Every level on a chart looks like an entry. Most of them are a map. What separates the two is a question almost nobody asks before resting a limit: how often does price actually get that far?
We measured it. BTC, ETH and SOL on the 4 hour chart, every bar of the last 180 days. From each bar we placed a level a set distance away, measured in ATR (the average true range over 14 bars), and counted how often price reached it.
The table
Distance from price: reached within 1 day / within 5 days 0.5 ATR: 74% / 90% 1 ATR: 49% / 78% 1.5 ATR: 31% / 67% 2 ATR: 20% / 56% 3 ATR: 8% / 36% 4.5 ATR: 3% / 18% 6 ATR: 1% / 10%
It is almost the same for all three coins. A level 1 ATR away was reached within a day 49.9% of the time on BTC, 48.7% on ETH and 49.2% on SOL. That is the reason to measure in ATR: it turns a price gap into one number that means the same thing on every chart.
How to do it with Janus Atlas
Turn on the Distance Table in Janus Atlas (Inputs, Controls). It lists each level above and below price and how far away it is.
Add the Average True Range, length 14, on the same timeframe, and divide each distance by it.
Read the chance off the table above.
Worked example, 17:53 UTC on 30 September
BTC was at 83,984 and the 4 hour ATR was 970. The prior day high was 572 away, 0.59 ATR. A level that close was reached within a day 70% of the time. The day low was 1,100 away, 1.13 ATR: 43% within a day, 73% within five. The month high was 3,400 away, 3.51 ATR: 7% within a day, about one time in three within five days. The month low was 9,065 away, 9.35 ATR. In 180 days of data, price never travelled that far within a day, and only 2% of the time within five. A limit on the month low is a map, not an order.
Our own record says the same
Our scanner's 6,524 limit proposals between 29 July and 3 August were filled 62 to 78% of the time when they sat within 0.75 ATR of price, and 2 to 5% of the time when they sat beyond 4.5 ATR.
The trap we nearly published
Our first read of that record said 597 limits resting 4.5 ATR or more away had filled zero times. It was read before those setups had finished their window. Fully graded, it was 10 of 597. Close to zero is not zero, and a trade that is still young is not a miss. Count only what has had its full chance.
What this does not tell you
Reached is not profitable. The table says whether a limit would fill, not whether the trade works after it fills. In these 180 days, levels above price were reached a little more often than levels below, because the period drifted up. In sample, three coins, one timeframe.
Observations, not recommendations.
