I Coded FVGs — Do They Work?

and try to determine [music] if these are actually tradeable setups. The proximal gap tap breaks even at 1.96 ticks round turn and Nasdaq all in costs round [music] trip are usually two to four ticks, so that gets completely eaten by costs. You can't trade that. Testing all 24 hours, not just regular trading hours, that breaks even at 3.19 ticks, which is also probably below realistic costs. And then testing just overnight, that breaks even at 1.95 ticks, so that's also dead. Even the best hour, which is our 9:00 a.m. cash open one, breaks even around [music] three to four ticks. But if we do a much deeper entry instead of entering at the close side fair value gap, if we enter at the open of the displacement candle, then we get plus 0.13R per trade, and then we break even around 10 and 1/2 ticks. So even if we estimate pessimistic [music] costs and we take off four ticks, we still net 0.08R. If we match up the same events, the deeper entry in the gap beats the proximal edge of the gap tap by 0.2R. If you're someone who trades these ICT concepts and trades fair value gaps, that's pretty huge information. That being said, we're still just testing a feature, an individual feature. There's nothing built around this, no actual strategy. There's no position sizing or entry or exit timing or anything like that, but this is still really useful information for [music] you if you happen to trade fair value gaps. I hope that seeing a popular retail trading smart money concept confluence coded and actually statistically tested inspires you to maybe do [music] the same. And maybe to start exploring ideas beyond what's just taught on YouTube by these gurus who just want your money. There's an entire world of trading to be learned and discovered yourself when you stop listening to people who don't actually have your best interest at heart. You start actually building and testing your own stuff programmatically.