Friday 12 June 2026

First entry. A strong week — and I want to be honest about why that’s not the point.

What the EAs did this week

McQuack, running across crypto (BTCUSD, ETHUSD, LTCUSD, SOLUSD), is up about $650 over three days. That’s the result I actually want to talk about — steady, spread across several pairs, the kind of number that can repeat.

The bigger one: PassiveIncomeTrend, trading gold and silver, ran from $987 to $1,695 in a single day.

The honest note (read this part)

A jump like that on PassiveIncomeTrend is well above what’s normal or sustainable, and I’m flagging it directly rather than dressing it up as skill. A gain that size in a day means the position was carrying more risk than I’d want as a steady diet — and the hard truth is that the same conditions that produced an outsized green day can produce an outsized red one. I’m reviewing the lot sizing on this EA for exactly that reason.

So please don’t anchor on the $987 → $1,695 number. If you take one thing from my very first post, let it be this: the spectacular days are the ones to be suspicious of, not the ones to celebrate. The boring, repeatable weeks are the real story of whether a strategy works.

One thing worth knowing

When an automated strategy hands you a result far above its normal range, the correct response isn’t to increase the lot size to “ride it” — it’s to ask whether the risk is quietly too high. Outsized wins and account-blowing losses come from the same place: position sizes that are bigger than they should be. I’d rather post smaller, steadier numbers for years than one screenshot that impresses strangers right before it wipes the account.

Not financial advice. Trading carries real risk of loss — most retail traders lose money, and results like this week’s are unusual, not typical. These are my own real results and opinions. Never trade money you can’t afford to lose.