WHAT’S CHANGED Last week’s note focused on abnormal volume appearing after significant structural damage — historically a condition that tends to show up near inflection zones, not for timing, but for identifying where risk begins to compress. Price is lower since that post. From a risk standpoint, that improves asymmetry rather than invalidating the framework. This week adds an important data point. HTF STRUCTURE - HTF Demand Zone: 76.76 – 82.82 - Key Reference Area: ~78 (within the lower portion of HTF demand) - Prior Imbalance: 86.86 – 88.52 (now fully filled) Notable observation: The largest volume transacted in IGV’s history occurred within this demand zone, and price held. High volume following imbalance resolution, coupled with demand response, typically reflects participation returning rather than exhaustion. HOW I’M WEIGHING PROBABILITIES - Largest historical volume print at HTF demand - Demand zone holding so far - Risk here is better than it was higher - Further downside is possible, but downside continuation is not where I’d allocate probability at this location This isn’t a conviction statement. It’s a location assessment. CONTEXT This still carries downside risk. This does not imply: - A confirmed bottom - That price cannot trade lower - That size should be aggressive It does imply: - Risk is compressing relative to prior levels - Long-term positioning makes more sense here than higher - Elevated fear is present, which is information rather than a signal If this zone fails, then the thesis is simply wrong — with risk defined. POSITIONING NOTES - Already positioned (shared previously) - Managing risk rather than adding indiscriminately - Favoring scaled exposure - Focus remains on higher-quality software names within IGV - Letting price confirm continuation before adjusting No rush. No prediction. Just location and risk.

Quick heads up: I’m updating my charts tonight for the No‑Chase Swing levels on U.S. stocks and major crypto. If you want me to prioritize something you’re watching, drop your request below with the Ticker

We just wrapped the live “Build Your First No‑Chase Plan” implementation call. If you couldn’t make it live, you didn’t miss your shot. The replay is the implementation call for you. 👉 Replay is here: https://www.skool.com/the-trading-desk-2388/classroom/4a51377f?md=97a0bdddf30d4e0cbc834392a37c3e3c On this session, we: - Walked through the No‑Chase Swing Method step by step - Marked higher‑timeframe zones together - Chose entries, stops, and targets that don’t require chasing - Built ONE clean swing plan you can actually execute around a 9–5 Your homework (whether you came live or not): 1. Watch the replay. 2. Post ONE trade plan in Trade Reviews & Help using this exact format: - Ticker: - Direction (long/short): - HTF zone screenshot + why it qualifies - Entry: - Stop: - Target(s): Tag @Albert Wang and I’ll review it.

I initiated my first position in Microsoft today. This is execution on the prior watchlist, not a new thesis. To increase probability of profit in this market, I used a defined-risk, long-dated structure instead of a stock entry: - Bought: MSFT Jan 17, 2027 $400 Call - Sold: MSFT Jan 17, 2027 $450 Call - Structure: Bull Call Spread This allows me to: - Get upside exposure near the $400 decision level - Reduce sensitivity to short-term volatility - Let HTF demand and time do the work without needing perfect timing This is a position-style trade, not a one-and-done entry. I’m comfortable building only if price works deeper into HTF demand and structure remains intact. The line in the sand remains structural, not emotional:Clean acceptance below the lower HTF demand (~345) would change the thesis. original analysis: https://www.skool.com/the-trading-desk-2388/microsoft-msft-long-swing-position

Quick reality check: The last stretch of swings has been tough. A bunch of clean setups simply haven’t followed through. That doesn’t mean “nothing works.” It means we’re in one of those periods where the distribution is doing its job: clustering more losers and breakevens together. This is exactly where most traders blow up or quit. It’s also where professionals separate themselves. 1. Trading = probabilities + risk/reward Even with a real edge, you will have: - Strings of losers - Good trades that lose - Periods that feel brutal The edge only shows up over a large sample size. One month of pain doesn’t erase years of data. For context: over the last couple of years I’ve averaged over 100% annualized. That is not typical and it’s not a promise. I’m sharing it so you understand: even with strong long-term results, I still sit through patches like this. That’s part of how those returns happen. 2. What I’m doing right now Here’s exactly how I’m responding: - Sticking to the No‑Chase rules on entries, stops, and size - Keeping risk per trade tight and avoiding “make it back fast” behavior - Saying no to marginal setups instead of forcing action - Reviewing every trade to separate bad execution from normal variance This is how you treat trading like a high‑income business skill, not a hobby. 3. What this means for you If you’re frustrated, that’s normal. The goal isn’t zero drawdowns. The goal is to learn to operate like a pro through them: - Respect your stop - Protect your downside - Size like you expect to be here 5–10 years from now - Focus on process, not needing every call to work I’ll keep sharing the levels, the plans, and now more post‑trade breakdowns, so you can see how a trader thinks in these chapters, not just when everything rips. We’re not here for a straight line. We’re here to build a skill that can pay you for years. Drop a comment with any recent trade you want me to break down and I’ll walk through it.