeared, but because almost none of the transaction records had been kept.
The payment receipt was gone. The chat had already been cleaned up. The Order ID had never been written down.
Reading that made me realize how easy it is to assume a completed trade will never need to be looked at again. Of the time that's true. The problem is that the one trade requiring verification usually isn't the one anyone expects.
What I found interesting wasn't the dispute. It was everything that had disappeared before the dispute even started. • No Order ID written down. • No payment receipt left on the phone. • Part of the conversation had already moved somewhere outside Binance P2P. None of those decisions seemed important at the time. Together, they made the transaction much harder to verify later. That's exactly what I try to avoid now.
A wallet that's been inactive for approximately 5 months just moved 94M $HEMI to Binance.
The majority of that has now been sent to Binance's cold wallet.
CryptoZeno
·
--
$HEMI up 56% and the interesting part is not the candle. It is what happened to positioning while it ran.
L/S has been sitting around 2.0 for a while. It just dropped to 0.82.
That is a big shift in a short window.
Open interest tells you which way it shifted. It is up 299% in 24h. If longs were simply closing, OI would be falling. It is tripling instead.
So the crowd is not taking profit. They are opening shorts into a move that is already going.
Meanwhile top traders sit at 1.28 on positions against 0.82 for everyone else. Big money is on the other side of that.
Taker buy/sell at 1.12 says buyers are still the aggressive ones.
Now the part I am not glossing over:
>OI is 195% of market cap >Futures volume 10.2x spot >1.69M liquidated in 24h
That derivatives book is roughly twice the size of the token itself. In a structure like that, 40% moves happen in both directions and they happen fast.
Funding is also flat at 0.0017%. So the shorts piling in are paying nothing to sit there. Nothing is forcing them out yet.
That is the missing piece. Crowded shorts with no cost can wait as long as they want.
What I am watching is whether funding turns negative while L/S keeps sliding. If both happen together, the shorts stop being a crowd and start being fuel.
For now the direction points up. Shorts building into strength, big accounts leaning the other way, buyers still lifting offers.
$HEMI up 56% and the interesting part is not the candle. It is what happened to positioning while it ran.
L/S has been sitting around 2.0 for a while. It just dropped to 0.82.
That is a big shift in a short window.
Open interest tells you which way it shifted. It is up 299% in 24h. If longs were simply closing, OI would be falling. It is tripling instead.
So the crowd is not taking profit. They are opening shorts into a move that is already going.
Meanwhile top traders sit at 1.28 on positions against 0.82 for everyone else. Big money is on the other side of that.
Taker buy/sell at 1.12 says buyers are still the aggressive ones.
Now the part I am not glossing over:
>OI is 195% of market cap >Futures volume 10.2x spot >1.69M liquidated in 24h
That derivatives book is roughly twice the size of the token itself. In a structure like that, 40% moves happen in both directions and they happen fast.
Funding is also flat at 0.0017%. So the shorts piling in are paying nothing to sit there. Nothing is forcing them out yet.
That is the missing piece. Crowded shorts with no cost can wait as long as they want.
What I am watching is whether funding turns negative while L/S keeps sliding. If both happen together, the shorts stop being a crowd and start being fuel.
For now the direction points up. Shorts building into strength, big accounts leaning the other way, buyers still lifting offers.
$BTC This month, we’re still trading inside last month’s fair value.
Both the VAH and VAL have been respected on retests, confirming an inside-month.
We’ve also broken below this month’s value area.
Normally, when price fails to find acceptance outside of fair value, it often rotates back inside.
Considering that we got rejected at last month’s VAL and the monthly profile is D-shaped, suggesting more range-bound price action, I expect price to move back above 63.4K.
$BTC Been waiting for this sweep of these lows for the past couple of weeks, and it looks like it could come over the next week...
Every bear market bottom has repeatedly swept the lows, making participants expect lower prices and making it increasingly difficult to long the market.
If price is bottoming within this range, this higher low around 60–62K should hold before price breaks out of the range over the coming months.
$BTC SOPR Cycle Model Is Flashing a Major Turning Point
#Bitcoin long-term SOPR cycle structure is showing an eerily familiar pattern. The chart highlights recurring high-profit zones near cycle tops and high-loss zones around deep capitulation, with each major cycle followed by a prolonged reset before the next expansion.
What makes the current setup interesting is the SOPR ratio drifting toward the lower part of its rising cycle structure. Historically, similar conditions appeared around 2014, 2018 and 2022, periods where profit realization weakened before Bitcoin entered another major accumulation and expansion phase.
The model projects a potential Nov 2026 to Jan 2027 window for another major cycle transition. If the historical rhythm remains relevant, the current weakness may represent a late-cycle reset rather than the beginning of a permanent trend reversal.
The key level to watch is whether SOPR can hold its structural support while BTC builds a new base. If history rhymes, the next opportunity may appear when the chart looks the least exciting.
Yesterday I pointed out how important 0.18 was for $ACE The level held and price ran quickly up to 0.37.
So where do things stand now?
The numbers:
>Price 0.10 → 0.37 → 0.18 → 0.26 >Market cap 32M >Open interest 82M >Futures volume 2.3B >Spot volume 210M >Funding -0.9% per 4h >L/S ratio 0.88 >Top trader L/S 0.94 >10M liquidated in 24h, 7M of it shorts
Start with one ratio:
Open interest is 82M against a 32M market cap. That is 256%.
A healthy range sits between 2 and 10%. This is twenty times that.
At this level the derivatives market is not reacting to price, it is setting it. The run to 0.37 and the 54% drop right after were not buyers and sellers disagreeing. Shorts got cleared first, then longs got cleared.
Futures volume is 2.3B on a 32M token. Seventy times the market cap changed hands in a day.
The funding side:
Funding is -0.9% per 4h, roughly 5.4% a day. That is a real cost. Shorts are paying serious money to stay in and nobody carries that for long.
On its own that argues for upside. But the rest of the data is not backing it up.
L/S at 0.88 is leaning short, not crowded short. There is not much of a pile to squeeze.
Top traders sit at 0.94, the crowd at 0.88. Both on the same side. No split here. Big accounts are not seeing something different.
107M of 146M is circulating. There is an unlock 19 days out but it is 0.38% of circulating supply. Noise level, it does not move the picture.
No catalyst. There is no news behind any of this.
How I read it:
The data here points at volatility, not at a side. Leverage is at an extreme, retail and top traders are on the same side, the first squeeze wave is behind us, and no new cluster has formed above yet.
In a structure like this, 30 to 40% moves in either direction are normal. Position size matters more than entry.
The one thing to watch is open interest. If 82M starts coming down, leverage is clearing out and a real base can form. If it keeps climbing, another flush is coming.
Not a call. This is just how the numbers read right now.
The Quiet Part Of Onchain Finance Is Identity There is a strange problem with regulated finance moving on-chain: proving that someone is eligible can require revealing far more information than the transaction actually needs.
That is where @Dusk has an interesting piece called Citadel. It uses zero-knowledge proofs for selective disclosure, so an application can verify a required attribute without receiving the whole underlying identity record. Dusk describes it as an identity and access layer for regulated flows.
• Residency can be verified without exposing an entire profile. • Eligibility can be checked without repeatedly handing over the same personal documents. • Access rules can become part of the on-chain workflow instead of sitting entirely in a separate compliance system.
A regulated market needs to know who is allowed to do what, but that does not mean every participant needs access to everything about that person. That is a much more precise privacy model than simply making transactions private. $DUSK is trying to make disclosure itself programmable. #dusk @Dusk