Trader Mayne's Framework — His Higher-Timeframe Rule Holds, His Entry Does Not
Trader Mayne · MNQ
On his own rules nothing clears the noise, and his higher-timeframe rule helps on every lens.
966 trades · 15.1% win
TEST IT ON OUR CHART ›
ICT's setups are taught more than anyone else's and tested less than almost any of them. These are his claims coded exactly as stated - the gap fill percentage, the TGIF pullback, order blocks, staged entries - each against real data and a control.
On his own rules nothing clears the noise, and his higher-timeframe rule helps on every lens.
On his rules gold makes money and his London window helps. Too few trades to call it proven.
A coin flip. The loss is exactly the commission.
Every level in a range looks like it works - so a random line has to be the test.
56%, not 70% - and the wrong side of the open fills just as often.
Applied as instructed, it hit the claimed band in 4 of 45 weeks.
Every rung of the ladder made it worse.
The rules come from the teacher's own public video or write-up — or, for a textbook method or our own research, the page says so. They are coded as stated and run over years of futures data from a commercial market-data vendor, with commission charged on every trade; slippage is not modelled. Where a teacher gives no number, every value in the plausible range is tested and all of them are shown — not only the best one. Each page states the market, the period, the sample and the costs used.
Written with software. The tests are code, and the code and much of the writing were produced with AI assistance. Every result comes from that research code. The words around the numbers are written from those results — if you find one that disagrees with its own numbers, tell us and it gets fixed.
If a number here is wrong, say so. Email hello@tradingbite.net with the page and what you think is wrong. If a teacher believes their rules were read incorrectly, tell us how they should be read and we will re-run the test and publish the result, whichever way it goes.
This is not advice. These are tests of publicly taught methods on historical data, published so you can check them yourself. Past results do not predict future results. Trading futures can lose you more than you put in. Terms and full disclaimer ›