A CFD trade journal that improves decisions

Trading Plans and Discipline · CFDs Trading Guide

A journal should explain a decision well enough that you can review it without remembering how you felt. Record the process and the outcome separately.

Write the entry before the trade

Record the setup, supporting evidence, invalidation, intended duration, size and planned cash risk. Include contract multiplier, funding assumptions and relevant events. A short dated note written before execution is more useful than a polished explanation created after the result is known. Save the rule version so later changes do not rewrite the history.

Record what actually happened

Capture fills, partial executions, rejected orders, spread conditions and deviations from the plan. Reconcile net results with the statement. Track the largest favourable and adverse movement during the position if the data permits, but do not assume every favourable point was an achievable exit. Distinguish a price opportunity from an executable decision.

Grade process independently

A profitable trade that ignored a size limit is a process failure. A loss taken according to a tested rule may be a correctly executed trade. Use separate fields for rule adherence and financial outcome. This prevents one lucky gain from rewarding a behaviour that creates unacceptable risk over repeated decisions.

Review patterns at a sensible interval

Look for repeated execution errors, underestimated costs and conditions in which the setup performs differently. Avoid changing rules after every loss. Compare sufficiently large groups and preserve a record of all changes. Choose one specific process improvement at a time, then evaluate whether it actually reduces errors rather than simply making the journal longer.

Try it yourself

A trade earns $250 but uses twice the permitted size. Another loses $80 while following every rule. Which entry should be marked as a sizing breach?

Show the worked answer

The profitable $250 trade. Outcome and process are separate. The compliant loss still belongs in performance analysis, but it is not evidence of a sizing breach.