What being wrong costs
Research tool · not investment advice. Full disclaimer →
New here? How to read Updated: measured 2026-08-27 over nifty500
Every number on this page names its source — start with “How to read”.
What being wrong costs
the size of the losses, not only the count of the winsSource: a committed measurement artefact.
Bottom lineAcross 4,586 resolved trades, the median was -1.00 R and 21.4% finished above 0 R. Positive means realised R > 0; zero belongs to the non-winning bucket. The top 1% carried 31.7% of positive R, so the average is sensitive to the tail.
A dated study, not a live number. Measured 2026-08-27 over the nifty500 universe — 500 symbols walked, 76,592 rows, 14,474 unresolved rows excluded rather than marked to the last close. It does not update on its own.
Honest boundaryThese are the outcomes of a rule set we have already tested and rejected · descriptive, not a signal.
The shape
Read every distribution band and count
Results are multiples of the amount risked (R). 4,586 resolved trades. 1 results below -5.00 R and 144 above 5.00 R are included in the end bands, not discarded.
| Result band | Trades | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Below -4.76 R, including 1 below -5.00 R | 1 | 0.0% |
| -4.76 to -4.51 R | 0 | 0.0% |
| -4.51 to -4.27 R | 0 | 0.0% |
| -4.27 to -4.02 R | 0 | 0.0% |
| -4.02 to -3.78 R | 0 | 0.0% |
| -3.78 to -3.54 R | 4 | 0.1% |
| -3.54 to -3.29 R | 1 | 0.0% |
| -3.29 to -3.05 R | 4 | 0.1% |
| -3.05 to -2.80 R | 1 | 0.0% |
| -2.80 to -2.56 R | 0 | 0.0% |
| -2.56 to -2.32 R | 4 | 0.1% |
| -2.32 to -2.07 R | 6 | 0.1% |
| -2.07 to -1.83 R | 15 | 0.3% |
| -1.83 to -1.59 R | 23 | 0.5% |
| -1.59 to -1.34 R | 38 | 0.8% |
| -1.34 to -1.10 R | 80 | 1.7% |
| -1.10 to -0.85 R | 3,423 | 74.6% |
| -0.85 to -0.61 R | 0 | 0.0% |
| -0.61 to -0.37 R | 0 | 0.0% |
| -0.37 to -0.12 R | 1 | 0.0% |
| -0.12 to 0.12 R | 16 | 0.3% |
| 0.12 to 0.37 R | 45 | 1.0% |
| 0.37 to 0.61 R | 79 | 1.7% |
| 0.61 to 0.85 R | 99 | 2.2% |
| 0.85 to 1.10 R | 95 | 2.1% |
| 1.10 to 1.34 R | 53 | 1.2% |
| 1.34 to 1.59 R | 68 | 1.5% |
| 1.59 to 1.83 R | 71 | 1.5% |
| 1.83 to 2.07 R | 52 | 1.1% |
| 2.07 to 2.32 R | 49 | 1.1% |
| 2.32 to 2.56 R | 30 | 0.7% |
| 2.56 to 2.80 R | 32 | 0.7% |
| 2.80 to 3.05 R | 23 | 0.5% |
| 3.05 to 3.29 R | 18 | 0.4% |
| 3.29 to 3.54 R | 17 | 0.4% |
| 3.54 to 3.78 R | 17 | 0.4% |
| 3.78 to 4.02 R | 12 | 0.3% |
| 4.02 to 4.27 R | 25 | 0.5% |
| 4.27 to 4.51 R | 13 | 0.3% |
| 4.51 to 4.76 R | 14 | 0.3% |
| 4.76 R or above, including 144 above 5.00 R | 157 | 3.4% |
In plain EnglishEach bar is a count of trades whose result fell in that band, measured in R — multiples of the money put at risk on that trade. A trade that lost exactly what it risked is −1 R. The wall at −1 R is trades stopped out as designed; the bar is tall because that is what usually happens. Mean and median are both marked because they disagree, and the distance between them is the skew.
Why the average hides it
| Quantity | Value | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Positive outcomes | 21.43% | 983 of 4,586 persisted results above 0 R. |
| Average positive trade | 3.1442 R | Average realised R among results above zero. |
| Average non-winning trade | -1.0294 R | 3,603 results at or below 0 R, including 0 zeros. Count of losses exceeding 1 R unavailable in this dated study. |
| Expectancy | -0.1348 R | The mean of all persisted resolved R values. |
In plain EnglishThe positive share times average positive R, plus the non-winning share times average non-winning R, gives the displayed expectancy. This arithmetic does not identify an exit cause or turn a rejected rule set into a signal.
What the rule change cost
| Quantity | Before the rule | After it (this run) |
|---|---|---|
| Resolved trades | 14,626 | 4586 |
| Expectancy (R) | -0.0797 | -0.1348 |
| Median (R) | -1.0000 | -1.0000 |
| Historical engine win flag (0–1) | 0.3631 | 0.2150 |
In plain EnglishThese are two different engines, not two attempts at one number. In August 2026 a rule was enforced that had been written down but never implemented: the fifth point of the pattern must actually reach the line drawn through points 1 and 3. That removed about 63% of the setups the older column counted. Read the last row: on the stricter, correct definition the rule set does worse, not better — enforcing the rule did not rescue it. The older column is kept because deleting it would quietly erase that.