2026-06-23 · 4 min read
Session edge, AI coach verdict, and running P&L for 2026-06-23.
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) | 37 | −$846.75 | -0.70R | -0.019R | 58.3% | 0.79 |
| − single best + single worst | 35 | −$5.41 | -0.00R | -0.000R | 58.8% | 1.00 |
| − top 2 + bottom 2 (≈5% each tail) | 33 | +$246.16 | +0.20R | +0.006R | 59.4% | 1.13 |
Trimmed trades: Single best + single worst — removed FCUV +$573.85 (best) · FCUV −$1415.18 (worst). Top 2 + bottom 2 — removed 2 from each tail (by $ P&L).
Outlier-driven red session: without the worst trade (or the bottom 5%), the rest of the book was roughly flat-to-green. The damage was concentrated — underlying behavior was fine.
Session verdict
FCUV is the whole story of this session, and it's a frustrating one because the name was right and the timing wasn't. The stock opened at 2.18, ran to 5.31 by 10:08am for a +143.6% move with two halts along the way, and then held almost all of it — closing at 4.76, retaining 82% of the run.
That is one of the best-behaved runners of the day. But your one sizeable position, the only material trade in 33, was a long at 11:10am, roughly an hour after the 10:08am high, and it cost you -$1.42k.
You bought a holder after it had already topped, into the only part of its day that was giving back ground rather than making it. Net for the session was -$943.79, so the rest of the book — 32 positions — actually netted about +$476 combined.
The single late long erased everything else and then some.
That +$476 across everything-but-FCUV is the tell on the day overall: this was a session full of real movement traded in small pieces. Five of today's runners moved +80% or more from the open, and three of them held 80%+ into the close (FCUV, BOLD at +93% holding 81%, ATLN at +133% holding 82%).
Against that backdrop your 33 positions averaged $164.86 per win and -$279.38 per loss — a reward-to-risk of 0.59:1 that needs a very high hit rate to clear, and 54.5% didn't get there. The $3–5 names carried 21 of your positions for a thin +$218, and the $2–3 group of three lost -$396.
So the volume was there and the moves were there, but the dollars extracted per name stayed small everywhere except the one place it ran the wrong way.
The intraday shape was mostly fine and the damage was concentrated. The 10:30–11:00am window produced +$690 across five positions at 80%, and the single 9:00–9:30am position added +$440 — your morning was working.
The bleed was 9:30–10:00am, ten positions for -$253, and then the 11:10am FCUV long. Worth noting across days: your 10:00–10:30am window is genuinely one-sided — green on 14 of 19 days over the 20-day window for +$22.8k — and today it was roughly flat (+$40 on eleven positions), so you were quiet in your single most reliable slot.
The 11:00–11:30am window, where FCUV landed, has been green on 12 of its last 16 days for +$11.8k; today it went the other way, which makes the FCUV loss an exception to your own pattern rather than the rule.
The two-week runner data points hard at when the high prints. Roughly fifteen runners since June 9 made their high before 7:00am ET — RDGT (5:13am, kept 20%), GITS (5:20am, 9%), and the cluster of 4:00–4:40am toppers like CIIT (-272%), VTAK (-67%), SAGT (-34%) and TNON (-47%) among them — and not one of them closed holding even half its move.
The holders were almost all later: of the runners that topped after 7:30am, FCUV (10:08am, 82%), ATLN (8:35am, 82%), BOLD (7:58am, 81%), NXTS on 6/22 (8:49am, 91%) and a half-dozen others all kept 60% or more. FCUV fit the holder profile cleanly — late high, gains retained — which is exactly why the name selection wasn't the problem.
The problem was paying for that hold an hour after it was already in the price.