Intro

This system is fully based on MentFx methods, system is backtested with

over 1000 trades and live traded over 600 trades, it passed two funded
challenges (in 3 months and in 4 months) and, with higher quality setups,
produces stable results (for me it’s 2-5 per week on average, so some weeks
are still negative of course). Depending on your management style, it can give
15-50% winrate (20% for me for 5R, 40% for 2R, but winrate for higher
qualities setups are higher), and it makes sense to target 2-10RR (I personally
used a fixed target of 5-7RR for a year, recently moved to 2RR, since it’s much
easier to catch and doesn’t require to sit over reacc. or redis on the way, also
much easier on the mind, and kind of fun for me, because of winrate, and
then I know that 2R trades happen several times a day for me, so fomo is not
that hard).
In a nutshell, the system is about Clear Context, which for me is a
confluence between good quality SSC’s and Models on Multitimeframe basis,
confirmed with simple MB or DMB on Entry timeframe + CS (any other
confirm is ok, I also use ICI sometimes).
This doc includes detailed description of a checklist I use, and also here’s
a video explainer:

What is Context?
Defining Context is like trying to understand what a person says to you in
a foreign language that you don’t fully know, and so when you speak to
someone, sometimes you can’t understand everything 100% clear, but at the
same time you can spot clues, understand sentences partially, combine them
and have a better understanding based on the context of what’s being said to
you (tourist looking for a railway station).
Same way in the markets - we never know for sure where and how price
will go, but using instruments like SSC and Models (words and sentences of
the market), we can have a better idea of what can happen and than confirm
our ideas with tested entries.
So SSC and Models are like words and sentences of a language in which
market is communicating with us during this specific moment about the price,
where it was and how developed, and at the same time where it can go in the
future.

I divide Context into Analysis Context and Execution Context.

I have approximate levels of quality for Context:
A: 12+ points, B+: 9+ points, B: 7+ points.
These points are just approximate indication of clear context, so no real
need to use them in this way, but maybe it can be useful to start with
something like that, as an alternative way to indicate the quality.

Step 1 - Analysis Context

1.1 Confluence between SSC (+1), based on Real and Fractal
Structure (use MentFx Structure indicator if needed).
Ideally, you’ll have at least 2-3 confluences between relatively distant
timeframes, they will be your Higher Timeframe, Middle Timeframe, Entry
Timeframe.
For example, you can have bullish Weekly or Daily range, bullish 1h or
4h, and bullish 1, 5 or 15 min. Exact timeframes are not important, they just
need to be relatively distant from one another, to give you a general picture of
the market.
I usually use Weekly-3D-Daily- as HTF, 30min.-4h. as MTF, and 1-5 min. as
ETF.
Example of Daily, 1h and 5 min. range confluence:

1.2 Clarity of SSC on MTF basis (+1).

Clear, better quality IMPULSES usually are:
- literally “clear” moves;
- created confident BOS;
- consist of relatively full body candles, with no slowing down in the middle;
- not too overextended/all over the place, but composed and clear structure
Clear, better quality SnD ZONES usually:
- consist of 1-3 full body unmitigated candles, they are not overly small or big.
- same on neighbour timeframes
- caused a break of some kind
- mitigated something or ideally created a cluster/chain of SnD’s.
- situated within a high-quality Impulse.
- confluence with other SnD’s (meaning more potential orders to mitigate in the
area), for example a wick and 50%, or LTF zone + HTF.

Example of a clean impulse and zone

Example of a messy impulse and zone

 1.3 Clarity and confluence of Models on different timeframes
(Acc, Dis, Reac, Redis) (+1) (Yes, you can trade it without models at all,
just based on Multitimeframe structure confluence)
Ideally they will support your multitimeframe SSC analysis, or even have
confluence between the models on different timeframes. Sometimes the
models is not there and what you have is just basic DMB, that’s also fine. But
having models gives you a better picture of context.
See additional info on Models in the end of this doc.
1.4 Additional context can include (one point each):
- Free money zone (in other words, are you entering near the zone,
on the way to targeted high, before or during the break of it, or
significantly later when the break and new impulse happened);
- No Overextension based on structure (7+ mb’s in a row or more);
- Price action against your main bias, so why your idea can fail.
Answer this question to see more complete picture.
 - Clusters and Chains/2.0 of SnD, Calm Waves (clear, one-sided, not
overextended candles, not too wicky):

Step 2 - Execution Context

2.1 Are we entering a trade directly from the MTF zone or

already moved away a bit/proved the model on ETF (+1 if we have
clear remod on ETF from MTF zone). Straight from the zone entry is
usually a bad idea, it’s better to wait for Acc\Dis on ETF + MB/DMB.

2.2 How the price reacts in the zone (+1 if not against
immediate impulse), is it showing signs of slowing down and moving to our
direction (cs, triple m, fractal MB etc.) or is it just falling quickly through the
zone with no signs of slowing down?
 2.3 Optimal session for a pair.
2.4 Was there not too much movement during this specific day
already? (+1) Rhythm of the market.
2.5 Chain of SnD’s/Build up/Waves (+1) on ETF or MTF
2.6 Aware of the red news, not entering 15 min. before or after.
(+1)
2.7 HTF context should support MDT context, which should
support ETF context.
2.8 Is it clear to you personally (+1), based on what you know -
don't force.
2.9 Know your invalidation point, and it should be invalidation and
not the reason to look for trades in other direction.
2.10 Emotional check and balance (+1). Staying out is an
important skill to master.

Step 3 - Confirmation
Confirmation is basically fractal representation of Step 1 and Step 2, on
Entry timeframe. In it’s simple form it’s just an MB or DMB with a tap in the
zone (bigger or refined) + CS or Triple M. I’m using CS usually.
But because it’s a fractal Step 1-2, then you need to consider Models
presented on ETF and also quality of SSC.
 Step 4 - Management
I go for b.e. discretionally based on price development (various ways of
managing are in the course), and then take full position at 2R (3, 5, 7RR for
this system is good as well, choose what suit your personality). I risk 0.25-0.5%
per trade.

Step 5 - Journal, do weekly recaps, analyse

Perfomance every 100-200 trades.
 Step 6 - For improving your mental game I recommend
The Mental Game by Jared Tandler

SETUP QUALITY LEVELS

Good setup are very clear and obvious, “screaming” and they present
themselves. Good losses will feel ok. Be willing to miss the day and it’s ok to
say I don’t know cause the market is not clear based on what I know
at the moment. Analyse the market later and use what you’ve found.

With Quality levels concept you can know where the trade is good
before entering a trade.
For every trade, write out what could be better for it to level up to A or B+. Find
most joy in quality of execution, and not in P&L, cause quality is something you
control in the moment of entry and what allows you to feel good in the moment
of placing trade, and it allows you to feel not that bad even after a loser.
Learn to receive joy form following the system, as profit is not always a sign of
trading master, but the ability to consistently execute your best setups and the
crucial skill of staying out is probably a better indication.
At the end of each week or day, or as part of hindsight research, write out B+, A,
A+ setups, how many entries they gave, other notes, journal.
Follow basic rules and you will be fine. You’re here for just part of the move,
traders share the same pain, respect the pain
You’re not your latest trade, the next trade is the most important trade in the
world

A: Max Quality

1. Directional bias/ment sentiment, confluence of 3 relatively distant

timeframes. Main starting point is Daily\4h Mod+DMB, or Remod +
2.0. Structure/snd’s should be very clear.
2. Confluence between 1 min. and 10-20min., or 5 and 60min. etc. (real or
very clear inside\2.0 is also possible)
3. A-Context, Clear SSC on ETF, dmb/re-mod.
4. From the last zone, or from clear 2.0’s build up (ideally after mitigation
of MB or deeper zones + move away from them), or before/during the
break of 5-15-60-240 min. highs after mitigation of the zone or MB.
5. Max 3 breaks on ETF (1-5m.) and MTD (15-60m.), and ideally we’ll have
last MB’s as clusters. Max 2 entries from ETF zone, 3 entries from MTF.
6. London-3h after NY open. Not on bank holidays. No entry 15 min.
before and 10 min. after red news, mindset is very stable. I would
definetely take this setup once again even knowing it’s a loser.

B(+) High quality

1. Directional bias/ment sentiment, confluence of 3 relatively distant

timeframes, ie daily, 1h, 15m, 1m. Structure/snd’s should be clear.
2. Confluence between 1-15min., 5-60 etc. (real or clear inside\2.0 is also
possible)
3. True ETF dmb/remodel or very clear inside structure\ici, aligned with
ETF model: for sideways\unclear in the zone (possible accumulation) of
5-15-60 - enter from DMB on ETF during highliq. session, so prove the
model on ETF.
A-B Context.
4. If sideways/unclear in the zone of 5-15-60, only one entry with the first
shift on ETF (so it’s still more like remodel).
5. From the last zone, or from clear 2.0’s build up (ideally after mitigation
of MB or deeper zones), or before/during the break of 5-15-60-240 min.
highs after mitigation of the zone or MB.
6. If after the break on MDT, wait for clear
tightness\remod\sideways\pullback (at least 3 candles). Then trade as
usual on ETF, or if still inside the tightness - clear ranges and context,
ideally after the break of 1h tightness on 5-15 min.
ONLY 2 entries inside the tightness for B+, during high liq session.
7. Max 5 breaks on ETF (1-5m.) and MTD (15-60), and ideally we’ll have
3-5th as a cluster. If 6, wait for reac + new break or clear 2.0\inside
structure. Max 3 entries from ETF zone, 3 entries from same MTF zone.
8. 2h before London-2h before NY close, lunch time (12-14) London if
setup is EXTREMELY CLEAR. Not on bank holidays. Wait 5 min. before
and after red news, mindset is more or less neutral, entry is not
emotional. Most likely, I would take this setup once again even knowing
it’s a loser.

B: Average Quality
 1. Directional bias/ment sentiment, confluence of 2 relatively distant
timeframes, ie daily, 1h, 15m, 1m. Structure/snd’s should be clear.
2. Confluence between 1-15min., 5-60 etc. (real or clear inside\2.0 is also
possible)
3. True ETF dmb/remodel or clear inside structure\ici, aligned with ETF
model: for sideways\unclear in the zone (possible accumulation) of
5-15-60 - enter from DMB on ETF during highliq. session, so prove the
model on ETF.
4. If sideways/unclear in the zone of 5-15-60, only two entries with the first
shift on ETF (so it’s still more like remodel).
5. From the last zone, or from clear 2.0’s build up (ideally after mitigation
of MB or deeper zones), or before/during the break of 5-15-60-240 min.
highs after mitigation of the zone or MB.
6. If after the break on MDT, wait for clear
tightness\remod\sideways\pullback (at least 3 candles). Then trade as
usual on ETF, or if still inside the tightness - clear ranges and context,
ideally after the break of 1h tightness on 5-15 min.
ONLY 3 entries inside the tightness for B, during high liq session.
7. Max 7 breaks on ETF (1-5m.) and MTD (15-60), and ideally we’ll have
3-5th as a cluster. If 8, wait for reac + new break or clear 2.0\inside
structure.
8. 2h before London-2h before NY close, lunch time (12-14) London. Not
on bank holidays. Wait 5 min. before and after red news, mindset is
more or less neutral, entry is not very emotional. Most likely, I would
not take this setup if I knew it will be a loser. This setup can feel a bit
awkward. It’s like something is missing. It may even look ok, but then
we feel want it to be a bit better. It may feel like you want to force the
market to go your way, but not really.
What usually lacks for A or B+: messy MDT/ETF, not aligned with
model (often against remod), too early attempts from the zone, when it’s
wicky accumulation, or too late when the move is over, not optimal
sessions, not clear looking patterns, too early entries after the break,
against 5-15-60 min, especially against 15 min.

C: Low Quality (stay out)

More unclear than B, especially on MTF.
Mostly C is about Confirm and MTF, which will be very unclear:
 - Confirmed against the immediate impulsive PA on ETF, it usually happens after a
good loser; (no CS or price slowing down)
- On a BUY, Model on ETF is CLEARLY Dis or especially redis (so it’s only first
or second break to our direction after sustained trend), and vice versa.
- Very wicky 1-2-4h, and no directional support from 5-30 min.
- Entry obviously against 15 AND 60 min. at the same time or sometimes against any
other obvious MTF combination. Usually, it will be combined with bad internal
structure.
- Confirmed with fractal structure only.
- Confirmed with no candle break or slowing down of price.
- Confirmed with internal should be very clean to be B. Otherwise, it’s B-.
- obvious wicky sideway movement on 5-15mi. (do not confuse it with tightening of
ICI after first impulse)
- Overall absence of good context, messy price action, not enough confluence,
early entries etc.
- Intuition, feeling something is very wrong (usually you will know what’s
wrong, like trying to catch early entries etc.), especially during low emotional
days.
- Daily loss limit reached (for me its when I had 3 losses of B- quality, or 3
losses with risk of x1.5 compared with the plan, or -2% reached)
- Zone entry limit reached

Additional notes on Models

The price is not only it’s recent break, but it’s acc and dis of orders.

Acc is relatively wicky back and forth for some time + bullish, mainly in bullish
SSC, also it’s when current ranges are wicked back and forth for absorption, so
PA is not clean and not actually holding yet, which is another form of strong to
weak hands transfer.

One of the differences between acc and reac is clarity, rangyness, number of
back and forth and how horizontal they are (for example, reacumulation is
much more one sided compared to acc), imbalances (acc is more wicky and
doesn’t live many imbalances), and overall reac is better holding of structure.
Depending on the area of the chart you choose to look at + the last move you can
be in different models at the same time. Experience and market observation will
help to read models better and adequately. Look at confluence between different
portions of the price action + recent SSC’s to understand it better.
Sometimes several reac cycles + bearish shift could indicate dis, cause we had
back and forth and now bearish break.

It’s important where mod develops (in fact it happens everywhere all
the time so we should be picky), so it should be all connected with SSC.

We expect mod around zone from HTF SSC, which will show that the
model is holding and delivering, and money stepped in.
Smart money get involved on initial SSC, and markups are easy for usual traders
to enter in.
Simply, we can see it as Stage 1 which is Accumulation or Potential Reac., and
then Stage 2 which is classical mark up, that could last for 2-5 MB’s usually
before reac. and then new continuation
To confirm reac you can observe 2.0 that started to deliver after reac, so no need
for full confirmation.

Reac/redis could be horizontal or vertical (pullback), you can prove

them on LTF or HTF, or trade current model, or wait for more
development. Reac-redis 3-4 breaks max usually, and it’s better to not trade
potential remod with 4 shifts.
How to use? For example - HTF break up, pullback. If pullback is
backandforth + bullish, then it’s more likely an acc. If it’s just bearish, bearish,
bearish, bullish, then it could be a redis (and thaaaat’s why it’s better to enter
later cause we’ll actually wait for decent acc)

Mods can develop in many ways, and should be confirmed with other Models
and SSC on other TF (and relation between their quality).
For example, redis on some TF could be developed within “bad, weak, mitigated
or irrelevant at that time” demand zone from HTF

Mods must be analysed together with SSC, in this way when a possible redis is
happening in a bullish SSC, than maybe it makes sense to see bigger picture and
see it as a reac with a bigger box drawn, or just WAIT for clear acc\reac from
that SSC, or the failing of that bullish SSC.
THE BLUEPRINT is even wider view of models, and if it’s clear, I use
it to support overall context:
Stage 1: Back and Forth (wicky/accumulation), ideally in some HTF zone or
inside the contextual HTF range, some bullish PA (initial SSC, usually of
average quality), Back and Forth again, like one more accumulation with a high
chance of a break below initial SSC/HTF ABSORPTION/accumulation,
Transition: Clusters Up (more clear SSC’s, already possible for entries), A bit
back (reac\ICI’s)
Stage 2: Again Clusters of SSC, or usually SSC/ICI, Prolonged trend, with clear
SSC and ICI after reac’s usually.
Blueprint shows that the money supporting the move
So if there was no model with the change but just huge move it says that no
really big money was involved, because they usually can’t be involved in 1 move
only.
What it gives us is understanding that Classical SSC are good for some times in
the market, but when the market is really trending than it’s better to use other
entries like EMA’s or go to LTF, or ICI’s, understanding that now we will move
more likely in REAC’s much more and price will likely not reach the deep
zones during the trend.
If you missed first entries on SSC, and realise you’re now in trending market,
you’re either enter on Larger zones mitigations, or LTF SSC.
And also it’s best to stay out during initial Back and Forth, especially on ETF,
and sometimes MTF as well.
 How to test
First, I’d recommend finding examples of the system in full hindsight
(20 should be ok), then test knowing the trend (half-hindsight, 50-100 trades)
and/or with simplified rules, like having less confluence etc., and then do a full
backtest (200 or more).
As a way of testing, I would recommend doing daily or weekly market
reviews, and find latest example of good entries and learn from them.
Before starting testing it, I highly recommend to see ALL content in the
Mentfx course.
Journal backtested trades, with screenshots.