Free weekly articles on what I'm watching, how I think about risk, and the reasoning behind my trades — public, and updated every week.
8 years public track record · 64,000+ followers on X · Updated weekly
A rundown of the levels I'm paying attention to right now and why — the general thinking, not the specific entry, stop, and size subscribers get in the private feed.
Read the full article →The risk-management framework behind every trade I take — the same one whether it's public or private.
Read post → Aug 25, 2026The reasoning behind the shift to a private feed — and what's actually changed for people following for free.
Read post → Aug 18, 2026A breakdown of the one setup that shows up more than any other in my trading — and how I confirm it before acting.
Read post → Aug 11, 2026Looking back on why I started posting publicly in 2018, and what changed enough to move most of it private.
Read post →Enjoying the free articles? Subscribers get the specific setup, entry, and stop loss on every trade — not just the weekly overview. Real-time, off the public timeline.
Subscribe on X — $20/moBilled via X. Cancel anytime.
Nothing dramatic this week — just a market that's still working through the same range it's been in for a few weeks now, so I'm mostly watching for how it resolves rather than forcing anything early.
The bigger timeframe structure is what I keep coming back to. Zoomed in, every day looks like a decision point; zoomed out, most of those "decisions" are just noise inside a much slower move. That's the lens I try to hold onto before I let a single candle talk me into anything.
Position size is doing more work than direction right now. When conviction is medium, size should be too — that's the simplest rule I have, and it's saved me more than any indicator ever has.
None of this is a recommendation to do anything with your own money — it's just the shape of how I'm thinking this week. The specific levels, entry, and invalidation point for what I'm actually trading went out to the private feed, not here.
People ask me about entries a lot more than they ask me about risk, which is backwards from how I actually trade. Risk gets decided first. The entry is just the detail that happens to trigger it.
Before I care what I'm buying, I decide what I'm willing to lose if I'm wrong — as a dollar amount, not a percentage that sounds fine until it isn't. That number stays fixed. Everything else, including position size, gets solved backwards from it.
The stop loss isn't a suggestion I move around when a trade starts going against me. If a setup needs a wider stop to "work," that's usually a sign the setup wasn't as clean as I wanted it to be, not a reason to give it more room.
This is the exact same framework whether the trade ever reaches the public timeline or not. What's changed isn't how I manage risk — it's just how much of the process I still post about in real time.
Back in 2018, posting every trade publicly was the whole point. I had no track record, so the only way to build one people could actually verify was to put everything out there — entries, stops, sizing, the works — and never quietly delete the ones that went wrong.
That hasn't changed. What changed is the size of the audience reading it in real time, and what real-time public information does to a setup the moment enough people can act on it at once. A private feed of a much smaller group behaves differently than a public post to tens of thousands of accounts.
So the split isn't "public got worse." It's that two different audiences need two different things: the public feed for transparency, track record, and general education, and a private feed for the setups that actually depend on staying private to still work as intended.
Free followers still get plenty — market structure, general commentary, the reasoning behind the trades that do go public. What they don't get anymore is the specific, real-time version of everything, and that's the deliberate trade-off behind all of this.
If you went back through years of my charts, one setup shows up more than any other — not because it's exotic, but because it's the clearest way I know to tell the difference between a market that's actually ready to move and one that's just drifting.
At its core it's a consolidation: price compresses into a tighter and tighter range after a clear directional move, volume dries up while that happens, and then something forces a decision — a breakout, or a failure back into the range. The pattern itself isn't the edge; how I react to it is.
Confirmation matters more to me than the pattern itself. I want to see the move happen with participation behind it, on a timeframe that actually matches how long I intend to hold the trade, not just a single candle poking outside a line on a chart.
This is a framework, not a guarantee — plenty of setups that look identical resolve in opposite directions. It's one tool in a larger process, shared here for how I think about markets, not as a signal to act on directly.
Eight years ago I started posting Bitcoin trades publicly mostly because I wanted a record I couldn't quietly rewrite later. No cherry-picking wins, no deleting the ones that didn't work — just an honest, ongoing log of a trader actually learning in public.
The biggest lesson wasn't about markets at all. It was that consistency compounds in ways a handful of good calls never will. Showing up with the same process week after week, through the obviously bad stretches too, is what actually built trust over time — not any single trade.
Transparency turned out to be the whole product long before I ever thought about a subscription. Not one tweet has ever been deleted, and that constraint made me a more careful trader, since every decision had to be one I was comfortable standing behind permanently.
That same instinct is exactly why the private feed exists now — not a rejection of the public track record, but an extension of it, for the half of my process that a fully public feed was never quite built to hold.
