Last week’s recap—I want to say one thing: the market isn’t here to reward you; it’s here to test you.
Over the past week, BTC kept bouncing back and forth between 97,000 and 101,000. Many people chased trades until they broke down—frequent entries and exits, and the more they traded, the more they lost. The performance of the Vāntian system during this period was this—SKIPPING most of the noise. It’s not because the system isn’t sensitive enough, but because it’s mature enough. Win rate isn’t achieved by doing more trades; it’s preserved by not acting out of chaos.
This week, we triggered 4 valid signals in total, and ultimately executed 3 trades, for a win rate of 75%. The biggest single-trade profit was +2.1% NAV, and the biggest single-trade loss was -0.7% NAV. Doesn’t it sound exciting enough? Yes. That’s what a professional player looks like.
I’ve seen too many people go all-in to break even, and then on two more trades they’re back to square one. They call it “strategy.” I call it “a gamble on luck.” Real strategy is: you know why you enter each trade, and you also know why you exit. If you don’t know why you entered, even if you profit, you’re still borrowing from the future.
The most important lesson learned this week: set your stop loss at the structure failure level, not at a psychological price point. Many friends ask me, why is my stop loss always so “wide”? Because I place it at the structure failure level. The market needs room to breathe. If you clamp your stop loss tightly, the market just sweeps you out—and then it moves exactly toward your expected direction. That’s not bad luck; it’s a lack of understanding. SL = structure failure, not the most recent low, and not an integer-level barrier.
One more thing worth recording: last Wednesday there was an opportunity to short ETH—FVG + OB confluence, and the structure looked excellent. But in the end, we didn’t execute. The reason was a macro event window—the 48 hours before and after Fed-related remarks—during which the system defaults to reducing trade frequency. If we had taken it, looking back afterward it would have been profitable. But what of it? The system says wait—so we wait. One correct act of waiting is worth more than ten lucky wins, because it builds your execution ability, not your luck record.
Trading is fundamentally anti-instinct. Your brain naturally wants more signals, more opportunities, and more “participation.” But the best opportunity the market gives you often appears when you’re the most bored. Sit there. Wait. Don’t move—that’s the hardest skill.
If you also took trades you shouldn’t have last week, don’t blame yourself for too long. Record it, analyze it, and then let it go. Start again next week, with clearer judgment. What do you think was hardest to control last week for you—impulses to enter, or refusing to cut losses?
Follow me: live stream + SMC teaching every night at 21:00
🌿 Zhao Xing, not announcing—Not advice
#BTC #交易复盘 #SMC
Over the past week, BTC kept bouncing back and forth between 97,000 and 101,000. Many people chased trades until they broke down—frequent entries and exits, and the more they traded, the more they lost. The performance of the Vāntian system during this period was this—SKIPPING most of the noise. It’s not because the system isn’t sensitive enough, but because it’s mature enough. Win rate isn’t achieved by doing more trades; it’s preserved by not acting out of chaos.
This week, we triggered 4 valid signals in total, and ultimately executed 3 trades, for a win rate of 75%. The biggest single-trade profit was +2.1% NAV, and the biggest single-trade loss was -0.7% NAV. Doesn’t it sound exciting enough? Yes. That’s what a professional player looks like.
I’ve seen too many people go all-in to break even, and then on two more trades they’re back to square one. They call it “strategy.” I call it “a gamble on luck.” Real strategy is: you know why you enter each trade, and you also know why you exit. If you don’t know why you entered, even if you profit, you’re still borrowing from the future.
The most important lesson learned this week: set your stop loss at the structure failure level, not at a psychological price point. Many friends ask me, why is my stop loss always so “wide”? Because I place it at the structure failure level. The market needs room to breathe. If you clamp your stop loss tightly, the market just sweeps you out—and then it moves exactly toward your expected direction. That’s not bad luck; it’s a lack of understanding. SL = structure failure, not the most recent low, and not an integer-level barrier.
One more thing worth recording: last Wednesday there was an opportunity to short ETH—FVG + OB confluence, and the structure looked excellent. But in the end, we didn’t execute. The reason was a macro event window—the 48 hours before and after Fed-related remarks—during which the system defaults to reducing trade frequency. If we had taken it, looking back afterward it would have been profitable. But what of it? The system says wait—so we wait. One correct act of waiting is worth more than ten lucky wins, because it builds your execution ability, not your luck record.
Trading is fundamentally anti-instinct. Your brain naturally wants more signals, more opportunities, and more “participation.” But the best opportunity the market gives you often appears when you’re the most bored. Sit there. Wait. Don’t move—that’s the hardest skill.
If you also took trades you shouldn’t have last week, don’t blame yourself for too long. Record it, analyze it, and then let it go. Start again next week, with clearer judgment. What do you think was hardest to control last week for you—impulses to enter, or refusing to cut losses?
Follow me: live stream + SMC teaching every night at 21:00
🌿 Zhao Xing, not announcing—Not advice
#BTC #交易复盘 #SMC