Check quantity, margin, costs and order states with two worksheets. A lot-size example separates outcome from process and links to detailed sizing, execution and journal guides.
A loss alone does not prove an error occurred; a profit does not prove the process was correct. Start with orders, contracts, budgets and information available at the time. The ten entries below are diagnostic starting points, not claims that every beginner makes them or that every problem is a discipline failure.
Unauthorised activity, an unexplained recipient or conflicting platform identity calls for evidence preservation and account verification. A trading method cannot repair an unverified counterparty.
| Problem | Observable difference | Evidence | Next check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quantity units confused | Actual base quantity differs from plan | Contract size, lots, acknowledgement | Recalculate rather than infer from decimal places |
| Budget confused with margin | Free margin treated as maximum affordable loss | Equity, notional, costs | Separate planned loss from margin |
| Stop treated as guarantee | Exit differs from trigger | Quote side, terms, timestamps | Check the order mechanism |
| Costs counted twice | Estimated spread deducted again after fill P/L | Fills, commissions, financing | Reconcile actual fee lines |
| Shared exposure overlooked | Different symbols share a currency direction | Quantities, base/quote currencies | Aggregate currency exposure and scenarios |
| Look-ahead in reasons | Entry explanation uses later information | Original screenshots, rule version, clocks | Use then-available information |
| Successful samples selected | Losses, unfilled or rejected requests absent | Complete exports | Define and complete the denominator |
| Impulsive rule changes | No prior condition or quantity exceeds budget | Change time, reason, version | Pause unresolved new requests and check |
| Displayed performance trusted | Screenshot without costs, floating losses or source | Full history, definitions, originals | Mark unsupported performance unknown |
| Entity/payment chain ignored | Brand, agreement and recipient differ without explanation | Terms, register, receipts | Establish identity and authority first |
Follow the relevant explanation: position budgeting, margin and leverage, costs, and shared currency exposure. Do not tick unresolved items just to complete a checklist.
Assume a linear EUR/USD contract with EUR100,000 per lot, a USD account and one pip of 0.0001. A planned EUR10,000 quantity corresponds to 0.1 lot. Entering 1.0 lot instead gives EUR100,000, ten times the plan.
For the same 30-pip distance, the planned USD1 pip value implies USD30; the mistaken USD10 pip value implies USD300. Fees are excluded, and no stop fill at that distance is guaranteed. This fictional unit check does not prescribe USD30 as anyone's personal risk allowance.
Trace contract units per lot, entered lots, acknowledged quantity, pip value and distance amount—in that order. If the provider defines a lot differently, recalculate. When an error is found, handle it according to actual order status and account rules; clicking amend does not prove an amendment took effect.
| Outcome | Prior-process evidence | Review |
|---|---|---|
| Loss | Original rule followed; quantity and fees traceable | Keep the sample; assess overall rule performance and budget deviation |
| Profit | Quantity exceeded plan or reasons were added later | Keep both profit and deviation label |
| Either | Key original records missing | Leave unclassified; do not manufacture a rule win rate |
| Still open | Floating results and outstanding orders remain | Separate from closed trades; floating gains are not realised returns |
This classification does not prove the rule itself works. Consistent execution may still implement a rule without an edge. Process adherence and statistical effectiveness are separate questions.
Create a case ID such as CASE-001. Record discovery time/zone, order IDs, plan version, observed mismatch, original-file location, confirmed facts, unknowns and next step. Screenshots are useful indexes; preserve exports and original communications where possible.
Do not overwrite originals. Annotate working copies and note who or which system generated each record and when. Redact unrelated identity documents, full account numbers and private addresses before sharing, while retaining the necessary order references.
Use the journal template for money reconciliation, decision checks for unplanned condition changes, and execution evidence for disputed fills. Their purposes differ; not every issue belongs under “mindset”.
Prioritise issues that can leave continuing exposure unknown: unconfirmed quantities or order states, unexpected account access, or entity/payment conflicts. Then reconcile money and information timestamps before changing an analytical method. Indicator optimisation does not come before identity and order status.
Changing many parameters simultaneously makes later results difficult to attribute. Start with an observable process change, such as retaining each quantity acknowledgement, and test whether records actually become complete. Keep before/after samples; two profitable trades cannot establish improvement.
Screenshots, short winning streaks and attractive curves do not replace provenance, costs and complete samples. Simulated outcomes are not actual fills. The CFTC's online trading-systems advisory cautions about performance promotions; citing it does not establish that a particular tool is fraudulent.
“Follow the rules and profit” leaves essential questions unanswered: which rules, tested on what data, with which charges, and how do failures look? Without traceable answers, leave performance unverified rather than inventing a win rate.
Is fixing size enough? No. Identity, costs, rules and execution remain separate checks.
Should I delete losing trades to restart statistics? Not to improve appearances. A new rule version can have a separate sample while old records remain intact.
Must I open a live trade to test a fix? No. Documents, paper calculations and simulations can clarify mechanics, without proving live returns.
Does this checklist prevent losses? No. It helps identify observable differences, not eliminate market, counterparty or execution risks.