An Agenda for a Review You Hold Alone

No review without a fixed agenda ever examines anything its author did not already suspect. That is the whole difficulty of doing this alone, and the sequence used at orb trading review consultoriainnova exists to work against it, since a strategy for the opening range gives its operator hundreds of small decisions to defend and no colleague to ask an inconvenient question. The order of the sections is the substitute for that colleague.

Start With Counts, Not Conclusions

The first section contains only tallies. Number of sessions, number of trades, number of trades matching each filter, number of rule violations, largest drawdown in the period. No interpretation is written yet. Doing the arithmetic before forming a view is uncomfortable and it is the only part of the agenda that reliably surfaces something unexpected.

Compare Against the Pre Written Criteria

The second section puts the counts beside the thresholds set at the start of the period and records, for each one, whether it was breached. This is a lookup rather than a judgement. Anything breached goes on a list for later sections. Anything not breached is closed for this review even when it looks worrying, because reopening it is exactly how the standard gets moved after the fact.

Read the Sessions You Skipped

The third section covers what was not traded. Setups that qualified and were passed over, mornings where the checklist was abandoned, and names removed from the watchlist during the period. The trades that did not happen are invisible in every performance number and they carry most of the information about drift in judgement.

Then the Numbers That Everyone Reads First

Expectancy, win rate, average result by day of week, and the distribution rather than the average. Placed fourth on purpose. By this point the counts, the criteria and the omissions are already written down, so a strong result cannot quietly excuse a poor compliance score and a weak one cannot trigger a redesign that the earlier sections do not support.

Close With At Most Two Actions

The final section allows no more than two changes, each with a version number, an expected effect and a date at which it will be assessed. A review that generates nine actions has produced a wish list, and none of them will be evaluated properly. Everything else goes into the queue and waits for the next interval.