Moving the stop-loss point

Core idea

Moving the SL is, in essence, going to find an entry point on a smaller timeframe: every time the neighboring smaller timeframe completes a correction wave, holds the support zone, and starts running again, you're allowed to move the SL up to just below that support zone. The unbreakable principle: don't move the SL while the correction wave hasn't finished and the continuation wave hasn't started running — because at that point nobody yet knows whether the low has actually formed.

Details

The base principle

You're holding through a wave on timeframe X → open up the next-smaller timeframe (X-1) to look for its wave structure. Every correction wave of X-1 that still keeps its upward validity (support not broken, RSI not below 40) and then continues rising = a new step to place the SL on. Because if X-1's structure breaks, X definitely can't keep rising → that's a valuable SL point.

Paragraph: Result: even in the worst case, you still lock in a chunk of profit from the entry point up to that support step; in the favorable case, you keep holding.

Three mandatory conditions before moving the SL

1. Correctly determine the wave structure — which timeframe the running wave belongs to (use RSI to identify it, see Wave logic, wave logic).
2. Correctly determine which wave the support zone corresponds to. Get the support wrong, and you've immediately moved the SL wrong. H1's support has to correspond to an actual correction process on H1's RSI; small lows that sit within a stretch where H1's RSI is still rising are only m5/m15's support, not H1's.
3. Move it by the NEIGHBORING smaller timeframe. Trading H4 → move by H1's structure. Trading H1 → move by m15 (or m10). Absolutely never trade H4 while moving the SL by M5/m15: within a normal H1 correction wave, m15 breaking support — even M5 creating downward momentum — is a perfectly normal thing → you get stopped out and then price rises on.

A timeframe gap that's too wide is also a mistake when SETTING the initial SL: entering on an H1 pattern but setting the SL by an M1 low (about 60x apart) is wrong; the farthest you should go is M5.

The principle "the wave has to be running before you move it"

• While price is still correcting, before the wave confirms a low → you're forbidden from moving the SL. A correction wave can perfectly well pull back to Fibonacci 0.5 before going up, and that's still a healthy correction.
• Only once the small timeframe retracts its wick, buying force comes back into the small timeframes, and the pattern starts running clearly → only then do you move it. You don't need to wait for the old high to break yet.
• All through the correction phase, if it looks weak, close it manually by the signal, rather than hanging the SL randomly at some zone.

Debunking a "clever idea": moving the SL to Fibonacci 0.5

The idea of "once the first wave finishes running, place the SL at its Fibonacci 0.5, and breaking 0.5 means the wave is weak" sounds reasonable but is very hit-or-miss:

• It violates the principle above (the correction wave hasn't finished yet).
• In reality there are messy/sideways price zones that sweep through 0.5 before breaking up — you get stopped out, then get scared and don't dare re-enter → you miss the whole wave.
• A candle wick sweeping through 0.5 and then springing back up is a very common pattern.

Paragraph: → The root of this mistake is misunderstanding the tool's nature: see fibonacci thuoc do luc (Fibonacci as a force gauge) — Fibonacci measures the force of a wave that has already run, it isn't a barrier to place an SL at. A sibling mistake from the same root is placing a pending order to enter at 0.5.

Do not: Forbidden: moving the SL while the parent timeframe's wave is BOUNCING

The three conditions above are about which timeframe to move it by; this rule is about when to move it — and this is a different mistake, one that people who avoid the earlier mistake can still fall into.

Paragraph: Holding a trade through an H1 wave, when price steps into a bounce, many people see m15 form an opposite structure and immediately pull the SL up by m15 "to be safe." Wrong: a bounce is a normal state of a running wave, not new data. Pulling the SL into the middle of the bounce zone = placing the SL right where price is about to pass through.

You're only allowed to move the SL once the very wave you're trading has already made a new high (or low) — meaning the correction round is done and the continuation wave has already started.

Paragraph: The tidy consequence: no new H1 high means there's no place yet to move an H1 trade's SL. If there's no place to move it to, leave it as is — that's the complete answer. See also the "When there's NO point to move to" section.

The case of OVERLAPPING WAVES (the opening phase of every wave)

In the opening stretch, the higher and smaller timeframes are always in phase, running together — H1 and H4 both going up, not yet separated. At this point:

• There's no data yet to move the SL by H1 (H1 doesn't have its own correction wave yet).
• The responsible timeframe at that point is the smaller one (if H1 breaks, H4 falls along with it) → you have to manage the trade and move the SL by m15.
• Once H1 separates out — that is, an H1 correction wave appears, neatly nested within H4's up-wave — only then do you switch to moving the SL by H1.
• The sign that H4 has "gained its own force": H4's RSI rises above the 60 zone and expands away from its 2 moving averages → pulling it back down would take time. If H4 is only hovering around 60 → H4 doesn't have its own force yet, and m15 breaking will pull H1 down and drag H4 down along with it. See Overlapping waves & the responsible timeframe (overlapping waves and the responsible timeframe).

When there's NO point to move to

When the market is weak / ranging, wave structures almost never form → many waves have no SL point worth moving to. Forcing a move breaks the principle and easily gets you swept. At that point, accept managing it by hand: look at whichever timeframe has a down pattern, and exit by that timeframe.

Choosing SPOT or FUTURES is choosing by the wave's timeframe

This decision also determines how you move the SL, so it belongs in the same place:

• A wave from 1D up → prioritize SPOT. You can hold it for weeks to months without getting worn down. Trading futures for a 1D/1W wave means holding through a whole month, and overnight/funding fees eat up the profit, not to mention "heart disease" from the stress.
• An H1–H4 wave → futures are more convenient because you enter and exit fast. H4 usually finishes running within ~3–5 days, which futures can handle.
• The teacher himself only trades futures on H1/H4, and has never traded a 1D wave on futures.
• If you want to capture a weekly/1D wave with futures, chop it into H4 waves and trade each stretch, rather than holding one trade all the way through.

Paragraph: The direct consequence for moving the SL: always move it by the timeframe responsible for creating the structure of the wave you're capturing.

• Capturing a weekly-timeframe wave → you have to wait for 1D to finish forming a low before pulling the SL up.
• Pulling the SL by each H4 low while capturing a 1D wave = very easy to get swept, and then price keeps going in your direction anyway. → Same rule as Timeframe consistency (the profit-generating strategy) (timeframe consistency) and Overlapping waves & the responsible timeframe (overlapping waves and the responsible timeframe).

Don't HAGGLE over the stop-loss with the market

This is a mindset mistake that sits right before the SL-moving problem: many people refuse to enter a beautiful wave just because the SL is "expensive."

• When a higher-timeframe wave hasn't run yet, there's no structure, no buying force pumped in yet, no bounce wave to place a tight SL against. Demanding a 50–100-point SL for an H8/1D-timeframe wave is exactly haggling with the market.
• An SL of several hundred points (the teacher cites ~200–500 points for an H8 wave, and a 1D wave sometimes has to accept 500–700 points) is that timeframe's rule of the game. If you want an H1-tight SL, don't go capture an H8 wave — don't force the H8 wave to play by H1's rules.
• A metaphor the teacher uses: sitting down to play chess and then cursing the rule-maker — "you have to play by my rules, I lose little and gain a lot." Or a child given one piece of candy who then cries and demands two, five, ten pieces.
• The consequence of not daring to enter because the SL is "expensive": no profit, no lesson, no experience — and afterward you get tortured by regret/FOMO, making it even harder to enter the next trades (The rush psychology when entering a trade, the psychology of rushing into a trade).
• Along with this: an R:R of 1:2 or 1:3 on the near target is still worth entering if the higher timeframe still has more rounds to open. Demanding 1:8–1:10 on every trade is greed. Take whatever the market gives (Getting Comfortable with Uncertainty, getting comfortable with uncertainty).

Two TYPES of setting the SL: "easygoing" and "optimal" — pick one, and pay the price for that choice

For the same wave, there are two valid ways of setting the SL; their costs are different, and you can't mix them:

Paragraph: The teacher says it plainly: others set the SL at the wave's low and go to sleep; if you set the SL on a sloped channel, you have to stay up and watch to re-enter — more effort means proportionally more reward. Either type is fine to choose, but choosing "optimal" while still being afraid of getting stopped out ruins both.

Paragraph: Along with two hard limits:

• Scaling in (adding in partial amounts) only goes until the 1%-of-account risk limit is used up, then stop (Stress in trading & capital strategy to reduce pressure — stress trading and capital strategy).
• Once the wave has already run hard / the main timeframe's RSI has already risen into the ~70 zone, there's no more room below to scale in — at that point you've already missed it, not "there's no data." Waiting for a too-solid signal (the parent timeframe's RSI has already crossed up and closed above both moving averages) only works in time when the market is weak; when the market is strong it pulls once and you've missed it. The marker to start watching and scaling in is when the parent timeframe's two moving averages narrow (RSI trend & the two moving averages — RSI trend and the two moving averages).

The SL is the cost of existing, not money lost

This is a line the teacher stresses twice in a row during the session and calls outright "an extremely important mindset" — because it's the psychological root of every behavior in the sections above: removing the SL / moving the SL / haggling over price.

"Our stop-loss point is NOT the money that we lose."

Paragraph: The argument the teacher uses — comparing it to running a business in real life:

• Running a business means you have to put up capital to buy stock and bear operating costs before collecting a profit. A whole year with 20–30–50% profit is already good.
• In trading, people go against this natural law: not wanting to put up any capital while still wanting a profit.
• Without stopped-out trades, you'd never have any profit — the SL is the mandatory cost of participating, exactly like the money to buy stock.

Paragraph: The mechanism that breaks when the mindset is wrong: treating the SL as money lost → produces fear → you don't accept the SL point → internal conflict → you can't make a decision → the profit never comes. That is, a wrong mindset here doesn't just lose the money on one trade — it paralyzes the entire decision-making process.

Paragraph: The teacher closes with a line that leaves no way out: "If you can't accept the SL point in this market, you'd best not play anymore."

Do not: "Moving the SL down but still keeping it at 1%" — the most sophisticated fallacy

A variant that's far harder to catch than simply removing the SL, because it borrows the language of discipline: the person moving it tells themselves, "I'm still following my money management, my total risk is still 1% of the account."

Paragraph: Why it's still wrong: discipline in this trade has three layers, not one —

1. capital discipline (risk ≤1%),
2. knowledge discipline (the SL must sit where the structure dictates),
3. consistency discipline (don't change the rules midway).

Paragraph: Keeping layer 1 while breaking layers 2 and 3 is still breaking discipline. Without a structural basis below, you're not allowed to move it, even if you lower the size to keep the 1% figure. And doing it repeatedly — moving it every single time — the teacher calls that an absolute mistake.

Paragraph: The verification question the teacher poses to the whole group: does moving the SL down come from analysis or from hope? The group's answer, and the teacher's: hope and fear, no logic at all. Use exactly this question every time your hand is about to pull the SL.

Paragraph: The correct approach instead: set the SL tight against the small timeframe's support / the nearby range cluster's low, accept losing a short SL, then watch the force in the zone below and re-enter if the wave still guarantees the trend. Compared to a short SL, the price of haggling is risk expanding out of control.

GETTING STOPPED OUT DOESN'T INVALIDATE THE TREND — and the mistake of stopping monitoring after getting stopped out

This section actually stands before the whole SL-moving discussion above, because it answers the question that comes right after the SL triggers: what did the market just say to me?

Paragraph: The teacher's answer: almost always "nothing at all." Most instances of getting stopped out are noise, entering too early, haggling with a small timeframe, or a weak wave — not a signal that the trend has reversed. Only a very small fraction is actually a real reversal.

Careful: The Hermes draft recorded a "99% / 1%" ratio for these two groups. Cross-checking the original transcript, that figure could not be found — the teacher states the principle qualitatively ("you're not allowed to invalidate that trend"). Record the principle, drop the number; a public-facing write-up must absolutely not cite 99% as a data point.

Paragraph: The theoretical basis (the part that makes this principle a matter of reasoning rather than a comforting platitude): an uptrend can't reverse straight into a complete downtrend unless there's an extremely large piece of news. It has to decelerate gradually, dissipate the previous wave's energy, shift into a range, and only then fall. So a single candle sweeping through the SL — which only takes a few minutes — structurally isn't qualified to count as reversal evidence.

Paragraph: A very common mistake, and it never shows up on the statement: getting stopped out, giving up, turning off the screen and going to sleep, not monitoring anymore — and then price runs in the old direction while you stand outside. The real damage from that trade isn't the 1% SL, it's the entire wave you missed.

Paragraph: The process after getting stopped out:

1. Draw no conclusion about the trend. Reopen the higher timeframe and check: does H1/M15 still hold its up-trait?
2. Still holds + buying force comes back on the small timeframe (M5) ⇒ this is data to keep entering, not a reason to stay away.
3. The higher timeframe has also turned down ⇒ stop, wait for a clear short wave. Don't force a re-entry out of the momentum of regret.
4. The case of a deep wick sweep through support: treat it as an anomaly you have to accept — "there has to be fish in a pond of water." The re-entry signal: a fake strong break, and then the small timeframe pulls RSI up into the ~60 zone = downward force has run out.

Paragraph: The closing line about trying to dodge anomalies: don't. The secret to dodging 100% of anomalies is not playing at all. A 1% SL is nothing compared to the wave right after it.

Paragraph: The consequence for someone who doesn't sit watching the screen: enter with less capital, leave a wider price gap — if stopped out, it's still just 1%. Someone diligent enough to sit and watch a small timeframe gets to capture more; that's a law of life, not the system's unfairness. This is the same trade-off already described in the "two types of SL: easygoing and optimal" section above — this section adds the after getting stopped out half of that same choice.

Paragraph: When out of phase, lower your expectations in advance, don't wait to get stopped out before lowering them. When H4 is out of phase with 12h/1D: lower your expectations, raise your caution, manage capital tightly. The typical failure chain runs the other way — getting drunk on the wave during the momentum phase, then entering an out-of-phase stretch while still holding the old expectations ⇒ getting stopped out ⇒ trading against it ⇒ abandoning the SL ⇒ blowing up. See The Psychology Switch (the psychology hand-off switch).

Putting it into practice

The process each time you want to move the SL

1. Which timeframe does the main wave belong to? (the target)
2. Has the neighboring smaller timeframe finished a correction wave yet?
3. Does that correction wave still hold its validity (support not broken, RSI ≥ 40)?
4. Has the continuation wave started running yet? Not yet → wait.
5. Once all 4 points above are met → place the SL just slightly below that support zone (roughly a few dozen points for BTC, eyeballed, no fixed number), not glued right against the candle wick.

Paragraph: No support zone is good enough yet: split the size into 2–3 parts, enter 1 part first with the SL below the whole range cluster; wait for the small timeframe to build a confirmed support, then enter the rest and move the SL up → a nice position, a tight SL.

Paragraph: Entering late: the SL has to be farther away → reduce the size so that even if stopped out, you still only lose 1% of the account. Someone entering early and someone entering late put the SL at the same spot; they differ only in size. This is the boundary between "entering late but by the rules" and "entering late and breaking the rules."

Paragraph: Adding to a position: after moving the SL to a new step, you can add more; the total risk is recalculated by the new SL point. You can use existing profit as a "cushion" for the added trade instead of spending another 1% of risk. In exchange, you have to enter and exit more, and monitor more laboriously.

What the teacher stresses / common traps

• "Haggling with the market" is a common ailment: demanding a very tight SL, nitpicking every dozen points → either you lose the opportunity, or you get swept. Better to place the SL below the whole range cluster to be safe.
• Closing too early out of fear of losing profit is a worse mistake than a loss. An example from the session: Mr. B closed early at resistance while m15 still had upward momentum and H1 was still uptrending → that trade earned more than Mr. A's, but it's a top-calling mindset; 8 times out of 10 the market keeps rising further → in the long run Mr. B both earns less overall and breeds the psychology of chase-buying, calling tops, getting stopped out. See The rush psychology when entering a trade (the psychology of rushing into a trade).
• Judge a trade not by its profit but by whether all 4 steps were done correctly: identifying the trend → determining the dominant timeframe → entering at the right point → managing the trade correctly. A breakeven trade where all 4 steps were done right is still a successful trade.
• A few sharply jerking candles say nothing on their own. A wave's data comes from a combination of candles, not from 1–3 of them.
• There's no such thing as "the entry point" and "the take-profit point" — only an entry zone and a take-profit zone. Drop the concept of a single point from your head, and only then can you observe calmly.
• Accept: there are candles that shoot so fast they bite the SL and then price runs on again — that's a probability you have to pay, one you can't control.

Related lessons

• Three sensitive points of a wave (the three sensitive points of a wave) — at the 3 sensitive points, you must close manually and flexibly instead of relying on the moved SL
• Overlapping waves & the responsible timeframe (overlapping waves and the responsible timeframe) — deciding which timeframe to move the SL by
• High-probability patterns (high-probability pattern) — the pattern decides the expectation, the expectation decides how you hold
• Entry point (entry point) — moving the SL is exactly finding an entry point on a small timeframe
• Wave logic (wave logic) · Rising momentum / falling momentum (QTT – QTG) (RSI up/down momentum) — the foundation for correctly identifying a wave and its support by timeframe
• The rush psychology when entering a trade (the psychology of rushing into a trade) — the root of moving the SL/closing too early on emotion