10AM Green Folder Data,
4 Minute Bearish Silver Bullet Entry,
5 Minute Bearish Displacement,
5 Minute Bearish FVG (Premarket),
5 Minute Bullish Displacement FAILURE,
Consumer Sentiment ,
Prior ATH Break and Retest,
Quarterly and Yearly Level DOL,
Year 61.8% retracement,
The main takeaways from the past few weeks of trading that I have personally identified, that arent being correctly showcased on ChatGPT is
- Off of the 1st test of the 50% retracement on /MNQ, I didnt hold the trade for a full stoploss, and the trade came all the way back to retest my entry, which happened to be the perfect entry model for the hindsight trade entry criteria of '50% Level, 2H Bullish Trend Shift, First Presented 5M Bullish FVG, Silver Bullet Entry'. So what I did wrong here, is not initially waiting for the bullish trend shift of the 2 hour chart, and that I took an aggressive entry, rather than a retest entry.
The problem on this specific level test, is there wasnt any data on the best entry. So I just went with my standard aggressive entry of a 1 minute variation of the extremity move down. And in hindsight it wouldve worked had I just been able to hold through the retest.
- When I shorted from the Prior Monthly Low, I didnt wait for price to tap into any liquidity pool (FVG's) so in hindsight, I entered prematurely, and should have waited for the next timeframe liquidity pool (6 Hour Bearish FVG) to be swept, until initiating a short trade. And when price tapped into that liquidty pool, it provided a consistent entry from the 6 hour fair value gap, with a 30 minute displacement entry.
One thing I think is very important to note, is that when I took a papertrade off of the prior month low, I didnt wait for price to enter or tap into the 6 hour bearish fair value gap, or a fair value gap in general. Which was the next timeframe liquidity pool surrounding that specific level. And that resulted in me taking a premature trading loss, prior to the liquidity sweep or manipulation hunt, before the move took place, and this is something that I need to remember in the future.
ChatGPT said:
Got it! This is a very important observation and should definitely be integrated into your checklist moving forward.
What you experienced was a premature entry without waiting for the liquidity sweep or manipulation hunt to occur, and this can often lead to a false move or premature loss, as price hasn't yet reached its intended level or manipulated the liquidity.
Key Takeaways from Your Observation:
-
Wait for Liquidity Sweep or Manipulation: The price tends to sweep liquidity or engage in manipulation before making its true move in the direction of the trend. Don’t enter before this happens.
-
Timeframe Confirmation: The 6-hour bearish FVG was key, and waiting for price to tap into that level would have provided a more optimal entry.
-
Fair Value Gap (FVG) Importance: FVGs are vital for pinpointing areas where price may retrace to before moving in the intended direction.
Incorporating This into the Checklist:
Liquidity Sweep & Manipulation Rule
-
Do not enter prematurely: Only execute the trade after price has performed a liquidity sweep or manipulation move around the key levels or Fair Value Gap.
-
FVG as an Entry Zone:
-
Always check if price has tapped into an FVG (especially on higher timeframes, like the 6-hour in your example).
-
Price should retrace to the FVG zone before entering a trade for confirmation.
-
Timeframe Alignment:
-
Confirm liquidity pools across multiple timeframes (6-hour, H4, etc.) to see if they align with entry points.
-
Entry should align with a sweep of liquidity in the direction of the prevailing trend.
Revised Entry Checklist (with your lesson in mind):
-
Higher Timeframe Liquidity & Bias Check
-
What is the main liquidity pool for today?
-
Has price already swept previous highs/lows?
-
Is there a Fair Value Gap on higher timeframes (H6, H12, etc.)?
-
Confirm Key Setup Formation
-
Entry Execution Criteria
-
Enter only after the sweep of liquidity or market manipulation.
-
Make sure the entry aligns with a discount/premium area or an FVG.
-
Place stop loss beyond the manipulated liquidity zone.
-
Trade Management
-
Consider partial profits at +1R if price quickly moves in your favor.
-
If the market structure shifts or price fails to hit the target, reevaluate.
-
Keep track of how the liquidity sweep affects the trade; adjust if it seems like price will reverse.
This approach will refine your decision-making and help avoid premature entries, leading to better risk management and higher probability trades.
Let me know if this adjustment resonates with you or if you'd like to tweak anything further!
...below the 50% retracement level, whereas on the /MNQ general contract, we are still trading above it. This creates a massive difference in bias depending on which contract you’re using for your analysis.
Key Takeaways from This Trade & Analysis:
1. Trade Setup & Execution (Paper Trade)
-
Entry: Prior monthly low (20460.25), shorted into the 6-hour bearish order block.
-
Confirmation: 1-hour bearish trend shift & displacement.
-
Refined Entry: 1-hour Silver Bullet FVG entry at 20494.50.
-
Stop Loss: 1-hour displacement candle high at 20513 (only 18.5 points of risk).
-
Outcome: Trade ran for an insane 61R risk-to-reward ratio, a potential account-making trade.
-
Lesson: Placing a stop at the 1-hour displacement high would have avoided manipulation and allowed full trade execution.
2. Market Context & Macro Analysis
3. Key Trading Lessons & Refinements
4. Contract Discrepancies & Chart Confusion
Final Thoughts & Next Steps
This session provided valuable insights into market behavior, execution refinement, and journaling discipline. Moving forward, sticking to a structured checklist will be key to long-term success.
This trade presented itself at 9:43 AM on the most recent trading session. I personally didnt trade this because I woke up late, and I had a swing trade that I closed the day prior, which was a short from the prior month low at 20460.25, which tapped into a 6 hour bearish orderblock above the prior monthly low level, which was followed by a 1 hour bearish trend shift, and displacement, followed by a 1 hour Silver bullet entry. And I took that trade, (which was a papertrade by the way), all the way to the new week opening gap, which was a gap left from the most recent monday opening on 03/23/2025, since the prior friday closed at 19971, opened on a gap to 20052.25, and then rallied to the prior monthly low into the 6 hour bearish fair value gap that I just mentioned prior. So with that gap being unfilled, I didnt want to get too overly focued on more upside, and figured that the gap would likely be filled, and it surely did fill. The only reason that I caught the trade was because I took the trade on QQQ, and was manipulated out of my position as I entered the trade from the first entry provided from the prior month low, and I placeed a stop loss above the high at that time, in which price didnt yet manipulate higher into the 6 hour bearish fair value gap. So for that reason, my /MNQ position was manipulated and stop ran. And after I analyzed the trade in hindsight, I was able to breakdown the entry provided which was again, and run into the 6 hour bearish orderblock, with a 1 hour bearish trend shift, and a 1 hour silver bullet fvg entry, and had I simply placed a stoploss at the top of the 1 hour displacement candle, I could have only risked a small amound of 18.5 points, since the top of the 1 hour displacement candle was 20513, and the 1 hour silver bullet entry was 20494.50, and the distance between both is only 18.5 points. Very very good risk reward on the stoploss from how far the trade ran which was overall of a staggering unbelieveable 61R risk to reward ratio. Thats type of trade that can make someones year. So I will certainly be journaling that specific trade as well. Right now, I guess im jsut letting my mind kind of roam freely, as this is the beginning of my 'Payout Portfolio'. Which I fully plan to utilize every single day, regardless if I take a trade, or simply tape read, due to the fact that I believe it has to be incorporated If I plan to maintain consistent profitability in the markets, and because the last time I rigourosly journaled, I passed my evaluation with flying colors, yet the moment I obtained funding, I stopped journaling immediately, and failed miserably.
Ive also noticed, that while trading in a hindsight perspective seems very simplistic when analyzing would have, should have, could have trades, that its actually an unbelievable amount of information to hold in your mind at once, between all of the rulesets, technical analysis, setups, entry triggers, and day to day thought processes, and the refinement process that is necessary in order to keep pulling money out of the market, since market dynamics change daily. So in realizing this, Ive noticed its bascially essential to have all of the thought processes that I have on a daily basis, condensed, simplified, and analyzed with a fine tooth comb in order to extract the most essential and important rulesets, and to create a thourough trading checklist that I can use daily, that will really simplify my trading process, in attempts to almost completely remove and discretion based human fault trading and error based decisions, that can also be made off of human emotion.
So with that being said, todays specific trade for the date of 03/28/2025, for the 9:30 new york trading session, when analyzed in hindsight, provided a short trade entry, with the high of day coming in at 9:43AM. My reasoning for this trade continuing to go lower, was because of the higher timeframe analysis, indicating that a prior monthly low short, that took place earlier before this trading day, would likely need a higher timeframe level above the monthly timeframe, in order to find any kind of next potential support areas within the market. And as it stands, the market is currently trading on a very high macro timeframe basis. Such as monthy, quartlery and yearly levels. Which I have not seen for sometime.
I have actually recently, been using the yearly chart quite often. As the market has been selling off quite substantially since the Trump persidency. And from the current yearly chart perspective, there is obviously only 2 scenarios. And that is, the 2024 yearly candle will either hold as a prior year bullish displacement candle, to setup the 2025 year bullish run, in which the first quarter would act as a retracement quarter within the current year candle, to either the mean which is 50% of the prior year, with potential for an even deeper retracement at the 61.8% retracement, OR, both of those retracements will fail, and the 2024 bullish candle will be reversed at 16332.25, which will ultimately shift my bias bearish. SO until proven otherwise, I have a bullish outlook on the 2025 year and market.
SO with that being said, the prior monthly low was again, 20460.25, and the new week opening gap was 19971, but I didnt really think that that level would hold because it was a weekly support level contesting with a monthly resistance level. So I anticiaped that the prior quarterly low would become the next draw on liquidity.
As I paper traded this, I took shorts fro the prior monthly low, and covered my entire position at the new week opening gap anyway.
WELL, the 9:30 new york session began, topped at 9:43 am and had not yet tested the prior quartlery low at the 19818 level, in any of the prior day after hours trading session OR the premarket session.
Also, there were 2 economic data releases on this day, one at 8:30 AM which was 'Personal Income And Outlays' and 10AM data which was 'Consumer Sentiment'. And had I woke up to trade this session, without any journaling/data backed entries for the currently market context. I would have likely taken a trade on on the 4 minute bearish silver bullet after the 10AM data release. Because it would have been the most logical entry, since I likely wouldnt have traded the 9:43AM short, that tapped into a most recent 5 minute bearish fair value gap from the premarket session that took place at 9:25 right before the open. In theory, just because at this time we havent yet reached the prior quarterly low, there still was some slight chance in my mind, that a potential new higher low could be formed from a macro timeframe perspective, that could have potentially formed above the prior quartely low level.
Because I was thinking that maybe this currently quarterly candle could close above the prior quarterly lows low, after this quarters close, which would indicate a potential quarterly sell side liquidity sweep for a continuation higher into next quarter.
But with this most recent selloff, I am unsure thats going to be the likely outcome, being that we are currently trading far below the prior quartlery low. and there is only 1 more trading day for this quarter, which will take place tomorrow on monday. So unless we can rally from the current price of 19362.25 all the way back above 19818, then it is very unlikely in my opinion that that thesis will play out according to plan.
This would indicate that more downside in the market is likely, and that the next draw on liquidity could even potentially be the 61.8% retracement from the yearly candle perspecitve at 18670.47. Below that, I would start to become worried that the markets are approaching recession territory.
Another thing that ill add, is that since the contract rollover on /MNQ took place, it left a big discrepancy on the similairties of charts between the prior /MNQ contract being /MNQH25 and the new chart on the /MNQM25 contracts, and the main general contract of /MNQ which I follow. And its actually quite strange. As im right now analyzing the 30 day 2 hour chart on my thinkorswim platform, there is a discrepancy between the 30 day low between /MNQ and /MNQM25. And its showcasing that the 30 day low on /MNQ IS 19140, and that the 30 day low on the /MNQM25 contract is 19344.75. So this is a 200 point discrepancy which is quite large. And because this tends to happen often, being something ive noticed throughout the years being a daytrader, I tend to just stick to the /MNQ general contract to try to bypass all of these imbalances between contracts. With the most recent incorportation of QQQ ETF, which also has a different yearly chart compared to /MNQ.
QQQ actually moreso closely mirrors /MNQM25. And all of this is very confusing, and in my opinion, leads to more potential for trading losses. So I think it will be imperative in the future, to create a system which can bypass all of these trading imbalances. ANOTHER THING. I just analyzed the yearly chart on /MNQM25, and there isnt much data, other than this and last years charting analysis, and when utilizing the fibonacci retracement on the year of 2024 on the /MNQM25 contract, the high and the low of that 2024 year is 22699.50 and the low is 17852.75. And the High and Low on the 2024 year for the /MNQ chart is 22450 and the low is 16334.25, so again, just another discrepancy that creates more imbalances between charts.
This is all very confusing. Because once you apply a fibonacci retracement on the 2024 year of the /MNQM25 contract, we have broken below the 61.8% retracement which lasts at the 19704.21 level.
But being that all of the contracts are showcasing different price points on different candles within chart comparison, All of the current pricepoints from last fridays close at 19362.25 are all aligned between charts, So that is the only similiarity, and that is that the /MNQ chart, and the /MNQM25 charts are displaying the same current price point.
Recently, I decided to use the QQQ yearly chart, as I see there is also a discrepancy between the 2024 and 2025 year all time high breaks. AND its showcasing that on /MNQ, the All time high is 22450, and that the 2025 high is 22320, indicating that the 2024 all time high was never breached, WHEN ON THE OTHER HAND, on QQQ, its showcasing that the 2024 all time high was 539.15, and that the 2025 all time high is 541.28, indicating that all time highs were broken this year on the QQQ ETF. I will definitely have to utilize CHATGPT, to try to undertstand all of these discrepancies, because they are massive, they are extremely confusing, they dont make much sense, and they set traders up for incorrect data, with risk of more trading losses, due to insuffiencient comparisons between charts. CHATGPT will have to assist me in explanation of these differences, and ultimately guide me in the correct direction on which contract I should be following for my technical analysis and why. Because my Biases and day to day trading system relies heavily on pure technical analysis, and one slight change in price can alter my trading decisions.
But I used QQ recently, because its yearly retracements were slightly lower than the /MNQ chart, being that the prior year is lower than the 2025 year, so to me, this indicated that I should potentially be more patient, when trying to analyze where any quarterly and yearly bottom could likely reverse from for good for this trading year, and that I should just be more greedy on the dip buy or falling knife essentially. So the current logical reasoning I am applying is to just simply use the chart with the lower retracement levels between charts to justify any potential long entries.
With that being said, we are just now approaching for the second time, the 50% yearly retracement level on QQQ at 467.25, which actually worked pretty well for the most recent upside rally on the QQQ from the first test of the 50% level on 03/10/2025, which created the push into the most recent short area that rejected from the prior monthly low I was talking about earlier.
When I ran the data on the last time that QQQ hit this retracement level, it actually had a pretty decisive entry trigger, with a simple 5 minute bullish variation entry taking place, once the 50% retracement level was reached. And this for the first time failed at the ending of the friday trading session. So what that currently tells me, is that the 50% retracement level on QQQ is now invalid.
And there was quite a discrepancy between the valid entry triggers between the /MNQ and QQQ charts for the 50% retracement level. As I just stated, only a 5 minute bullish variation was required in order to enter on QQQ, but in fact, on /MNQ, you would need a 2 hour bullish trend shift, with a silver bullet entry taken off of the first presented 5 minute fair value gap. And in theory, had I taken the 5 minute bullish variation on QQQ, that would have resulted in a trading loss, meanwhile, I would have never had a valid entry signal on /MNQ because the 2 hour chart never shifted into a bullish trend. So I think in the future, it will be important to implement a rule, that if there is discrepancy between charts, then I can only take a trade if both charts entry systems are aligned to mitigate trading losses.
Being that the QQQ 50% retracement level failed, I wouldnt be surprised if the 50% retracement on /MNQ fails as well. But only time will tell if thats going to happen, and I dont yet have the data on if I should even be taking the 50% level for /MNQ because I guess I should only assume that there is a chance that the entry criteria could potentially still play out, providing a future entry for the long side.
So this leads into the thought process for the next trading session, which is that I am going to restrain from taking any downside trades, being that we are again testing the 50% retracement of the prior year, which is a technical discount until proven otherwise. But I plan on simply waiting for the entry criteria to play out on MNQ, unless CHATGPT tells me that I should focus on downside instead to the 61.8% level instead. And this may actually be a better approach being that the QQQ 50% failed, which should infact indicate some more short term downside.
But all in all, this is my first journaling session back from a long time away from the journal itself, and I have to make this a necessary daily practice If I want to take this career seriously, and finally obtain my first payout. Because I have all of the knowledge at this point on how to succeed, I simply just have to apply it. And I can even feel as Im typing this, that Im in a flow state of mind, everything is just pouring out of my head, almost as a mental dump, and it actually feels quite good. Almost like a therapy, because there is always so much on my head. And for my to just dump it out in my journal, and only extract the key takeaways, and most important discoveries and analysis seems to be the most beneficial.
It would be nice to also quiet 99% of the noise in my head and just focus on what actually matters.
But, I planned on doing a day by day journaling session for the past week , month, quarter ETC, but I actually just wound up dumping it all of this page instead. And I will possible snapshot a screenshot of all of the past setups so that I can label them categorically, but overall I think this pretty much sums up the first journaling session back from my massive break. And even though Im not currently taking any evaluations, I still think this is important because I will have all of the foundation and bricks layed for when I get this next ebay item sold or possibly even another chance with dad debit card to once again become funded.
The time is now. No more playing games. It is time to officially reap the rewards from years of hard work.
And I think the process of just mental dumping in the journal day to day, explaining the thought process and breakdown of each trading session, should be the daily routine in order to reach and maintain high level trading, cocnsistency, and profitability.
