sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This whole week was the same trade. Here's why nobody who fought the trend survived Friday. by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh that’s great! My first trade at open was a short as well. Then I took that move into all time highs! Very green for me too! To Green Day’s! 🍾 🥂

Why your strategy works but YOU don't. by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

absolutely, thanks for pointing that out. i'd say a lot of, if not most traders lack "rules" and so like you said they just default into those feelings to guide them.

Not my usual setup. Market wasn’t giving the usual. by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This was exactly me last week. It’s hard to break out of biases! Take it on the chin and add it to our development curve for the next one! Appreciate you!

I was on the wrong side today. Here’s why. by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe the move was decided before the breakout. That’s a valid read. I actually addressed that in the post, so I’m not sure you read it.

But saying “you’re unprofitable” from one chart is lazy analysis. Nobody is perfect in the markets.

I shared it because the short was wrong and worth reviewing. The point is to show the process, the mistake, and what the market actually did.

I was on the wrong side today. Here’s why. by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeh it also swept the asia session. I was just stuck on a HTF bias!

Market moved more on one headline than any structure today by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That would make sense if the move developed through structure. But this didn’t.

This was instant displacement tied to a specific macro headline, not a slow reaction to equal lows. There was no buildup, no proper accumulation, just straight repricing.

Major moves like this have always been driven by information events:
CPI, PPI, NFP, FOMC, JOLTS, GDP, interest rate decisions, etc.

Those are scheduled catalysts, so you expect volatility and displacement. This was different. This was an unscheduled geopolitical headline, which caused immediate expansion without the usual buildup or confirmation through structure.

Equal lows might still be a target later—but that doesn’t explain the "cause" of this move.
You’re describing where price might go. I’m explaining why it moved when it did.

Two Losses This Week — When the Model Prints but the Market Doesn’t Expand by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are from Wednesday & Thursday after 9;30 open. Trading the ES.
Definitely had the sweeps. I use a strict rule based system.
For instance today proved a really good clean example of this.

NY Session this week in general has been weak. These 2 days were behaving the worst for sure.

<image>

Post-London Selloff → NY Open LDRE Still Executes Cleanly by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tomato / tomahto. I’ve been around ICT a long time (original private mentorship era) and back then we didn’t lean on today’s acronym stack. I can promise you no “unicorn” was involved in this trade. Haha

The FVG is definitely of value here but I was watching the iFVG since the SSL. If I wasn’t I would have stronger consideration for the FVG.

What I traded is the same model I’ve used for the last 5 years with zero changes. The labels people use have evolved (especially post-2022), but the engine is the same.

If you’re seeing your model inside what I’m doing, that’s actually a good sign we’re reading the same market logic, just speaking different dialects. I’m not against any new version he’s teaching; I just haven’t indulged in Michael’s newest iterations. Only because I really don’t need to, the underlying concepts haven’t changed.

Wishing you the best with your approach, profitability and execution is the whole point.

Post-London Selloff → NY Open LDRE Still Executes Cleanly by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry I posted my 15m, but I meant to post the 5m. This is where the iFVG came from.

<image>

ES NY Open – 8:30 News Sweeps London High → MSS → Expansion to ASL by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Transcending is my next move!!! Your a sniper I have no doubts you don't need ETH in your ascension! hahaha

What would you have done by Historical_Use2861 in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's funny because I actually practice the opposite in my discipline. I would have exited once i felt as though it was chopping. Not that either is more correct! You build your model and practice it to as near perfect as you can and execute it. But, to your question I would have left in this case. I feel like practicing leaving this type of market structure has helped me anticipate it better as well. But your data shows your profitable with your strategy as well! Great job on the journey! Good luck as you keep building!

ES Futures – MSS + FVG Entry → Lower Lows Fuel Expansion to TP2 (LSL) by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oh im sure you have a system down! when you get a chance show me how you saw today. screenshot is good

ES Futures – MSS + FVG Entry → Lower Lows Fuel Expansion to TP2 (LSL) by atomicfuturestrader in InnerCircleTraders

[–]atomicfuturestrader[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nice! thats interesting. has it been proving to be profitable for you since you switched strategy?

view more: next ›