Skip to main content
Track Fixed contract sizing
14 / 21
Library

2013issue C1236-38

Weekday, session, and market expectancy for contract size

The archive workflow wrote a countable daily and weekly net-profit target first. Average trade profit by weekday, session, and market then raised or cut a fixed-lot baseline before real-money size was aligned.

  • Write a countable daily and weekly net-profit target before any room or contract-count decision.
  • Compute average trade profit separately by weekday, session, and market, then weight a fixed-lot baseline toward stronger buckets and cut it on weaker ones.
  • Authenticate complete entries, targets, and stops, then use simulated live replications and a rolling window before aligning real-money size.
  • Scale lot count from rolling average trade profit so uneven results sit in size, with stop distance and exposure inside the decision.
Entries in this reading3 entries

Set the target before the room or the size

A personal success definition was written first as a countable daily and weekly net-profit target. Room choice and contract count came only after that target existed.

Keep only rooms that can be authenticated

Of 422 rooms inspected, 262 had no track record at all. Later cuts left 16 rooms whose real-time trades showed complete entries, targets, and stops that could be authenticated and replicated.

Measure average trade profit by weekday, session, and market

Average trade profit is the mean result per contract inside a defined bucket such as one weekday, one session, or one futures market.

Average trade profit computed separately for each weekday showed large day-to-day gaps. Contract size was then weighted toward stronger days and reduced on weaker ones.

In the same market, morning and afternoon average trade profit could differ enough to justify shrinking or skipping one session while leaving the other sized.

When one room traded more than one market, average trade profit differed by product, so a larger fixed contract count was reserved for the stronger series.

Use expected value to scale a fixed-lot baseline

Expected-value sizing treats rolling average trade profit as the input that scales a fixed-contract baseline, rather than giving every signal the same lot count. Expected value uses average profit per trade, bucketed by day, session, and market, as the expectancy input that decides whether size stays small or expands.

Fixed contract sizing keeps a one-lot or other fixed-lot baseline and changes the contract count only after expectancy, stop distance, and account capacity are known.

Volatility position sizing scales lot count after measuring how uneven results are across weekdays, sessions, and markets, so exposure is bounded before the order is placed.

Align real-money size only after a rolling window

One hundred to two hundred simulated live replications, plus a rolling average-trade-profit window, were used before real-money size was aligned to contemporary expectancy.

A rolling window drops the oldest observations as new trades arrive so the expectancy used for size stays current.

Put stop distance and exposure inside the size decision

Listed common failures include having no plan before entry, inadequate capital or money management, and unused protective stops, which place stop distance and exposure inside the size decision.

Average trade profit by room and contract

Average trade profit is not interchangeable across products in the same room, so a fixed lot treats a weak contract like a strong one. Crude in room A is $11.50 per trade while the euro in that room is $78.22; gold and silver in the other two rooms sit near $80–$129 against emini S&P figures near $17. These dollar amounts are the author’s stated ATP examples, used to raise or cut contract count before real-money size is aligned.
Average trade profit is not interchangeable across products in the same room, so a fixed lot treats a weak contract like a strong one. Crude in room A is $11.50 per trade while the euro in that room is $78.22; gold and silver in the other two rooms sit near $80–$129 against emini S&P figures near $17. These dollar amounts are the author’s stated ATP examples, used to raise or cut contract count before real-money size is aligned.

Each pair is a different shortlisted room; the article does not give sample size or dates for these ATP figures.

Educational research material, not investment advice. Historical source context does not establish present-day performance.
14 of 21 in the Fixed contract sizing track
201438-43 pp.Next on Fixed contract sizingBounded leverage before you size a tradeLeverage control leaves buying power unused so a single adverse move cannot empty the account.
All readings on this track · 21 readings
  1. 1987Volatility-layered mechanical system with fixed contracts
  2. 1994Starting capital from worst-case portfolio walk-forwards
  3. 1994Bound small-account risk before adding leverage
  4. 1996Variable position size after entry
  5. 1996Equity path filters for contract size and drawdown
  6. 1997Stop distance, equity caps, and trading halts
  7. 1999Size-matched buy-and-hold evaluation for stock systems
  8. 2002Size from stop distance to keep dollar risk even
  9. 2003Share size from daily profit equilibrium
  10. 2004Half-size energy futures as a pre-trade leverage filter
  11. 2007Equalizing contract risk in trend following
  12. 2007Expected-equity sizing and geometric drag
  13. 2007Predefine the loss before fixed contract sizing
  14. 2013Weekday, session, and market expectancy for contract size
  15. 2014Bounded leverage before you size a trade
  16. 2015Equal-dollar futures size and open-interest liquidity
  17. 2015Atomize trading decisions: discipline over complexity
  18. 2017Tiny bets, ruin risk, and mechanical scale
  19. 2018Near-strike weekly puts and unfunded assignment risk
  20. 2019Paper trading is unfinished without fill and size rules
  21. 2019Constructing futures leverage from margin and fixed size
All 29 readings tagged Fixed contract sizing
Also on Fixed contract sizing5 readings