Investor guide

How Post-Trade Analysis Turns Outcomes into Reviewable Evidence

Post-trade analysis compares completed outcomes with the written plan so an investor can study process, risk, and recurring patterns without treating a small sample as a forecast.

Published and reviewed by Millwheel Oy · Updated October 31, 2026

Source register

What each source contributes

MSPT trade review analytics methodology

Role: Documents the formulas, inclusion rules, and interpretation used for MSPT trade review measures.
Timing: Reviewed with the current public MSPT analytics implementation.
Limitations: Metrics depend on the completeness and accuracy of each user's recorded plan and fills.

MSPT trade lifecycle guide

Role: Explains how research, planning, execution, management, and post-trade review form one record.
Timing: Reviewed with the current public MSPT workflow.
Limitations: The example is educational and omits instrument-specific, tax, and account constraints.

Start with completed, comparable records

MSPT keeps open positions separate because their outcomes are still unknown. Descriptive performance measures use closed positions with a valid realized R. Records without the required entry, initial stop, shares, or completed fills are excluded from the affected R calculation rather than being treated as zero.

Core review measures

Realized P/L sums the recorded exit proceeds relative to the recorded entry cost for the shares sold.
Realized R divides realized P/L by the position's recorded initial dollar risk.
Win rate is the share of valid closed outcomes with realized R above zero.
Average win R and average loss R describe the mean result inside their respective groups.
Expectancy R is the arithmetic mean of all valid realized-R outcomes in the selected sample.
Plan adherence and entry discipline are reviewed separately from profit or loss.

Worked example: five closed trades

Assume five completed positions produced +2.0R, -1.0R, +0.5R, -0.8R, and +1.3R. Three of five were positive, so the win rate is 60%. The average win is about +1.27R and the average loss is -0.90R.

The five outcomes total +2.0R. Dividing by five gives an expectancy of +0.40R per recorded trade. The same result can also be checked as 60% times +1.27R plus 40% times -0.90R, allowing for rounding.

This is a historical description of five observations. It does not mean the next trade is expected to earn 0.40R or that the setup has a durable edge.

Review decisions as well as outcomes

Compare the actual entry with the planned entry and record whether it was ideal, acceptable, or undisciplined.
Record whether the written plan was followed and explain material deviations.
Study setup, timeframe, market regime, and exit reason only when the sample is large and consistent enough to be meaningful.
Use review notes to form a specific process rule that can be tested over later trades.

Turn a recurring lesson into a coaching rule

When several reviews point to the same behavior, MSPT can express the lesson as one specific coaching rule, such as waiting for the planned entry condition or recording a stop before entry. Later reviewed trades can be compared with a prior baseline using average R, win rate, plan adherence, and entry discipline.

A coaching comparison is a personal process experiment. It does not prove that the rule caused the difference, and it should not be judged from only a few outcomes.

Important limitations

Small samples are unstable and can be dominated by one unusually large result.
Missing trades, fills, fees, corporate actions, or currency conversion can distort the record.
Changing setup definitions or management rules reduces comparability across time.
Historical win rate and expectancy do not establish future performance or investment suitability.