이 거래 방식, 제대로 하고 있는 걸까요? 🤔

Short answer: three days isn’t enough data to tell you anything, and your instinct to be skeptical is exactly the right instinct. Hold onto that skepticism, it will save you a lot of money.

Here’s the structural problem with evaluating a strategy after 3 days. You don’t have enough trades to distinguish skill from variance. If your edge produces winners 55% of the time, it is completely normal to have a streak of 5, 10, even 15 winners in a row on pure luck alone. You’d need to run that same setup for months before the math starts separating “this actually works” from “I got lucky early.”

The way to test whether you’re learning or just riding variance is not to look at your P&L. Look at the quality of your decisions. Are you taking trades that strictly match your rules, or are you starting to bend the rules because the last few worked? Are you closing at your planned exit, or holding longer because you “feel” it? Are you sizing consistently, or starting to increase size because the account is green? Variance looks identical to skill on the way up. The place it reveals itself is in what you do when the first losing streak hits. That’s the real test, and you haven’t had it yet.

On the prop firm question, please don’t. Not yet. Three days of paper trading with a new strategy is nowhere near ready for real capital, let alone a prop firm’s challenge. Prop firms are designed to extract fees from traders who take the challenge before they’re ready, which is the vast majority of them. The daily loss limits, trailing drawdowns, and consistency rules are structured in a way that makes it very hard to pass even with a real edge, and nearly impossible without one. You want to trade real money for at least 3-6 months on your own capital, even if it’s small, before you consider a prop firm. The rules of prop firms are part of the skill, and that skill is separate from trading itself.

Keep the skepticism. It’s your best asset right now