Independent provider directory
What a model is What makes one work Build & compare Questions See four tested models
How-to guide

How to build a simple trading model

Five steps to turn a rough idea into a specified, testable model — and one honest warning about the step most people skip.

Building a model is less about discovering a secret indicator and more about writing a rule clear enough to hand to a stranger. Work through these in order, and do not risk real money until the last one is in place. The schematic below is the kind of thing you are aiming at by the end of step two — a rule with nothing left to interpretation.

How a mean-reversion model places its entry, stop and targetSchematic of a mean-reversion setup. A price line falls below the middle of its own recent range until it sits an unusual distance under a typical level; the model enters long on that stretch, places a stop a measured distance further down at the point a continued fall would signal a genuine new trend, and sets the target back at the typical level where the snap-back is judged complete.typical level (the mean)ENTER: stretched lowSTOP: stretch becomes a new trendTARGET: back at the meanprice stretched far from the mean → the model's only inputtime →
Illustrative schematic, not a specific recommendation. The rule fixes the entry, stop and target in advance — the model acts on the stretch, not on a feeling about the bounce.

1. State the observation

Pick one repeatable situation you believe carries an edge — most often a price stretched a defined distance from its own recent range — and write it down precisely enough to be tested. If you cannot state it without the word “feels,” it is not yet a model. The aim of this step is a sentence two people would read the same way.

2. Turn it into a rule

Convert the observation into a specific trigger: the level or condition that opens the position, the level that closes it for a loss, and the level that takes profit. “Long around here” is not a rule; named levels are. In the schematic above, that is the entry on the stretched low, the stop a measured distance below it, and the target back at the typical level — three numbers, fixed before anything happens.

3. Fix the size and the exit before the entry

Decide how much of the account the model risks per decision, and set the stop and target at the same moment as the entry — never after. A model whose exit is improvised is no longer the model you tested. The position size is not a feeling; it falls out of the stop distance and your risk budget. Here is the arithmetic, done once:

Illustrative position sizing · not a specific recommendation
account 8,000  ·  risk per trade 0.75%60 at stake
entry 50.00  ·  stop 48.50 → stop distance 1.50 per unit
position size 60 ÷ 1.50 = 40 units (round down)
if stopped 40 × 1.50 = −60 = the 0.75% you budgeted, no surprises

Change nothing but the stop — say it widens to 47.00, a 3.00 distance — and the size halves to 20 units to keep the same 60 at risk. The account percentage sets the loss; the stop distance sets the size. That is the entire discipline.

4. Score it against its own history

Run the rule over a continuous past period and read the full record: the decision count, the win rate with losers included, and the worst drawdown. Be ruthless about overfitting — if the rule only works after you tune it to one stretch of data, you have modelled noise, not an edge. A clean way to guard against this is to set the rule on one slice of history and only ever judge it on a slice it has never seen.

5. Keep the forward record — the step almost everyone skips

Log every call before its outcome: entry, stop, target, and how strongly the rule rated it. A backtest can be flattered; a forward, committed record cannot. Without this step you will remember your winners and forget your losers, and you will never know whether the model actually works. This is the hard part, and it is the part that settles the question. The most rigorous version makes the record tamper-proof — committed somewhere a later edit would be visible — which is the standard the tested models here are held to:

How a model's call becomes a claim a stranger can re-checkFlow diagram in four stages. A model publishes a call with its entry, target, stop and conviction grade; those fields are turned into one SHA-256 fingerprint; the fingerprint is anchored to a Bitcoin block at the moment of publication; long afterward anyone can re-hash the published call and confirm it matches the on-chain receipt, proving the call was fixed before its outcome was known.PUBLICATION TIME → (the receipt is dated before the trade can resolve)1 COMMITentry / targetstop / grade+ signal time2 FINGERPRINTone SHA-256 ofthose fields,fixed length3 ANCHORwritten to aBitcoin blockat publication4 RE-CHECKanyone re-hashesand matches thepublic receiptA match proves every field was fixed before the outcome was known.
The same logic behind the recommended models: each call is frozen on a public ledger the moment it goes out, so its record turns into something a stranger can check line by line rather than merely be impressed by.

If keeping an honest, tamper-proof forward record is the step you know you will skip, that is the case for running models where someone else has already done it. the #1-ranked provider's four mean-reversion models anchor each call on a public ledger before the outcome is known, which is the record-keeping step made un-fudgeable. Before you trust any record — yours or theirs — learn to read one honestly.

Related