I lost this trade even though I followed every rule I had. That bothered me more than the loss itself.
The setup was there. I waited for it patiently. I got the liquidity sweep. I got the BOS. I entered. Price moved toward my take profit and came within touching distance — then reversed and hit my stop loss.
My strategy is not a 100% win strategy. Losses happen even when every rule is followed. That is the cost of doing business. But in this trade I missed something specific, and I want to track whether accounting for it improves my results going forward.
The 1-Hour Chart
Price retraced into the FVG. Near the top of the FVG I could see the liquidity zone — as expected. I waited for the sweep. I waited for the BOS. I entered. Price moved in my direction and almost reached the take profit.
Then it reversed and hit my stop loss.
To understand what happened, we need to go down to the 15-minute chart.
The 15-Minute Chart — Where I Missed It
The old liquidity zone had been swept — that was my confirmation to enter. What I missed was that before I even entered the trade, price had already created new equal highs above the entry point, forming a fresh liquidity zone. I was so focused on confirming the original setup that I did not check whether new liquidity had formed in the meantime.
Markets do not care about the liquidity that existed when I first analysed the chart. They care about where liquidity exists right now. The old zone was swept — but a new one had already replaced it before my entry. I walked into a trade with unswept liquidity sitting directly above my take profit. Price went up to grab it and hit my stop loss on the way back down.
This is exactly why I keep a journal. Without screenshots from the trade, I would never have been able to identify this pattern clearly enough to even question it.
What I Am Going to Do About It
I want to be careful here. One loss is not enough evidence to rewrite a rule.
Every loss asks a question. Not every loss deserves a new rule. The challenge is figuring out which ones do.
What I will do is start tracking this specific variable over the next several trades — noting whether new liquidity formed while the trade was open and whether accounting for it would have changed the outcome. If the pattern holds across a meaningful sample, it becomes a rule. If it does not, it was just one trade.
I should also be honest about something. Even if I had noticed the new equal highs in this trade, I cannot say with certainty it would have become a winner. It is a variable I ignored — and I want to test whether consistently accounting for it improves my results over time. That is the only way to know.
Following rules does not guarantee 100% wins. It never will. The reason we follow rules is to minimise losses and maximise the probability of profit over a large enough sample. This loss was within the rules. The question this trade raised might eventually lead to a better rule — but only after the data tells me it should.
The strategy is always evolving. There is always room to improve.
Bye for now, take care.
0 Comments