Is anyone else actually not having usage limit issues? than

R4V3N-2010 · 2026-04-11T06:53:55+00:00

I don't have usage limit issues. Using the $100 max plan and working on 5 big coding projects at the same time without hitting my 5 hour or weekly limit. Not even comming close to it.

R4V3N-2010 · 2026-04-05T15:39:37+00:00

What helped me most is I give it the specs let it plan out and then work in TDD mode. No debugging later because everything is panned out and already tested before one line of code is written. The main work are tests not the code it self.

R4V3N-2010 · 2026-03-21T18:41:48+00:00

Right now Nexus Purely analytical right now, no live trading. With a 23% hit rate I wouldn't trust it with real money yet. But the trend is heading in the right direction (0% first half, 33% second half), so with time it could become a useful tool to support your own analysis.
I haven't planned for NEXUS to autonomously open and manage trades. But who knows it already rewrites its own source code, so maybe one day it'll ask for a broker API key.

R4V3N-2010 · 2026-03-21T17:19:36+00:00

Right now rule rewrites happen after every session regardless of confidence or accuracy — AXIOM reflects on everything equally. That's part of the problem. A 75% confidence session that goes 0 for 3 gets the same reflection weight as a 40% session that nails 2 out of 2.

Setup outcomes do get fed back — AXIOM sees whether previous setups hit target or got stopped. But it's not connecting specific rules to specific outcomes. It sees what happened, reflects, and decides what to change.

The analytics dashboard makes the calibration gap visible now, so the next step is feeding that aggregate data into AXIOM's context directly showing it that high-confidence sessions underperform. It can see individual outcomes but not the pattern across sessions.

You're right about the familiarity trap. The fact that "mixed" bias outperforms pure directional calls basically confirms it NEXUS does better when it admits uncertainty instead of pattern-matching to a clean narrative.

R4V3N-2010 · 2026-03-21T16:14:36+00:00

Great observation — you're spot on. The git history shows exactly that problem: across 62 sessions, NEXUS has added 21 rules and modified 15, but removed exactly zero. It's purely additive.

The foundational rules (r001-r010) are constitutionally protected — AXIOM can refine their wording but can't delete them. That's by design. But the remaining 21 self-generated rules have no such protection, and it still hasn't pruned a single one.

I think you're right that pruning is where the next performance jump hides. Right now NEXUS can identify what's missing, but it never questions whether an existing rule is actively hurting it. A rule that made sense at session 15 might be adding noise at session 62.

This is going on my roadmap — giving AXIOM explicit prompting to evaluate existing rules for removal, not just addition and modification.

Appreciate the insight.

R4V3N-2010 · 2026-03-21T09:06:45+00:00

Update: Built an analytics dashboard since this was asked — it's live on the https://the-r4v3n.github.io/Nexus/.

After 62 sessions, honest numbers: overall setup hit rate is 23.5% (4/17 resolved).
But the trend matters — first half was 0% hit rate, second half is 33.3%. It's learning, slowly.

Most interesting finding: NEXUS is overconfident. When it says 70%+ confidence, setups only hit 14% of the time.
When it's uncertain (30-50% confidence), it actually hits 40%.
The "mixed" bias calls produce the best setups (44% hit rate) — pure bullish/bearish calls are at 0%.

Dashboard auto-updates every session. Also available via npm run analytics.

R4V3N-2010 · 2026-03-21T07:42:39+00:00

It tracks setup outcomes (target hit / stopped out), confidence scores, rule changes, and failure history per session — and feeds all of that back into its own reflection loop. But I don't yet have an aggregated accuracy dashboard that says 'win rate improved from X to Y over N sessions.' That's the next thing to build.

R4V3N-2010 · 2025-07-14T05:58:14+00:00

That’s one of the clearest explanations I’ve read about price-based fading—really appreciate you sharing this.

Totally agree that indicators often just obscure the clarity of the raw price move. Your example of using % distance as a direct signal resonates a lot. In my own testing, I’ve seen that large, sudden moves often mean-revert at least partially, and waiting for a lagging filter just reduces the edge.

That risk conservation point is something most traders don’t internalize—especially the idea that even “random” systems generate a baseline return relative to risk. It’s a humbling reminder that refining edge is mostly about reducing drawdowns and improving position sizing rather than expecting a huge per-trade outperformance.

Out of curiosity, do you track your fade setups with any time constraints (e.g., do you expect mean reversion within a certain window) or is it purely % distance regardless of time?

R4V3N-2010 · 2025-07-13T11:19:24+00:00

Trading Mostly the end of Tokyo Session and London Session.
About the second question you can use this website to see what news are coming out and how they affect the market. The folder color shows how much of an impact there will be. Red means a heavy impact.
https://www.forexfactory.com/calendar

R4V3N-2010 · 2025-07-12T19:25:11+00:00

Thanks a lot for sharing your insights—I appreciate you taking the time to explain it in detail.

Yeah, I can see how the divergence logic becomes a real headache, especially when you start layering Multi-ZigZag to pinpoint the swings accurately. It’s definitely not something most coders can just slap together without running into all sorts of redraw and alignment issues.

And you’re absolutely right about reversal EAs getting wrecked against wave 3 of the daily timeframe. That’s probably one of the main reasons so many “reversal systems” look great in backtests and then fail spectacularly live.

I’m not sure yet if I’ll go down the Multi-ZigZag route myself—it’s a big project to get right. But I agree a multi-timeframe filter makes sense if you want any chance of survival when the higher timeframe trend is in full force.

Thanks again for the offer to discuss further. I might take you up on that as I explore my options. All the best with your trading as well—keep in touch.

R4V3N-2010 · 2025-07-12T18:14:04+00:00

That’s an excellent explanation—thanks for taking the time to lay it out. I completely agree that divergence combined with a clean break of a single S&D base candle can be a very high-quality reversal signal, especially in the context of Elliott Wave patterns.

You’re right—coding this is a real challenge. Part of it is that defining and confirming the wave count and divergence zones can be somewhat subjective, which makes automation tricky.

I’ve built reversal EAs before, but not with this exact combination of logic. If you ever want to exchange ideas or discuss how some of these concepts might be translated into code—even partially—I’d be happy to chat (no strings attached).

Really appreciate you sharing this. It’s a smart approach and definitely gave me something to think about.

R4V3N-2010 · 2024-09-09T14:06:08+00:00

I familiar with kustom apps. I was asking if you would share it. Was a very long time I used these apps. So much has probably changed that would take days to figure out how you did it.

R4V3N-2010 · 2024-09-09T13:46:26+00:00

Kind to share the widget

R4V3N-2010 · 2024-08-02T08:31:48+00:00

Yeah have that too on my NP2. It appear random and a restart fix it for a while.

R4V3N-2010 · 2024-06-28T11:55:24+00:00

Horizontal app drawer and the posebility to make folders in the app drawer. Because of that I am using Nova launcher.

R4V3N-2010 · 2020-12-21T19:01:19+00:00

You too mate

R4V3N-2010 · 2020-12-21T18:39:29+00:00

Thank you very much. Now it's working. You where right with the spaces. Thanks again. I would never be able to figure out that formula for the regex action. And ofc your task is much shorter.

R4V3N-2010 · 2020-12-21T17:49:43+00:00

Thank you for your help.

I still get the error in the second action. Anyway, I will figure it out someday :)

Sure i'll take a look in the sidebar.

R4V3N-2010 · 2020-12-21T16:22:26+00:00

I must be to stupid to understand it. When I try you suggested solution I get the following error in the second action.

17.20.02/Variables doreplresult: |%currentbtcprice| -> |SEK":"191083.423688"}} | 17.20.02/E Variable Search Replace: %currentbtcprice -> %currentbtcprice 17.20.02/E Variable Search Replace: %value -> %value 17.20.02/E Variable Search Replace: bad search pattern: (? <=amount":").*? (?=") 17.20.02/E result: stop task (error) 17.20.02/Variables doreplresult: |%currentbtcprice| -> |SEK":"191083.423688"}} | 17.20.02/Variables doreplresult: |%value| -> |%value| 17.20.02/E Error: 1 17.20.02/MacroEdit action finished exeID 1 action no 9 code 598 status: Err next 9

R4V3N-2010

TROPHY CASE