This page shows the real-time performance of scalping signals available in the Elite plan.
⟳ Updated every 2h
Updated on Aug 5, 2026, 10:57 AM
Range Hunter 🔬 Dry run
Simulation — what a small account would have made by following the AI
Simulation based only on signals where the AI proposed an SL and TP and whose result is known. Starting budget 5000 $, fixed risk 100 $/trade (2%), no compounding, no fees or slippage. Indicative only — not a real track record. Expired signals are excluded. The simulation started on June 14, 2026 with an initial capital of $5,000.
+$100 (+2%)
Total simulated gain or loss
Final simulated balance (starting from 5000 $) : $5,100
—
Profit Factor
100%
% winning trades (3 trades included)
0%
Worst account drawdown
3 trades over 11 days 1 expired excluded
Simulation — what we avoided (or missed) by ignoring weak signals
Same simulation (5000 $, 100 $/trade) but on the discarded signals (score too low). We calculate what would have happened if they had been taken: when SL would have been hit → money saved by the filter; when TP would have been hit → gain missed because of the filter.
$600
✅ Losses avoided thanks to the filter (6 SL avoided)
$372
❌ Gains missed because of the filter (7 TP missed)
+$228
Net balance (positive = filter useful)
13
Ignored signals with known result
13 signals over 23 days
Comparison — does the AI outperform the indicator alone?
We replay the exact same simulation (5,000 $, 100 $/trade) twice on the same signals: once using the raw indicator SL/TP levels, once using the AI-suggested levels. The greener column shows which approach was more profitable.
Indicator
+$131 (+2.6%)
Win rate 33.3%
AI
+$100 (+2%)
Win rate 100%
3 signals compared
⚠️ Trades taken with warning (score 55–59)
These signals have an imperfect context (e.g. opposing trend, unvalidated filter) — tracked separately to determine whether taking them despite the warning is worth it, or whether they should be systematically ignored.
100%
% winning trades
1 TP reached 0 SL hit
1 Completed trades
0.00R
Max favorable — winning trades
how far price went in the right direction
—
Max adverse — losing trades
how far price went in the wrong direction
Indicator Stop Loss vs AI-suggested Stop Loss
The indicator always places its SL exactly at 1R (fixed distance). The AI suggests an SL positioned on market structure — often a bit further away, but better placed. This section compares both approaches on taken signals (≥55) to determine which better protects the trade without cutting winners.
2 / 4
Trades where the indicator SL was hit
50% of analyzed trades
1.02R
Average distance of AI SL
vs fixed 1R for the indicator — larger = wider SL
2/2
✅ AI SL would have avoided exit 2 times (100% success rate +)
Situation where the indicator SL triggered but the AI SL would not have — the trade then reached TP
0
⚠️ AI SL too tight — would have cut a winner
0 times the AI SL triggered while the indicator would have let the trade reach TP
4 signals analyzed (taken signals with AI SL available)
Results of taken signals
These figures concern only signals deemed strong enough to follow (score above the threshold). The win rate indicates the percentage of trades where the TP was reached — meaning the price hit the target without the stop-loss being triggered. The higher this figure, the more reliable the system.
TP reached 2
TP too early 1
Expired 1
4 resolved signals · 1 expired
100%
% winning trades (win rate)
2/0
Target reached (TP) / Stopped out (SL)
25%
Correct direction, outside window (1)
The monitoring window is 48h. If the SL or TP is reached after this limit, the trade is not counted. Here the price hadn't moved fast enough — it eventually reached the TP after the signal closed.
13.5h
Average trade duration
Zoom on performance by direction (buy vs sell), quality of targets set, and recent trend to see if the system is improving.
100%
Winners buying (Long) — 1/1
100%
Winners selling (Short) — 1/1
4.50R
Target risk/reward ratio (average R:R) — e.g. 2R = targeting 2× the risk
0.40R
Gain actually achieved on winning trades
0.40R
Max favorable on winners — how far price went in the right direction
—
Max adverse on losers — how far price went in the wrong direction
100%
Recent trend — last 10 trades (3 winners / 3)
100%
Recent trend — last 20 trades (3 winners / 3)
SL/TP calibration — taken trades only (4 signals)
Stop-Loss
Well placed 3 (75%)
Too tight 0 (0%)
Too wide 1 (25%)
Take-Profit
Well calibrated 0 (0%)
Too ambitious 1 (25%)
Too conservative 3 (75%)
% winners by signal strength (score)
A signal with a high score should produce more winning trades than a weak signal — this table verifies whether that's actually the case.
60-70 100% (1/1)
50-60 100% (1/1)
% winners by trigger type
Some trigger types work better than others — this table shows which ones, so you know which setups to focus on.
▲ rangehunter 100% ✅ 1 ❌ 0 /1
▼ rangehunter 100% ✅ 1 ❌ 0 /1
Ignored signals — was the filter right to skip them?
These signals had a score too low to trigger an alert. We verify here in hindsight what would have happened if they had been taken: losses avoided or gains missed?
6
✅ Correctly ignored — SL would have been hit (loss avoided)
7
❌ Missed gains — TP would have been reached
53.8%
Share of ignored signals that would have won
0
Undetermined result (neither TP nor SL hit)
Well ignored: 6
Missed gains: 7
13 resolved ignored signals
Global score — is the system making the right decisions?
Combines taken AND ignored signals to answer one question: in what proportion did the system get it right — whether by alerting on a winning signal, or ignoring one that would have lost?
Correct decisions overall (9 out of 16 evaluated)
Correct: 9
Incorrect: 7
Total signals received 17
Total ✅ TP ❌ SL
Conv.taken 1✅1❌0
Warn.taken 1✅1❌0
Ignoredignored 13✅6❌7
Analysis quality — is the system well calibrated?
These statistics cover all signals (taken and ignored) and the automatic post-trade reports generated after each resolution. They verify whether the score, SL and TP are correctly calibrated, and whether the AI correctly reads market direction.
Signal distribution by score (all signals)
0
<30
2
30-40
4
40-50
9
50-60
2
60-70
0
70+
62.5%
Predicted direction confirmed by market (10/16)
16
✅ Stop-losses well placed (per post-trade reviews)
0/1
SL too tight (cut too early) / too wide (loss too large)
8
✅ Targets (TP) well calibrated
1
TP too ambitious
The price couldn't reach the target
8
TP too conservative
The price went much further than the target
🕐 Impact des sessions & Kill Zones sur les signaux
Chaque ligne correspond à une fenêtre horaire UTC. Kill Zones = moments de liquidité maximale où les institutions entrent sur le marché. Le win rate, le nombre de signaux pris et ignorés, et le taux de bonnes décisions permettent de voir quelles sessions sont les plus favorables.
Session / KZ
Win%
Total
Conv.
Warn.
Ignored
Ignored decisions
✅ Loser avoided ❌ Winner missed
Good dec.%
Tokyo
—
5 (29%)
—
—
5
✅3(60%)❌2(40%)
60%
London KZ Kill Zone
100%(1/1)
1 (6%)
1
—
—
—
100%
London
—
1 (6%)
—
—
1
✅1(100%)❌0(0%)
100%
NY KZ Kill Zone
—
1 (6%)
—
—
1
✅0(0%)❌1(100%)
0%
NY/London
—
1 (6%)
—
—
1
✅0(0%)❌1(100%)
0%
NY
100%(2/2)
5 (29%)
—
1
2
✅0(0%)❌2(100%)
50%
NY Close KZ Kill Zone
—
1 (6%)
—
—
1
✅0(0%)❌1(100%)
0%
Hors session
—
2 (12%)
—
—
2
✅2(100%)❌0(0%)
100%
KZ = Kill Zone (max liquidity) · Win% = taken resolved signals · Good dec.% = taken winner + ignored loser avoided
Balanced Edge 🔬 Dry run
le juste milieu entre ambition et prudence
Simulation — what a small account would have made by following the AI
Simulation based only on signals where the AI proposed an SL and TP and whose result is known. Starting budget 5000 $, fixed risk 100 $/trade (2%), no compounding, no fees or slippage. Indicative only — not a real track record. Expired signals are excluded. The simulation started on June 14, 2026 with an initial capital of $5,000.
+$770 (+15.4%)
Total simulated gain or loss
Final simulated balance (starting from 5000 $) : $5,770
1.43
Profit Factor
67.3%
% winning trades (55 trades included)
17.9%
Worst account drawdown
55 trades over 49 days
Simulation — what we avoided (or missed) by ignoring weak signals
Same simulation (5000 $, 100 $/trade) but on the discarded signals (score too low). We calculate what would have happened if they had been taken: when SL would have been hit → money saved by the filter; when TP would have been hit → gain missed because of the filter.
$4,300
✅ Losses avoided thanks to the filter (43 SL avoided)
$4,913
❌ Gains missed because of the filter (65 TP missed)
−$613
Net balance (positive = filter useful)
108
Ignored signals with known result
108 signals over 51 days 2 expired excluded
Comparison — does the AI outperform the indicator alone?
We replay the exact same simulation (5,000 $, 100 $/trade) twice on the same signals: once using the raw indicator SL/TP levels, once using the AI-suggested levels. The greener column shows which approach was more profitable.
Indicator
+$300 (+6%)
Win rate 35.4%
AI
+$429 (+8.6%)
Win rate 62.5%
48 signals compared
⚠️ Trades taken with warning (score 55–59)
These signals have an imperfect context (e.g. opposing trend, unvalidated filter) — tracked separately to determine whether taking them despite the warning is worth it, or whether they should be systematically ignored.
76.9%
% winning trades
10 TP reached 3 SL hit
13 Completed trades
1.20R
Max favorable — winning trades
how far price went in the right direction
1.10R
Max adverse — losing trades
how far price went in the wrong direction
Indicator Stop Loss vs AI-suggested Stop Loss
The indicator always places its SL exactly at 1R (fixed distance). The AI suggests an SL positioned on market structure — often a bit further away, but better placed. This section compares both approaches on taken signals (≥55) to determine which better protects the trade without cutting winners.
31 / 53
Trades where the indicator SL was hit
58.5% of analyzed trades
1.02R
Average distance of AI SL
vs fixed 1R for the indicator — larger = wider SL
13/31
✅ AI SL would have avoided exit 13 times (41.9% success rate +)
Situation where the indicator SL triggered but the AI SL would not have — the trade then reached TP
0
⚠️ AI SL too tight — would have cut a winner
0 times the AI SL triggered while the indicator would have let the trade reach TP
53 signals analyzed (taken signals with AI SL available)
Results of taken signals
These figures concern only signals deemed strong enough to follow (score above the threshold). The win rate indicates the percentage of trades where the TP was reached — meaning the price hit the target without the stop-loss being triggered. The higher this figure, the more reliable the system.
TP reached 24
SL hit 18
TP too early 14
56 resolved signals · 0 expired
67.9%
% winning trades (win rate)
24/18
Target reached (TP) / Stopped out (SL)
25%
Correct direction, outside window (14)
The monitoring window is 48h. If the SL or TP is reached after this limit, the trade is not counted. Here the price hadn't moved fast enough — it eventually reached the TP after the signal closed.
5h
Average trade duration
Zoom on performance by direction (buy vs sell), quality of targets set, and recent trend to see if the system is improving.
58.6%
Winners buying (Long) — 9/21
77.8%
Winners selling (Short) — 15/21
2.00R
Target risk/reward ratio (average R:R) — e.g. 2R = targeting 2× the risk
1.20R
Gain actually achieved on winning trades
1.20R
Max favorable on winners — how far price went in the right direction
1.20R
Max adverse on losers — how far price went in the wrong direction
90%
Recent trend — last 10 trades (9 winners / 10)
65%
Recent trend — last 20 trades (13 winners / 20)
SL/TP calibration — taken trades only (52 signals)
Stop-Loss
Well placed 32 (62%)
Too tight 6 (12%)
Too wide 14 (27%)
Take-Profit
Well calibrated 15 (29%)
Too ambitious 10 (20%)
Too conservative 26 (51%)
% winners by signal strength (score)
A signal with a high score should produce more winning trades than a weak signal — this table verifies whether that's actually the case.
70+ 64.7% (6/12)
60-70 68% (13/21)
50-60 71.4% (5/9)
% winners by trigger type
Some trigger types work better than others — this table shows which ones, so you know which setups to focus on.
▲ cross50 57.1% ✅ 2 ❌ 3 /5
▲ cross50_ct 75% ✅ 1 ❌ 1 /2
▼ cross50_ct 60% ✅ 1 ❌ 2 /3
▲ rebound20 66.7% ✅ 6 ❌ 4 /10
▼ rebound20 82.4% ✅ 11 ❌ 3 /14
▲ rebound50 33.3% ✅ 0 ❌ 4 /4
▼ rebound50 80% ✅ 3 ❌ 1 /4
Ignored signals — was the filter right to skip them?
These signals had a score too low to trigger an alert. We verify here in hindsight what would have happened if they had been taken: losses avoided or gains missed?
45
✅ Correctly ignored — SL would have been hit (loss avoided)
66
❌ Missed gains — TP would have been reached
58.4%
Share of ignored signals that would have won
2
Undetermined result (neither TP nor SL hit)
Well ignored: 45
Missed gains: 66
Expired: 2
113 resolved ignored signals
Global score — is the system making the right decisions?
Combines taken AND ignored signals to answer one question: in what proportion did the system get it right — whether by alerting on a winning signal, or ignoring one that would have lost?
Correct decisions overall (83 out of 167 evaluated)
Correct: 83
Incorrect: 84
Total signals received 172
Total ✅ TP ❌ SL
Conv.taken 42✅28❌14
Warn.taken 13✅10❌3
Ignoredignored 116✅45❌66
3 pending
Analysis quality — is the system well calibrated?
These statistics cover all signals (taken and ignored) and the automatic post-trade reports generated after each resolution. They verify whether the score, SL and TP are correctly calibrated, and whether the AI correctly reads market direction.
Signal distribution by score (all signals)
10
<30
21
30-40
35
40-50
42
50-60
41
60-70
23
70+
63.4%
Predicted direction confirmed by market (102/161)
115
✅ Stop-losses well placed (per post-trade reviews)
15/30
SL too tight (cut too early) / too wide (loss too large)
52
✅ Targets (TP) well calibrated
30
TP too ambitious
The price couldn't reach the target
74
TP too conservative
The price went much further than the target
🕐 Impact des sessions & Kill Zones sur les signaux
Chaque ligne correspond à une fenêtre horaire UTC. Kill Zones = moments de liquidité maximale où les institutions entrent sur le marché. Le win rate, le nombre de signaux pris et ignorés, et le taux de bonnes décisions permettent de voir quelles sessions sont les plus favorables.
Session / KZ
Win%
Total
Conv.
Warn.
Ignored
Ignored decisions
✅ Loser avoided ❌ Winner missed
Good dec.%
Tokyo
78%(14/18)
58 (34%)
17
1
40
✅15(38%)❌23(57%)
52%
London KZ Kill Zone
100%(2/2)
10 (6%)
1
1
8
✅4(50%)❌4(50%)
60%
London
80%(4/5)
16 (9%)
3
2
11
✅5(45%)❌5(45%)
60%
NY KZ Kill Zone
100%(6/6)
16 (9%)
3
3
10
✅3(30%)❌6(60%)
60%
NY/London
57%(8/14)
22 (13%)
10
3
8
✅2(25%)❌5(63%)
48%
NY
14%(1/7)
34 (20%)
5
2
27
✅9(33%)❌18(67%)
29%
NY Close KZ Kill Zone
0%(0/1)
5 (3%)
1
—
4
✅4(100%)❌0(0%)
80%
Hors session
100%(3/3)
11 (6%)
2
1
8
✅3(38%)❌5(63%)
55%
KZ = Kill Zone (max liquidity) · Win% = taken resolved signals · Good dec.% = taken winner + ignored loser avoided