More screenshots

    Works with the AI tools you already use

    Claude CodeClaude CodeCursorCursorCodex CLICodex CLIGitHub CopilotGitHub CopilotGemini CLIGemini CLI+20 more

    AI Trading Journal Edge & Mistake Analyzer

    1

    Its purpose is not to report superficial statistics such as: Win Rate = 58% and stop there.

    $9.99

    Secure checkout via Stripe

    30-day refund guarantee

    Converts to your local currency at checkout

    0 installsSecurity scanned
    AI Trading Journal Edge & Mistake Analyzer

    AI Trading Journal Edge & Mistake Analyzer

    Example session with this skill installed

    TRADING JOURNAL

    File
    Atlas_Trading_Journal_2026.xlsx

    Account
    Fictional $50,000 Futures Evaluation

    Period
    2026-01-02 through 2026-06-30

    Timezone
    America/New_York

    Trades
    327

    Instruments

    NQ
    MNQ
    ES
    MGC

    STRATEGY

    Name
    Atlas Intraday v4

    Primary Setups

    Trend Pullback
    Breakout Retest
    VWAP Reversion
    Failed Breakout

    Setup Grades

    A
    B
    C

    DAILY RULES

    Maximum Trades per Day
    4

    Daily Loss Stop
    -2.0R

    Cooldown After 2 Consecutive Losses:
    15 minutes

    Allowed Trading Window
    09:30–14:30 New York

    C-Grade Setups
    Not permitted in live trading

    ENTRY RULE

    Trend Pullback requires

    Trend aligned.
    Pullback complete.
    Confirmation candle closed.
    Momentum condition valid.

    A trade taken before confirmation-candle close is defined as:

    Premature Entry

    EXIT RULE

    Do not manually exit a valid winner before:

    Target
    Stop
    Explicit Invalidation

    unless risk policy requires otherwise.

    JOURNAL FIELDS

    trade_id
    date
    entry_time
    exit_time
    instrument
    direction
    setup
    setup_grade
    session
    entry_price
    exit_price
    stop_price
    target_price
    initial_risk
    net_pnl
    r_multiple
    mae_r
    mfe_r
    confirmation_complete
    rule_compliant
    rule_violations
    confluence_tags
    emotion_before
    exit_reason
    minutes_since_previous_trade
    trades_today_before
    loss_streak_before
    win_streak_before
    notes

    SESSION DEFINITIONS

    New York Open
    09:30–10:00

    New York AM
    10:00–11:30

    Midday
    11:30–13:00

    New York PM
    13:00–14:30

    REQUEST

    Analyze the entire journal.

    I specifically want

    Most Profitable Setups
    Weakest Setups
    Best and Worst Sessions
    Long vs Short
    Instrument Performance
    Premature Entries
    Premature Exits
    Overtrading
    Possible Revenge / Loss-Response Patterns
    Rule Violations
    Performance After Winning Streaks
    Performance After Losing Streaks
    Confluence Combinations
    Profit Giveback
    Trade Number in Day
    Performance After 2 Consecutive Losses

    Do not stop at headline metrics.

    I want specific conditional findings.

    For example

    "What percentage of New York AM losses came from premature entries?"

    Also calculate

    Count-Based Loss Attribution
    Dollar / R-Based Loss Attribution

    Build

    Edge Map
    Mistake Map
    Rule Compliance Comparison
    Streak Table
    Confluence Table
    Performance Attribution
    Top Action Priorities
    Retest Plan

    Do not invent emotional or behavioral labels that are not supported by the journal.

    • Read your context and instructions
    • Compiled the ai trading journal
    • Generated the document

    === AI TRADING JOURNAL EDGE & MISTAKE ANALYSIS ===

    Period
    2026-01-02 through 2026-06-30

    Account
    Fictional $50,000 Futures Evaluation

    Strategy
    Atlas Intraday v4

    Trades Reviewed
    327

    Data Quality
    HIGH

    Key Strengths

    Net P&L is complete.
    R-multiple is available.
    Confirmation state is available.
    Rule compliance is available.
    MAE and MFE are available.
    Streak state is available.
    Confluence tags are available.

    Primary Limitation

    Emotion tags are incomplete and therefore revenge-trading conclusions are treated cautiously.

    === EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ===

    Strongest Historical Edge

    A-Grade Trend Pullback
    +
    Higher-Timeframe Alignment
    +
    New York AM

    Trades
    64

    Expectancy
    +0.27R

    Profit Factor
    1.81

    Confidence
    HIGH

    Largest Performance Leak

    Premature Entry

    Premature entries represented

    21.4% of all trades

    but:

    49.8% of all gross loss R.

    Most Important Conditional Finding

    73.3% of New York AM losing trades were entered before confirmation.

    Those trades generated

    61.2% of New York AM gross loss R.

    Most Important Behavioral Pattern

    After two consecutive losses, rule-violation frequency rose from:

    12.1%

    to:

    38.7%

    and next-trade expectancy fell from:

    +0.08R baseline

    to:

    -0.21R.

    Priority Action

    Strengthen the confirmation gate and test a mandatory enforcement mechanism after two consecutive losses.

    === BASELINE PERFORMANCE ===

    Trades
    327

    Wins
    176

    Losses
    145

    Breakeven
    6

    Win Rate
    53.8%

    Net Result
    +21.6R

    Average Winner
    +0.83R

    Average Loser
    -0.68R

    Expectancy
    +0.066R per trade

    Profit Factor
    1.29

    Maximum Drawdown
    -9.4R

    Maximum Consecutive Losses
    5

    === PROCESS QUALITY MATRIX ===

    GOOD PROCESS / GOOD OUTCOME

    Trades
    151

    Net
    +63.7R

    GOOD PROCESS / BAD OUTCOME

    Trades
    91

    Net
    -56.1R

    BAD PROCESS / GOOD OUTCOME

    Trades
    25

    Net
    +13.2R

    BAD PROCESS / BAD OUTCOME

    Trades
    60

    Net
    -39.2R

    Interpretation

    A significant share of profitable trades came from poor process.

    Those winners should not be interpreted as evidence that rule violations are beneficial.

    === RULE COMPLIANCE ===

    Rule-Compliant Trades

    242

    Expectancy
    +0.18R

    Profit Factor
    1.53

    Net
    +43.5R

    Rule-Violating Trades

    85

    Expectancy
    -0.26R

    Profit Factor
    0.71

    Net
    -21.9R

    Historical Difference

    +65.4R between the aggregate compliant and violating trade groups.

    This does not represent a causal counterfactual.

    It demonstrates that historically the strategy performed materially better when the defined process was followed.

    === SETUP ANALYSIS ===

    1. A-GRADE TREND PULLBACK

    Trades
    91

    Expectancy
    +0.22R

    Profit Factor
    1.67

    Net
    +20.0R

    Classification

    VERIFIED HISTORICAL EDGE

    1. BREAKOUT RETEST

    Trades
    78

    Expectancy
    +0.14R

    Profit Factor
    1.39

    Net
    +10.9R

    Classification

    CANDIDATE / MODERATE HISTORICAL EDGE

    1. VWAP REVERSION

    Trades
    83

    Expectancy
    +0.02R

    Profit Factor
    1.06

    Net
    +1.7R

    Classification

    FRAGILE EDGE

    1. FAILED BREAKOUT

    Trades
    42

    Expectancy
    -0.12R

    Profit Factor
    0.78

    Net
    -5.0R

    Classification

    NO EDGE DETECTED IN CURRENT SAMPLE

    1. C-GRADE TRADES

    Trades
    33

    These trades were not permitted under the supplied live-trading rules.

    Expectancy
    -0.20R

    Net
    -6.6R

    Rule Status
    PROCESS VIOLATION

    === EDGE MAP ===

    EDGE

    A-Grade Trend Pullback + HTF Alignment / NY AM

    Trades
    64

    Expectancy
    +0.27R

    PF
    1.81

    Confidence
    HIGH

    EDGE

    Breakout Retest / New York Open

    Trades
    39

    Expectancy
    +0.19R

    PF
    1.52

    Confidence
    MEDIUM-HIGH

    EDGE

    NQ Long / Trend Pullback

    Trades
    52

    Expectancy
    +0.24R

    Confidence
    HIGH

    === SESSION ANALYSIS ===

    NEW YORK OPEN

    Trades
    79

    Expectancy
    +0.12R

    Net
    +9.5R

    NEW YORK AM

    Trades
    118

    Expectancy
    +0.15R

    Net
    +17.7R

    Best Session
    NEW YORK AM

    MIDDAY

    Trades
    61

    Expectancy
    -0.04R

    Net
    -2.4R

    NEW YORK PM

    Trades
    69

    Expectancy
    -0.05R

    Net
    -3.2R

    Worst Session
    NEW YORK PM

    === WHY NEW YORK AM IS STRONG ===

    New York AM is not profitable simply because of the session.

    Its strongest performance comes from

    Trend Pullback
    Breakout Retest
    Higher-Timeframe Alignment

    Rule-compliant NY AM trades

    Expectancy
    +0.25R

    Rule-violating NY AM trades

    Expectancy
    -0.31R

    Interpretation

    The underlying session contains historical edge, but poor execution destroys a substantial portion of it.

    === PREMATURE ENTRY ANALYSIS ===

    Premature Entries
    70

    Percentage of All Trades
    21.4%

    Expectancy
    -0.24R

    Net
    -16.8R

    Confirmed Entries
    257

    Expectancy
    +0.15R

    Net
    +38.4R

    Loss Count Attribution

    Premature entries represented

    55.2% of all losing trades.

    Gross Loss R Attribution

    Premature entries represented

    49.8% of total gross loss R.

    === NEW YORK AM PREMATURE ENTRY FINDING ===

    New York AM Losing Trades
    30

    Premature-Entry Losses
    22

    Count-Based Loss Attribution

    22 / 30

    73.3%

    New York AM Gross Loss
    -21.4R

    Premature-Entry Gross Loss
    -13.1R

    R-Based Loss Attribution

    13.1 / 21.4

    61.2%

    Finding

    73.3% of New York AM losing trades were entered before confirmation, accounting for 61.2% of gross loss R in the session.

    Confidence
    HIGH

    Interpretation

    The session itself is not the primary problem.

    The main historical leak inside New York AM is entry timing.

    === MAE COMPARISON ===

    Confirmed Entries

    Average MAE
    0.48R

    Premature Entries

    Average MAE
    0.81R

    Difference

    Premature entries experienced approximately 69% more adverse excursion before exit.

    This supports the interpretation that early execution is materially degrading trade location.

    === PREMATURE EXIT ANALYSIS ===

    Tagged Premature Exits
    37

    Actual Realized Result
    +4.8R

    Rule-Based Historical Counterfactual
    +9.7R

    Estimated Historical Difference
    +4.9R

    Classification

    COUNTERFACTUAL ESTIMATE

    Most Premature Exits Occurred

    After One Prior Loss
    During New York AM Winners
    When MFE Exceeded +1R

    Interpretation

    Exit anxiety is not inferred.

    The supplied data shows early manual exits under these conditions, but emotional cause is not established.

    === LONG VS SHORT ===

    LONG

    Trades
    181

    Expectancy
    +0.10R

    PF
    1.41

    SHORT

    Trades
    146

    Expectancy
    +0.02R

    PF
    1.08

    Initial Interpretation

    Longs appear materially stronger.

    Confounding Check

    72% of long trades occurred in:

    NQ and ES

    while:

    41% of shorts occurred in MGC and lower-performing Failed Breakout setups.

    Adjusted Interpretation

    Direction contributes to the difference, but instrument and setup mix materially confound the raw long-vs-short comparison.

    === INSTRUMENT PERFORMANCE ===

    NQ

    Trades
    139

    Expectancy
    +0.16R

    PF
    1.48

    Classification
    STRONGEST

    MNQ

    Trades
    81

    Expectancy
    +0.08R

    PF
    1.24

    Classification
    POSITIVE

    ES

    Trades
    63

    Expectancy
    +0.05R

    PF
    1.16

    Classification
    POSITIVE BUT MODEST

    MGC

    Trades
    44

    Expectancy
    -0.09R

    PF
    0.83

    Classification
    WEAK

    === TRADE NUMBER IN DAY ===

    Trade #1

    Expectancy
    +0.15R

    Trade #2

    Expectancy
    +0.13R

    Trade #3

    Expectancy
    +0.03R

    Trade #4+

    Expectancy
    -0.16R

    Rule-Violation Rate on Trade #4+:

    47.9%

    Finding

    Later trades show a substantial deterioration in both expectancy and compliance.

    This is stronger evidence of historical overtrading than raw trade frequency alone.

    === OVERTRADING ===

    Defined by supplied rules as

    More than 4 trades per day
    or
    trading after daily stop
    or
    re-entry without a new valid setup.

    Overtrading Trades
    39

    Expectancy
    -0.28R

    Net
    -10.9R

    Percentage of Total Trades
    11.9%

    Percentage of Gross Loss
    27.6%

    Confidence
    HIGH

    === PERFORMANCE AFTER LOSSES ===

    After 1 Loss:

    Trades
    99

    Expectancy
    +0.03R

    Violation Rate
    18.2%

    After 2 Consecutive Losses:

    Trades
    31

    Expectancy
    -0.21R

    Violation Rate
    38.7%

    Average Re-Entry Delay
    8.4 minutes

    After 3+ Consecutive Losses:

    Trades
    14

    Expectancy
    -0.29R

    Violation Rate
    50.0%

    === TWO-LOSS COOLDOWN ===

    User Rule

    15-minute cooldown after 2 losses.

    Compliant Cooldown Trades

    Trades
    15

    Expectancy
    +0.07R

    Cooldown Violations

    Trades
    16

    Expectancy
    -0.47R

    Finding

    Historical performance after two losses differed sharply depending on whether the cooldown rule was followed.

    Confidence
    MEDIUM

    Reason

    The subgroup contains only 31 trades and should be validated prospectively.

    === POSSIBLE LOSS-RESPONSE PATTERN ===

    The following cluster appears after two or more losses:

    Shorter Re-Entry Delay
    Higher Rule-Violation Rate
    More C-Grade Setups
    Higher Average Risk

    This is classified as

    HIGH-CONFIDENCE LOSS-RESPONSE PATTERN

    not:

    Confirmed Revenge Trading

    because explicit emotional labels are incomplete.

    === PERFORMANCE AFTER WINS ===

    After 1 Win:

    Expectancy
    +0.11R

    After 2 Wins:

    Expectancy
    +0.09R

    After 3+ Wins:

    Expectancy
    -0.04R

    Average Risk Increase
    +21%

    C-Grade Setup Frequency
    2.1x baseline

    Interpretation

    Performance deteriorates after extended winning streaks while risk and lower-grade setup participation increase.

    Possible mechanism

    Reduced selectivity.

    Confidence
    MEDIUM

    === CONFLUENCE ANALYSIS ===

    Trend Pullback Base

    Expectancy
    +0.12R

    Trend Pullback + HTF Alignment:

    Expectancy
    +0.25R

    Incremental Lift
    +0.13R

    Trend Pullback + Volume:

    Expectancy
    +0.16R

    Incremental Lift
    +0.04R

    Trend Pullback + HTF + Volume:

    Expectancy
    +0.27R

    Incremental Lift vs HTF only
    +0.02R

    Finding

    Higher-timeframe alignment provides the strongest incremental historical value.

    Volume adds comparatively little once HTF alignment is already present.

    === PROFIT GIVEBACK ===

    Days Reaching At Least +2R:
    21

    Average Intraday Peak
    +2.46R

    Average Final Result
    +1.18R

    Average Giveback
    1.28R

    Primary Historical Sources

    Trade #4+
    New York PM
    Trades After Earlier Loss
    C-Grade Trades

    === MISTAKE MAP ===

    1. PREMATURE ENTRY

    Trades
    70

    Net
    -16.8R

    Severity
    CRITICAL

    Confidence
    HIGH

    1. OVERTRADING

    Trades
    39

    Net
    -10.9R

    Severity
    HIGH

    Confidence
    HIGH

    1. TWO-LOSS COOLDOWN VIOLATION

    Trades
    16

    Expectancy
    -0.47R

    Severity
    HIGH

    Confidence
    MEDIUM

    1. C-GRADE SETUPS

    Trades
    33

    Net
    -6.6R

    Severity
    HIGH

    Confidence
    HIGH

    1. PREMATURE EXIT

    Historical Estimated Drag
    -4.9R

    Severity
    MEDIUM

    Classification
    COUNTERFACTUAL ESTIMATE

    === PARETO LOSS ANALYSIS ===

    Premature Entries
    +
    Overtrading
    +
    C-Grade Setups

    overlap on some trades.

    After removing duplicate attribution, these behaviors were present in:

    31.8% of unique trades

    and:

    67.4% of gross loss R.

    === STRATEGY VS EXECUTION ATTRIBUTION ===

    Trend Pullback

    Compliant
    Strong positive expectancy

    Violating
    Negative expectancy

    Classification
    STRONG STRATEGY / WEAK EXECUTION IN VIOLATING SUBSET

    Failed Breakout

    Compliant
    Still negative

    Classification
    WEAK STRATEGY / EXECUTION NOT PRIMARY CAUSE

    === TOP ACTION PRIORITIES ===

    PRIORITY 1

    Problem
    Premature Entry

    Why
    Largest recurring loss concentration.

    Action
    Enforce confirmation completion before entry.

    Measure
    Premature-entry rate
    Expectancy
    MAE
    Gross-loss attribution

    Confidence
    HIGH

    PRIORITY 2

    Problem
    Performance deterioration after two consecutive losses.

    Action
    Test strict enforcement of the existing 15-minute cooldown.

    Measure
    Violation rate
    Re-entry delay
    Expectancy
    Setup grade

    Confidence
    MEDIUM

    PRIORITY 3

    Problem
    Trade #4+ deterioration.

    Action
    Audit whether trade #4+ should require A-grade setup or no further trading.

    This should initially be treated as a test hypothesis rather than a permanent rule.

    Measure
    Expectancy
    Violation rate
    Daily giveback

    Confidence
    HIGH

    PRIORITY 4

    Problem
    C-Grade setups.

    Action
    Enforce existing prohibition consistently.

    Measure
    C-grade frequency
    Net R
    Compliance

    Confidence
    HIGH

    PRIORITY 5

    Problem
    Premature winner exits.

    Action
    Track exit reason and MFE for the next 30 eligible winners.

    Do not change target logic yet.

    Confidence
    MEDIUM

    === RETEST PLAN ===

    Experiment 1:
    Confirmation Enforcement

    Sample
    Next 30 qualifying Trend Pullback / Breakout trades

    Primary Metric
    Expectancy

    Secondary
    MAE
    Win Rate
    Loss Attribution
    Rule Compliance

    Experiment 2:
    Two-Loss Cooldown

    Sample
    Next 20 qualifying post-two-loss situations

    Compare
    Cooldown respected vs violated

    Primary
    Next-trade expectancy

    Experiment 3:
    Trade #4+ Selectivity

    Test
    Only A-grade trade #4+

    Compare against historical baseline.

    === JOURNAL DATA IMPROVEMENTS ===

    Add

    Explicit reason for every manual exit.

    Why

    Improves premature-exit attribution.

    Add

    Explicit emotion-before field on every trade rather than optional notes.

    Why

    Allows stronger separation between behavioral labels and inferred loss-response patterns.

    Add

    Market regime.

    Why

    Allows determination of whether setup weakness comes from regime mismatch.

    === FINAL CONCLUSION ===

    The journal contains a measurable historical edge.

    The strongest evidence is concentrated in

    A-Grade Trend Pullbacks
    Higher-Timeframe Alignment
    New York AM
    NQ

    The largest performance leakage comes from:

    Premature Entries
    Later-Day Overtrading
    C-Grade Setups
    Rule Degradation After Consecutive Losses

    The most important finding is not the overall win rate.

    It is that a large share of losses is concentrated in specific, identifiable, and potentially controllable behaviors.

    Historical analysis only.

    These associations do not guarantee future performance or prove psychological causality.

    ai-trading-journal-edge-mistake-analyzer.pdf

    PDF · document

    Generated

    Example file from a real run - the skill writes it into your workspace.

    Connects securely to your tools. The creator never sees your data.

    What you get

    Identify which setups lose money despite having a high win rate.Quantify the P&L impact of trading after reaching a daily stop limit.Compare performance across different instruments using normalized R-multiples.Detect if risk size escalates following a losing streak.

    About this skill

    AI Trading Journal Edge & Mistake Analyzer is a premium post-trade analytics and performance-attribution agent designed to identify exactly where a trader's historical edge is created, weakened, or destroyed.

    Its purpose is not to report superficial statistics such as:

    Win Rate = 58%

    and stop there.

    Its purpose is to discover deeper conditional relationships such as:

    73% of New York AM losing trades were entered before the strategy's confirmation condition was complete, representing 61% of gross loss dollars in that session.

    This difference makes the agent useful for serious traders who want to improve process quality rather than simply monitor P&L.

    The agent can analyze:

    CSV Trade Histories Excel Trading Journals Broker Exports TradingView Trade Reports Prop-Firm Trading Logs Manually Maintained Journals Structured Trade Notes Daily Review Notes Setup Labels Strategy Versions Rule-Compliance Checklists Confluence Tags Market-Regime Tags Session Tags Emotion Tags Entry Reasons Exit Reasons Screenshots Referenced by the User MAE / MFE Data Trade Sequence Data

    The analytical process is:

    Inspect Data → Normalize Schema → Validate Trade Integrity → Normalize Time and Sessions → Normalize P&L and R-Multiples → Map Setups → Map Rules → Map Behavioral Tags → Establish Baseline Performance → Segment Results → Detect Edge Concentration → Detect Mistake Concentration → Analyze Entry Timing → Analyze Exit Timing → Analyze Overtrading → Analyze Loss-Response Patterns → Analyze Rule Violations → Analyze Streak Effects → Analyze Confluence Combinations → Quantify Historical Impact → Assess Confidence → Build Edge Map → Build Mistake Map → Rank Action Priorities → Define Retest Plan

    The agent treats each trade as a combination of:

    Market Context Strategy Setup Execution Decision Risk Decision Behavioral State Outcome

    This prevents outcome bias.

    A winning trade can contain poor process.

    A losing trade can still represent excellent execution.

    The skill therefore distinguishes:

    GOOD PROCESS / GOOD OUTCOME

    GOOD PROCESS / BAD OUTCOME

    BAD PROCESS / GOOD OUTCOME

    BAD PROCESS / BAD OUTCOME

    This distinction is critical because profitable rule violations can reinforce bad habits while valid losing trades can incorrectly be interpreted as mistakes.

    The agent can calculate baseline metrics such as:

    Total Trades Net P&L Gross P&L Fees Win Rate Average Winner Average Loser Payoff Ratio Expectancy Expectancy in R Profit Factor Median Trade Maximum Winner Maximum Loser Maximum Drawdown Drawdown Duration Maximum Consecutive Wins Maximum Consecutive Losses Average Holding Time Trade Frequency Average Trades per Day Profitable Days Losing Days

    However, baseline statistics are only the starting point.

    The primary objective is conditional performance attribution.

    The agent analyzes trading setups individually.

    For each setup it can calculate:

    Trade Count Win Rate Net P&L Average R Median R Profit Factor Drawdown Contribution Average MAE Average MFE Rule-Violation Rate Premature-Entry Rate Premature-Exit Rate Session Distribution Instrument Distribution

    It does not rank setups using win rate alone.

    A setup with:

    55% Win Rate 0.7 Payoff Ratio

    may be structurally weaker than one with:

    42% Win Rate 2.1 Payoff Ratio

    The agent therefore evaluates:

    Expectancy Profit Factor Average R Sample Size Drawdown Stability Outlier Dependence Rule Compliance

    before classifying a setup.

    Possible setup classifications include:

    VERIFIED HISTORICAL EDGE

    CANDIDATE EDGE

    FRAGILE EDGE

    NO EDGE DETECTED

    INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE

    "Verified historical edge" means supported by the supplied historical sample. It does not guarantee future profitability.

    Session analysis is another major capability.

    The agent can compare:

    Asia London New York AM New York PM Regular Trading Hours Overnight Pre-Market Power Hour Custom User-Defined Sessions

    Session analysis requires correct timezone normalization.

    It can calculate:

    Trades Net P&L Expectancy Win Rate Profit Factor Average R Rule-Violation Rate Premature-Entry Rate Premature-Exit Rate Overtrading Rate Drawdown Contribution Setup Distribution Instrument Distribution

    Instead of saying:

    New York AM is your best session.

    the agent can produce a more actionable conclusion such as:

    New York AM generated 62% of total net profit while representing only 38% of trades. Most of the advantage came from Trend Pullback and Breakout Retest setups, while 73% of losing NY AM trades were associated with premature confirmation.

    This identifies both the edge and the leak inside the same segment.

    The agent performs long-versus-short analysis.

    It compares:

    Trade Count Net P&L Expectancy Profit Factor Average R Win Rate Drawdown Violation Rate Setup Mix Session Mix Instrument Mix

    It also checks for confounding.

    For example:

    Long trades appear significantly stronger than short trades.

    However:

    78% of long trades occurred in NQ during bullish sessions, while short trades were concentrated in Gold and low-performing sessions.

    The correct conclusion is therefore not simply:

    Longs are better.

    The agent identifies when direction is confounded by instrument, setup, session, or regime.

    Instrument analysis supports:

    Futures Forex Stocks ETFs Crypto Indices Commodities

    For each instrument it can calculate:

    Trades Net P&L Expectancy Expectancy in R Profit Factor Win Rate Drawdown Contribution Average MAE Average MFE Rule-Violation Rate Setup Distribution Session Distribution Fees as Percentage of Gross Edge

    When instruments have different tick values, contract multipliers, lot sizes, or account sizes, the agent avoids naive raw-dollar comparisons.

    When initial risk is available, it prefers normalized measures such as:

    R-Multiple Average R Expectancy in R Return per Unit Risk

    The skill performs detailed premature-entry analysis.

    Premature entry can be identified only when supported by:

    Explicit Confirmation State Strategy Rules Journal Tag Signal-Bar Requirement Breakout Confirmation Rule Retest Requirement Moving-Average Alignment Session Trigger User Note

    The agent never invents premature entries.

    If confirmation cannot be reconstructed, it states:

    Premature entry cannot be measured reliably from the available fields.

    When available, it compares:

    Premature Entries Confirmed Entries

    using:

    Trade Count Win Rate Expectancy Average R Net P&L Loss Contribution

    MAE

    MFE

    Session Distribution Setup Distribution

    It can calculate both:

    Count-Based Loss Attribution

    and:

    Dollar-Based Loss Attribution.

    For example:

    22 of 30 losing New York AM trades were premature.

    Count-Based Loss Attribution: 73%

    Those trades produced $3,410 of the session's $5,590 gross losses.

    Dollar-Based Loss Attribution: 61%

    This level of attribution is a primary differentiator of the skill.

    Premature-exit analysis can use:

    Exit Reason Journal Tags Rule-Based Exit Requirements

    MFE

    Target Data Post-Exit Movement Manual Close Notes

    Possible metrics include:

    Actual Realized R Maximum Favorable Excursion MFE Capture Ratio Rule-Compliant Exit Estimate Premature-Exit Historical Drag

    Counterfactual estimates are explicitly labeled.

    Example:

    Actual tagged early-exit performance: +4.2R

    Historical rule-compliant counterfactual: +9.8R

    Estimated historical drag: -5.6R

    Classification:

    COUNTERFACTUAL ESTIMATE

    The agent never reports estimated P&L as if it were actual realized P&L.

    The skill performs overtrading analysis.

    It does not equate high trade frequency with overtrading.

    A legitimate high-frequency strategy may trade often.

    Overtrading means:

    Trading beyond the strategy or risk process.

    Possible evidence includes:

    Trades Above Daily Maximum Trades After Session Cutoff Trades After Daily Stop Repeated Re-Entries Without a New Setup Trades Outside Approved Setups Rapid-Fire Trades Low-Grade Setups After Earlier Losses User-Tagged Overtrading

    The agent can analyze trade sequence:

    Trade #1 Trade #2 Trade #3 Trade #4+

    Example:

    Trades #1–2: +0.14R expectancy

    Trade #3: +0.03R

    Trades #4+: -0.12R

    Trades #4+ also contained: 64% of all rule violations.

    This helps distinguish whether poor performance occurs because the market changed or because trader selectivity deteriorated.

    The agent can analyze:

    Minutes Since Previous Trade

    to identify rapid re-entry patterns.

    Possible transparent buckets include:

    Under 5 Minutes 5–15 Minutes 15–30 Minutes 30+ Minutes

    The agent performs cautious revenge-trading and loss-response analysis.

    It does not diagnose psychological conditions.

    It does not label every trade after a loss as revenge trading.

    A stronger revenge-pattern candidate may require multiple pieces of evidence:

    Previous Trade Was a Material Loss Next Trade Occurred Unusually Quickly Position Size Increased Setup Grade Declined Rule Was Violated Journal Note Recorded Frustration / Revenge / FOMO

    If evidence is weaker, the agent uses neutral language such as:

    POSSIBLE LOSS-RESPONSE PATTERN

    or:

    LOSS-FOLLOWING RULE-DEVIATION PATTERN

    instead of overclaiming revenge trading.

    The agent can calculate:

    Count Net P&L Average R Win Rate Position-Size Change Time Since Prior Loss Violation Rate Session Loss-Streak Position

    Rule-violation analysis is another central module.

    Possible violations include:

    Premature Entry Oversizing Moved Stop Farther Removed Stop Traded Outside Session Traded Restricted News Exceeded Daily Trade Limit Re-Entered Without New Setup Ignored Regime Filter Premature Exit Held Past Cutoff Ignored Cooldown Prop-Firm Rule Violation

    For each violation type the skill calculates:

    Trades Frequency Net P&L Average R Gross Loss Loss Contribution Setup Distribution Session Distribution Instrument Distribution Streak Context

    It can compare:

    RULE-COMPLIANT TRADES

    against:

    RULE-VIOLATING TRADES

    Example:

    Rule-Compliant: 212 trades +16.8R

    Rule-Violating: 71 trades -8.9R

    Interpretation:

    The historical strategy edge remained materially stronger when the trader followed the defined process.

    The agent can also identify violation clustering.

    Example:

    Premature Entry + New York PM + After Two Losses

    may be materially worse than premature entries generally.

    Streak analysis examines behavior and performance after:

    One Win Two Wins Three or More Wins One Loss Two Losses Three or More Losses

    Metrics include:

    Next-Trade Expectancy Position Size Risk Amount Setup Grade Rule Compliance Time to Next Trade Session Instrument

    Example:

    After a winning trade: +0.12R expectancy

    After a losing trade: -0.04R

    After two consecutive losses: -0.19R

    Rule-violation rate after two losses: 37%

    Baseline violation rate: 11%

    This reveals that the performance deterioration may come from trader behavior rather than strategy mechanics.

    The agent can analyze risk escalation after wins and losses.

    Possible observations include:

    Average risk rises 27% after three consecutive wins.

    Average risk rises 19% after two consecutive losses.

    These are historical associations.

    The skill does not automatically diagnose:

    Overconfidence Revenge Martingale

    unless evidence supports those labels.

    Drawdown-state behavior can also be analyzed.

    Possible states include:

    At Equity High Mild Drawdown Moderate Drawdown Deep Drawdown

    The agent can compare:

    Trade Frequency Risk Size Setup Quality Rule Compliance Instrument Switching Session Switching Expectancy

    This can reveal whether the trader's process deteriorates during account drawdown.

    The agent can also analyze current daily P&L state before each trade:

    Positive Day Flat Day Negative Day Near Daily Stop

    This enables profit-giveback analysis.

    When trade sequencing allows it:

    Daily Peak P&L Final Daily P&L Giveback

    can be calculated.

    The agent can then attribute giveback to:

    Late-Day Trades Trade Number Setup Violation Loss Streak Overtrading Session

    Example:

    Days that reached +2R: 18

    Average final result: +0.8R

    Average giveback: 1.2R

    Primary historical source: Trades #4+ after 13:30.

    The skill performs confluence analysis.

    Possible confluence tags include:

    Trend Alignment Higher-Timeframe Alignment

    VWAP

    Volume Support / Resistance Market Structure Momentum Order Flow Session Regime News Liquidity Pullback Quality

    The agent does not only evaluate single tags.

    It can evaluate combinations such as:

    Trend + Higher-Timeframe Alignment Trend + Volume Trend + HTF + Volume Range + VWAP Breakout + Volume + Retest

    However, it protects against combinatorial overfitting.

    When many tags exist:

    Analyze Pairwise Combinations First Require Adequate Sample Use Selected Three-Way Combinations Apply False-Discovery Caution Prefer Economically Plausible Combinations

    The skill can calculate incremental confluence value.

    Example:

    Trend Pullback: +0.08R

    Trend Pullback + HTF Alignment: +0.17R

    Trend Pullback + HTF + Volume: +0.18R

    Interpretation:

    Higher-timeframe alignment historically added material value.

    Volume added little additional value once HTF alignment was already present.

    This can help simplify strategies by identifying redundant confluences.

    The skill also detects confluence redundancy.

    For example:

    EMA Alignment Trend Alignment

    may represent substantially overlapping information.

    It avoids counting correlated signals as independent evidence.

    Day-of-week and time-of-day analysis can be included when samples are sufficient.

    Possible finding:

    58% of all rule-violating losses occurred after 11:30 even though only 29% of trades were taken during that period.

    The agent can analyze:

    First Trade Effect

    Example:

    After a first-trade loss:

    Average daily trades increased from 2.6 to 4.1.

    Rule-violation rate doubled.

    This can reveal behavioral sequences that basic performance dashboards miss.

    The skill uses MAE and MFE where available.

    Maximum Adverse Excursion can help investigate:

    Entry Timing Stop Placement Premature Entries

    Maximum Favorable Excursion can help investigate:

    Exit Timing Winner Giveback Target Efficiency Premature Exits

    Possible entry-quality result:

    Premature entries showed:

    1.7x greater MAE

    and:

    31% lower MFE

    than confirmed entries.

    Possible exit-quality result:

    Actual realized winners captured only 42% of recorded MFE in a specific setup.

    The agent does not assume that capturing 100% of MFE is realistic or desirable.

    The skill can identify late-entry or chasing patterns when evidence supports them.

    Possible evidence:

    Large favorable move occurred before entry. Remaining reward/risk deteriorated. MFE after entry was materially smaller. Journal records chase/FOMO behavior.

    The agent creates a structured Mistake Taxonomy.

    SETUP MISTAKES

    Wrong Setup Low-Quality Setup Incomplete Confirmation Regime Mismatch

    EXECUTION MISTAKES

    Premature Entry Late Entry Premature Exit Stop Movement Target Deviation

    RISK MISTAKES

    Oversizing Inconsistent Risk Adding Outside Plan Trading After Daily Stop

    BEHAVIORAL MISTAKES

    Overtrading Loss-Chasing Revenge-Pattern Candidate Impulsive Re-Entry Late-Session Deterioration

    PROCESS MISTAKES

    Skipped Checklist Missing Plan Missing Screenshot Missing Review Incomplete Journal Fields

    Mistakes can be ranked:

    CRITICAL

    HIGH

    MEDIUM

    LOW

    based on:

    Frequency Monetary Cost R Cost Drawdown Contribution Recurrence Effect on Historical Edge

    The skill builds a required Edge Map.

    The Edge Map can contain:

    Edge Source Segment Trades Expectancy Profit Factor Net P&L Stability Confidence Why It Matters

    Possible edges include:

    Trend Pullback in NY AM Short Breakout on Gold Long Setup with HTF Alignment First Two Trades of Day Rule-Compliant Setup A High-Volatility Breakout

    The skill also builds a required Mistake Map.

    The Mistake Map contains:

    Mistake Trade Count Frequency Net P&L Loss Contribution Average R Most Common Context Severity Action Priority

    It can reveal:

    A small number of recurring mistakes may account for a disproportionate share of total historical losses.

    Example:

    Premature Entries + Trades After Daily Trade #3

    represented:

    29% of trades

    but:

    68% of gross loss.

    This supports a Pareto-style improvement process.

    The skill separates strategy weakness from trader execution weakness.

    Example 1:

    Setup B remains negative even when fully rule-compliant.

    Interpretation:

    STRATEGY WEAKNESS

    Example 2:

    Setup A is strongly positive when rules are followed and negative when the trader violates entry rules.

    Interpretation:

    EXECUTION WEAKNESS

    The agent can summarize this through:

    STRONG STRATEGY / STRONG EXECUTION

    STRONG STRATEGY / WEAK EXECUTION

    WEAK STRATEGY / STRONG EXECUTION

    WEAK STRATEGY / WEAK EXECUTION

    The skill can perform outlier-dependence analysis.

    It can calculate contribution from:

    Largest Winner Top 3 Winners Top 5 Winners

    If removing a few trades destroys profitability:

    flag:

    OUTLIER DEPENDENCE

    It can also analyze:

    Profit Concentration Loss Concentration Setup Concentration Instrument Concentration

    The agent can evaluate temporal stability.

    Possible segmentation:

    Month Quarter First Half vs Second Half Rolling Windows

    A finding that repeats across several months is more credible than one driven by a single week.

    The agent can compare:

    Full Sample Recent 20 Trades Recent 50 Trades Recent 30 Days

    to detect:

    Strategy Drift Trader Drift Compliance Drift

    Example:

    Compliance Rate: 92% in Q1 71% in Q2

    Expectancy: +0.16R in Q1 +0.02R in Q2

    This may justify investigating whether performance deterioration is associated with process deterioration.

    The agent can perform historical counterfactual scenarios.

    Examples:

    Remove Trades After Daily Stop Remove Premature Entries Remove C-Grade Setups Apply Rule-Compliant Exit to Tagged Premature Exits

    Every simulation is labeled:

    HISTORICAL COUNTERFACTUAL SCENARIO

    It is not presented as actual history or guaranteed future performance.

    The skill includes strict double-counting protection.

    One trade can contain:

    Premature Entry Oversizing Loss-Streak Context Overtrading

    The loss cannot simply be added independently to every category.

    The agent can therefore distinguish:

    Primary Mistake Secondary Mistakes Multi-Label Analysis Unique-Trade Attribution

    It can build an attribution waterfall only when categories are mutually exclusive or appropriately adjusted.

    The final improvement plan prioritizes controllable, high-impact findings.

    Each priority can include:

    Problem Evidence Historical Impact Trigger Rule Pre-Trade Countermeasure In-Trade Countermeasure Post-Trade Review Measurement Retest Period

    The skill frames changes as measurable experiments.

    Example:

    TEST:

    For the next 30 qualifying New York AM setups, allow entries only after the documented confirmation state is complete.

    MEASURE:

    Premature-entry rate Expectancy

    MAE

    MFE

    Rule compliance Loss attribution

    This is preferable to claiming:

    This will fix your trading.

    The skill can produce weekly and monthly reviews.

    A Weekly Review may include:

    Strongest Edge Largest Performance Leak Compliance Trend Best Session Worst Session Top Setup Streak Behavior One Primary Focus for Next Week

    A Monthly Review can add:

    Strategy Drift Behavioral Drift Regime Changes Setup Stability Action-Plan Progress Recent vs Long-Term Performance

    The final analysis should prioritize conclusions in the following form:

    Finding Evidence Magnitude Confidence Likely Interpretation Action How to Validate

    This turns the journal into a structured improvement system rather than a passive record of wins and losses.

    How to install

    Works the same in every agent - Claude, Cursor, Codex, Copilot and 20+ more.

    ~30 seconds
    1. 1

      Download the ZIP

      Free skills download straight away. Paid skills unlock right after purchase.

    2. 2

      Unzip into your skills folder

      Every agent reads skills from one folder on your machine. Drop the unzipped folder in there.

    3. 3

      Ask your agent to use it

      Restart the agent if it was already running. It picks the skill up automatically - no config needed.

    Skills folder by agent

    Click the path to copy it. Create the folder if it does not exist yet.

    Reviews

    No reviews yet

    Be one of the first to try it. Every listed skill passes our trust checks below.

    Security scanned

    Passed our 8-point scan before listing

    Fresh listing

    Recently published to Agensi

    30-day refund

    Not a fit? Get your money back

    Trust & safety

    Security scanned

    Verified clean 1 month ago

    • Passed all security checks, Safe to install

    Listed1 month ago

    What's inside

    Frequently Asked Questions