# Case: compare two trade lists > Two journals, two styles: compare expectancy after costs, drawdown, sample size and discipline, then say which plan is worth continuing and what would change your mind. - Course: [Trading Basics: How It Works, How Not to Lose Everything](https://productovi.com/courses/trading.md) - Module: Can I lose often and still come out ahead? - Lesson 16/32, ~39 min - Source: https://productovi.com/courses/trading/compare-two-trade-lists ## Two journals **Alex Tutor:** Back on your Pebble practice account, today you're the judge. Nora and Marc each started with 10,000 and want to know whose plan is better. Both journals are in one file. **Dataset (CSV):** [Two practice journals](https://productovi.com/datasets/trading/compare-two-trade-lists/m4_two_journals.csv) Journal A is Nora's (12 trades), journal B is Marc's second plan (45 trades). net_result is after fees; planned risk of a trade = (entry − stop) × size. - `journal`: A (Nora) or B (Marc) - `size`: Units traded - `plan_followed`: Was the written plan followed? - `net_result`: Result after fees, dollars **Nora:** Easy win for me. 9 wins out of 12, plus 1,104.27. Marc made 391.86 in 45 trades. Case closed. **Sofia:** A total from 12 trades and a total from 45 aren't the same kind of number, though. **Marc:** I won't argue with the totals. But a total isn't a plan. Let's put the same four questions to both lists. ![Alex stands at a table like a judge; Nora waits beside a small pile of big uneven stones, Marc beside a long neat row of small even pebbles.](https://productovi.com/courses/trading/diagrams/m4-l4-scene.png) **Alex Tutor:** Four questions: the average trade after costs, the worst drawdown, how many trades, and whether the risk per trade stayed steady. Start with the first. **Alex Tutor:** Before any numbers: match each question with what it protects you from. > **Exercise:** Match each question for a trade list with what it tells you. > **Exercise:** Journal A: 12 trades, +1,104.27 after fees. What is its expectancy per trade, in dollars? **Nora:** Ten times better. I rest my case. **Sofia:** But 12 trades is under 30. That number is "too few to tell". **Alex Tutor:** Exactly. And look at how Nora's 12 trades were sized. Planned risk is the distance to the stop times the size. **Marc:** Trade 1: (37.88 − 36.61) × 118 = 149.86. Trade 8: (48.34 − 47.05) × 620 = 799.80. Her risk went from 1.5% of the account to 8%. **Alex Tutor:** Check one row yourself: what did Nora plan to risk on trade 8? > **Exercise:** Journal A, trade 8: a long on NWF with entry 48.34, stop 47.05 and size 620 units. What was the planned risk to the stop, in dollars? > **Exercise:** In journal A the size grows from 118 to 620 units, and trade 8 has plan_followed = no. What does that mean for its expectancy of 92.02? **Nora:** I sized up because I was winning. Doesn't that make sense? **Alex Tutor:** Look again at trades 7 and 8. Trade 7 lost 413.38. Trade 8 then doubled the planned risk, to 799.80, and held past the stop. That's chasing a loss, not sizing up. ## The worst stretch **Alex Tutor:** Now the drawdown. Nora's account peaked at 11,788.22 after trade 6. Then came trades 7 and 8. Drawdown shows what living with a plan actually feels like. **Nora:** Minus 413.38, then minus 1,149.00. The second one I held past my stop. > **Exercise:** From the 11,788.22 peak, journal A lost 413.38 and then 1,149.00. What was the drawdown, in percent of the peak? One decimal. **Marc:** Mine has a smaller average, 8.71 a trade, and fees ate 253.16. That's a thin edge. But my risk never went above 100, and 45 trades is past the 30 mark. **Sofia:** So per trade A looks far better, but its worst stretch was more than twice as deep as B's. **Nora:** In two trades. I remember that week. **Alex Tutor:** Now the third question. What can each journal's length honestly support? > **Exercise:** Journal A has 12 trades, journal B has 45. Which statement about the evidence is fair? > **Exercise:** Because journal A has the higher total and the higher win rate, it is the better plan. **Nora:** So my 1,104 is luck? **Alex Tutor:** Maybe not, but we can't tell yet. What could be wrong with Marc's result too? It's thin after costs, it's one stretch of the market, and 45 trades is still a first reading. Judging the plan you like as hard as the one you don't is the whole skill. **Marc:** And I'm not calling mine proven either. Just worth another 45 trades. **Alex Tutor:** Last check before you write: what could still be wrong with the plan we just picked? > **Exercise:** Journal B looks like the plan worth continuing. Which doubts about it are fair? > **Exercise:** Nora's journal A holds 12 trades, with sizes from 118 to 620 units, and trade 8 broke the plan. In 2–3 sentences, tell Nora what she would need to change in her journal so that it could be judged fairly next time. **Alex Tutor:** Notice that none of this needed a chart. Four questions, a calculator and the honesty to put them to both lists. **Alex Tutor:** Now the module's case. Write the verdict both of them will read: which plan is worth continuing, with numbers, and what could still be wrong. **Marc:** And be as hard on mine as on hers. **Nora:** Fine. Just be fair, and use the numbers, not my mood that week. > **Exercise:** Compare the two journals and say which plan is worth continuing. > **Educational, not advice** > > This lesson is educational, not advice. A good practice journal is not a promise for real money. Most people who trade lose money, and you can lose all of it. For taxes and rules, check with a licensed professional where you live. - Previous lesson: [Drawdown: why losses hit harder than gains](https://productovi.com/courses/trading/drawdown-and-ruin.md) - Next lesson: [Candles and timeframes](https://productovi.com/courses/trading/candles-and-timeframes.md) --- Productovi Learning. Free, no sign-up needed to read.