2026-06-03 · 5 min read
Session edge, AI coach verdict, and running P&L for 2026-06-03.
Trim Review
How much of today's result was carried by a few outliers? The table recomputes the core session stats with the biggest movers removed. Trimmed rows are colored vs baseline: green = holds most of the move, amber = meaningful erosion, red = collapses or flips sign.
| Scenario | Trades | Net P&L | Total R | E[R] / trade | $ WR | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline (all trades) | 43 | +$2604.04 | +2.90R | +0.068R | 48.8% | 1.34 |
| − single best + single worst | 41 | +$1557.65 | +1.74R | +0.042R | 48.8% | 1.28 |
| − top 3 + bottom 3 (≈5% each tail) | 37 | +$1864.58 | +2.08R | +0.056R | 48.6% | 1.54 |
Trimmed trades: Single best + single worst — removed SDOT +$3002.66 (best) · SDOT −$1956.27 (worst). Top 3 + bottom 3 — removed 3 from each tail (by $ P&L).
Broad green session: still clearly green after trimming the biggest movers, so the day was a stack of small plus-EV decisions compounding — not a few home runs.
Session verdict
Across 41 positions for +$2.94k, 5 SDOT trades in the $5–10 bucket defined the risk: +3.35R / +$3.00k and +1.07R / +$963.20 versus -2.18R / -$1.96k, -1.24R / -$1.11k, and -1.17R / -$1.05k, so 12.2% of your trades (5/41) produced gross swings of +$3.96k and -$4.12k around a modest positive day. The $0.25–0.50 bucket booked 11 trades for +$1.06k at 63.6% WR, and the $2–3 bucket had 4 trades for +$625.44 at 75.0% WR, yet you allocated only 15 total trades to those higher-WR, lower-ticket buckets versus 15 trades into $5–10 where WR was 46.7% and the SDOT cluster introduced large tails.
With 9 trades in $3–5 producing -$891.34 at 22.2% WR and only 1 trade in $0.50–1.00 for -$20.98, most of your downside came from the $3–5 band while you put very little capital to work in the middle of the sub-$5 spectrum. Because every SDOT trade printed in the $5–10 bucket and the 5 SDOT positions alone went from -$4.12k gross on the three losers to +$3.96k gross on the two winners, the +$2.94k realized outcome hinged on how that single name behaved inside a broader tape where small-ticket buckets were quietly positive.
Significance and conceptual math
Today’s 48.8% WR (20/41) is almost identical to your 90d baseline 47.3% (1785/3770), with z=0.183 and p≈0.8550, so the day’s P&L comes from sizing and R distribution rather than a statistically meaningful WR jump. E[R] at 0.080R is nearly double the baseline 0.042R, and with avg win/loss at $505.30 / -$341.40 giving 1.48:1 reward:risk versus a breakeven WR of 40.3%, the combination of a slightly higher WR (+1.5pp vs baseline) and better payoff ratio explains how +2.94k printed without a WR outlier.
Profit factor at 1.41 sits between your recent 7d PF 1.73 and prior 30d PF 1.14, placing today as a mid-strength realization in the context of the current upswing rather than a statistical extreme. The 5 material SDOT trades (2 winners, 3 losers) produced +$3.96k in gross wins and -$4.12k in gross losses (PF ≈ 0.96 within that cluster), so the overall 1.41 PF required the remaining 36 trades to generate about +$3.10k.
Finishing at 48.8% WR versus a 40.3% breakeven WR gave you an 8.5pp buffer, enough to absorb three SDOT losses between -$1.05k and -$1.96k without erasing the session. The $0.25–0.50 bucket at 63.6% WR and +$1.06k on 11 trades plus the $2–3 bucket at 75.0% WR and +$625.44 on 4 trades together contributed about +$1.69k, roughly 57% of the day’s net, while $3–5 lost -$891.34, so most of the expectancy lift came from smaller-priced names rather than the mid-price band.
With last 7d WR at 48.2% and PF 1.73 versus prior 30d WR 44.8% and PF 1.14, today’s 48.8% WR and 1.41 PF are consistent with the recent improvement in expectancy even though realized variance was concentrated in a single $5–10 ticker. The fact that 1 trade in the $100+ bucket returned +$557.40 at 100% WR while 9 trades in $3–5 lost -$891.34 at 22.2% WR shows that, on this tape, more of your risk was deployed into the weakest price band by realized performance.
What you might have missed
Across 41 positions, the lone $100+ trade at +$557.40 out-earned the entire 9-trade $3–5 bucket, which lost -$891.34 at 22.2% WR, even though you only touched $100+ once. The 36 non-material positions (all under |1R|) collectively added about +$3.10k, while the 5 material SDOT trades were roughly -$0.16k in aggregate, so the headline swings in SDOT obscured that most of the day’s money came from many small, controlled trades.
Despite posting 63.6% WR and +$1.06k in the $0.25–0.50 bucket and 75.0% WR and +$625.44 in $2–3, you put only 15 trades into those zones versus 24 trades in the $3–10 buckets where $3–5 alone lost -$891.34.
One thing to try next session
Next session, impose a hard cap of 5 SDOT entries in the $5–10 bucket and consciously reallocate at least 5 additional trades toward the $0.25–0.50 and $2–3 buckets, then review whether shifting those clicks into today’s demonstrated high-WR, +$1.69k zones lowers your dependence on a single mid-priced name for P&L.