Inconclusive · Exits · 2026-09-19; timeframe gap fill 2026-10-11
Is the dual-tranche exit (50% at 1.5R, runner to 2R) better than a single target?
What this means
This plotted equity curves for the two-tranche exit against single targets and other breakeven rules, but the outputs are not in the repo. The two-tranche exit became the default anyway. Nothing can be concluded from this study. The single 15m TradingView sweep (exit-target-sweep) found a single 1.5R target did worse (+0.04R on 19 stocks), though within noise, but a fair test would compare single and dual exits over the full universe on each timeframe. The original curves are lost, but the simulation answers the core question: banking half at TP1 does make results less spread out than a single 2R target, by about 7%, at the cost of a slightly lower average (significantly so only on daily). It is not the smoothest option - breakeven at Point A is smoother still - but that comes with a clearly lower average.
Explanation checked against the data.
By timeframe
| Timeframe | Verdict | n | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15-minute | Inconclusive | 639 | single TP1 +0.041R vs +0.107R, within noise |
| 1-hour | Inconclusive | 3,688 | setup-R spread (SD) 1.29 dual vs 1.39 single TP2 and 1.25 single TP1; mean +0.159 / +0.168 / +0.150 gap fill G10, 2026-10-11 (price simulation; 1h/4h prices cover Nov 2023-Sep 2026 only) |
| 4-hour | Inconclusive | 1,073 | SD 1.27 dual vs 1.37 single TP2; mean +0.071 / +0.078 gap fill G10, 2026-10-11 (price simulation; 1h/4h prices cover Nov 2023-Sep 2026 only) |
| Daily | Inconclusive | 2,041 | SD 1.30 dual vs 1.41 single TP2; mean +0.206 vs +0.226 (q=0.007) gap fill G10, 2026-10-11 (price data) |
- Hypothesis
- Banking half at TP1 and running the rest with breakeven gives a smoother equity curve than no-BE, BE at A, or BE at 1.5R.
- Method
- Own Python sim plotting four equity curves.
- Result
- Outputs (equity_curve_comparison.png, equity_metrics.json) are not in the repo. Proxy from the 2026-10-11 gap fill (price simulation, paired): spread of setup R (SD) is lower with the dual exit than with a single 2R target - 1h 1.29 vs 1.39, 4h 1.27 vs 1.37, daily 1.30 vs 1.41 - at a small cost in mean (single 2R +0.009 / +0.006 / +0.019R higher; daily q = 0.007). Breakeven off: SD 1.31 / 1.29 / 1.32. Breakeven at Point A: SD 1.02-1.10 but mean -0.01 to -0.07R.
- How much to trust it
- Low: nothing saved; same look-ahead sim family
- Did it change the live rule?
- dual tranche became the strategy default on 2026-09-22 (73acb95)
Scripts and data for this study will be linked here when the research code is published on GitHub.
Education and research only. Not financial advice. Backtests use today's index members (survivorship bias).