A close-to-close sequence is a bias label, not a trigger

Close-to-close sequences were catalogued as bias scores

The archive enumerated close-to-close sequences of two through five successive session closes on Treasury-bond futures. Each close was marked only as higher or lower than the close immediately before that day.

The base test entered on the last close of the sequence and exited on the next session close. That base test used no stop.

One named sequence was two lower closes followed by two higher closes, each compared with the immediately preceding close. The short was taken on that last, higher close.

The tabulated percent profitable column was treated as a directional-bias score. Larger bias readings were used only as a cue to keep developing the sequence as a rule rather than as a finished signal.

Holding from one close to the next close was described as weaker in bias and larger in risk than an open-to-close hold. The write-up took that comparison as evidence that the directional edge faded as the hold lengthened.

The next open could confirm the short, with a stop set first

After a selected close-to-close sequence, one opening-range variation waited for the next session, sold only if that open was higher, and exited on the same day's close. That is opening-range confirmation: the trade is taken only if the next open is on the bias side of the prior close sequence.

A more selective opening-range variation also required a wide-range last day on the final bar of the close-to-close sequence before selling a higher following open.

A stop-loss variation of that higher-open sale placed a seven-tick stop above the open. That fixed-tick stop set the loss distance before the position was held.

The default was a daily bias map

The catalog was framed as a daily bias map. The default was not to trade against the indicated side unless other information clearly overrode it. The sequences were offered as a base for further rule research.