Grades that are measured
A conviction grade should be the reward-to-risk arithmetic you would do by hand, done for you — calculated, not chosen.
Most sources attach confidence words to setups — “strong”, “high conviction” — that mean whatever the sender wants on the day. A measured conviction grade is different: it marks where a setup sits in its own engine's return distribution, with a number behind it. That is the same judgement the calculator helps you make, one trade at a time.
On the pick, every setup carries a grade from A (highest) to D (lowest), and the threshold is per engine. There is no E grade; it left the live product so each of the four rungs keeps a clear meaning. The bar that earns an A is set against each engine's own returns, which is why the same letter means a different absolute move on a different clock:
| Engine | Horizon | What an A is worth here |
|---|---|---|
| Intraday | minutes inside one session | around 0.70% a trade |
| Multi-Session | a half day out to a couple of sessions | around 4.50% a trade |
| Swing | about a week to a month | around 6.00% a trade |
| Position | long-horizon, higher conviction | long-horizon scoring |
An A sits at the top of an engine's own measured return spread and D at the bottom of what still gets published. The bar moves with the clock, because a strong reward-to-risk read on a minutes-long trade and a strong one on a multi-week trade describe different absolute moves. There is no E grade — it was retired from the live product so the four rungs keep their meaning.
Why per-engine calibration matters to you
One blanket threshold laid across all four engines would quietly shortchange the fast engine and inflate the slow one: a 0.70% move and a 6.00% move are not comparable in raw size, so measuring both against a single fixed target would tell you nothing. Grading each setup against its own engine's spread means a B on a fast setup and a B on a swing setup each say the same thing — “above-typical reward for this risk, on this clock” — which is exactly what a trader who cannot take every setup needs in order to know when to size up.
And because the grade is one of the fields sealed into the on-chain hash (see locked at release), it is fixed before the outcome and cannot be revised once the trade closes. That stops a grade from being a dial turned up after a winner prints.
What failing this test looks like
The moment a grade is a word instead of a number it fails this test — and a grade that was never hashed fails it a second time over, since it can simply be re-typed later.
- Chat-room call-outs. The operator owns the post history, so a stop or target can be added after the move, edited in place, or deleted with no trace. The levels fail locked at release outright — and usually the full record too, because the losing call-outs simply scroll away.
- Auto-copy rooms. More checkable than a chat, since a platform tracks participant results — but the individual levels are rarely graded and rarely fixed per setup, so they fail the grade is measured and locked at release even where a rough record exists.
- Social-feed callers. Posts can be deleted or boosted at will, and revenue often comes from broker affiliate links, so a caller tends to fail almost every test at once — the levels are stated, locked at release and paid by you together.
- Re-poster / aggregator sites. They republish other people's levels without checking them, so every honesty gap in the original is carried forward. They fail the full record is shown by inheritance.
This is why the guide judges a field rather than one product: a grade tied to measured returns and frozen before the outcome is exactly the test most of the field cannot clear, which is what makes clearing it worth paying for.
The timestamp guards the grade alongside the levels, but the grade is still only worth something on a re-runnable record: calibrate it against a hand-picked showcase and you have calibrated it against nothing. To see the grade and the other fields checked together on one setup, follow the how-to-read guide.