FOREX AKTUALITY

You spot a channel on the chart that keeps narrowing. Price is still making lower highs and lower lows, so the trend looks bearish, yet the moves are getting smaller. By the time it finally breaks out you have already talked yourself out of the trade, or you take it and a single candle wicks back through your stop. This guide fixes the three points where falling wedge trades usually go wrong. You will get four identification criteria that either all hold or the pattern does not count, a target calculation worked through in pips rather than left as a formula, a straight answer on whether volume means anything on a forex chart, and a rule for what to do when the breakout fails. A falling wedge is a bullish pattern made of two downward-sloping trendlines that converge, with the lower line falling more slowly than the upper one. That shrinking gap shows selling pressure fading. The pattern is confirmed when price closes above the upper line, and the usual target is the height of the wedge projected up from the breakout point. Want to test these four criteria on live charts before you risk anything? Set the platform up and mark up a few wedges under real market conditions first. A falling wedge is a contraction pattern in which price drifts lower between two converging, downward-sloping trendlines. Both the highs and the lows are falling, but the lows are falling more slowly, so the two boundaries squeeze together as the pattern matures. That geometry describes a market where sellers are still in control on the surface and losing ground underneath it. The reading is straightforward. Each new leg down covers less distance than the one before, which means supply is being absorbed at progressively similar levels rather than driving price away. When buyers finally take the upper boundary with a close, the balance has changed and the pattern resolves upward. The wedge builds one swing at a time. A rally is sold, but slightly higher than the last one was. The following decline stops slightly above where the previous decline stopped. Repeat that three or four times and you have two lines closing on each other. Because it needs several completed swings, a falling wedge takes time. Three or four candles drifting lower is a pullback. A wedge worth trading normally spans dozens of candles on whichever timeframe you are using. The falling wedge is a bullish pattern in both of its common forms, whether it ends a downtrend or interrupts an uptrend. The downward slope misleads people into reading it as bearish continuation. Bullish is a tendency, not a guarantee. What settles the direction is whether price produces a close beyond the upper boundary. Until that happens the wedge is an unresolved contraction, and it can just as easily break down. The shape alone tells you very little. What came before the wedge decides how you read it, and most guides only cover the first two of the three cases below. This is the textbook case. A long decline runs out of momentum, the swings contract, and the break of the upper boundary marks the point where the downtrend stops working. The prior downtrend has to be substantial for this reading to apply. A wedge that forms after a two-week slide inside a broader range is not reversing anything. Here the target is the full wedge height projected from the breakout. When the wedge appears as a pullback inside an established uptrend, it is a pause rather than a turn. This version tends to resolve more reliably, because the dominant trend is already working in your favour. The move that follows is usually smaller, so size the target from the length of the previous impulse leg rather than from the wedge height. The common error is reading the contraction as the end of the uptrend and closing a good position into it. The third case looks identical on the chart. A downtrend produces a counter-trend bounce that contracts into a wedge, and the breakout runs straight into supply that has not been cleared. The check is simple: look at what sits above the wedge. If there is an obvious prior swing high, an untested supply zone or a moving average that has been capping every rally, the bullish reading is the wrong one. Stand aside rather than paying to find out. Three patterns drift lower on a chart and two of them are frequently mistaken for the wedge. Getting the identification wrong means taking the trade in the wrong direction, so it is worth thirty seconds of checking. The descending triangle is the dangerous one. It also converges, but its lower boundary is horizontal, which means buyers are defending one specific price while sellers keep lowering their offers. That structure usually resolves downward, the opposite of the wedge. The bull flag is easier to separate once you look at the two lines together. A flag runs in a parallel channel, so the distance between the boundaries stays roughly constant instead of shrinking. Both patterns lean bullish, so the cost of confusing them is smaller. Read more: Bull flag pattern, a practical guide for forex traders. Four criteria, and all four have to hold. Drop any one of them and what you are looking at is a decline, not a pattern with an edge. Draw the upper boundary across the swing highs and the lower boundary across the swing lows. Both must slope downward, and each needs at least two touches before the line means anything. A line resting on a single point is not a trendline. It is a guess with a ruler through it, and it will happily support whatever conclusion you already wanted. The lower boundary has to fall more slowly than the upper one. That difference in slope is what makes the lines converge and what tells you selling pressure is easing. If the two lines run close to parallel, you have a descending channel. Channels are traded from edge to edge rather than on a breakout, so the distinction changes the whole approach. A workable wedge normally spans somewhere between 15 and 50 candles. Fewer than that and the swings have not had room to contract, so you are reading noise as structure. Convergence that happens too quickly is its own warning. If the lines meet within a handful of candles, the pattern usually resolves as a sharp continuation rather than a clean breakout. On a daily chart, expect several weeks for a wedge to complete; on a four-hour chart, several days. While the wedge is forming, activity should taper as the range narrows, then pick up on the candle that breaks out. That is the classic description. It is also where forex charts stop matching the textbook, which is the subject of the next section. MT4 and MT5 display tick volume, which counts how many times the price quote updated during a candle. It does not count contracts or currency units traded. Forex is decentralised, so there is no central exchange tallying size, and two brokers can show different tick volume for the same candle depending on how often their feed updates. Tick volume is still useful as a proxy. It tracks relative participation and activity, so a breakout candle showing a clear jump against the surrounding candles tells you more traders were active. What it cannot tell you is how much money moved, which is exactly what the stock market version of the rule depends on. Session overlap distorts the reading further. The hours when London and New York are both open carry far more quote updates than the Asian session, so a breakout at 14:00 London time will show higher tick volume than an identical breakout at 03:00 regardless of conviction. Compare a candle with candles from the same session, never across sessions. The practical rule: treat rising tick volume on the breakout as a bonus, not a requirement. A close beyond the boundary is the first-order confirmation, and a breakout on ordinary tick volume is still a valid breakout. Most wedge tutorials apply an equities rule such as "1.5 times the 20-day average volume" directly to currency pairs. That threshold has no meaning on a market with no consolidated volume figure. The number of price updates recorded during a given period on a forex platform, used as a substitute for traded volume because decentralised markets do not publish a consolidated figure. Two entries are available and they trade risk against participation. Taking the breakout puts you in for the whole move and exposes you to failed breaks; waiting for the retest cuts the risk and sometimes leaves you behind. Enter when a candle closes above the upper boundary. On a daily chart that means the daily close, on a four-hour chart the four-hour close, and the distinction matters because price spends plenty of time above a line without ever closing there. An intraday poke through the boundary is not a breakout. It is the single most common reason a wedge trade is entered and stopped out in the same session. Once price has broken out, it often returns to the old upper boundary and holds above it. Entering on that hold gives you a tighter stop and a cleaner invalidation level. The retest does not always come. If price runs away from the boundary, let it go rather than chasing it, because a chased entry carries the same target with a much worse stop distance. Put the stop below the last swing low inside the wedge, with a small buffer for normal volatility. That level is where the premise fails, so it is the level worth paying for. Placing the stop below the entire pattern feels safer and usually is not. On a wedge spanning several weeks, the distance from entry to the pattern low can be large enough to push the reward-to-risk ratio below anything worth trading. One more cost to plan for: spreads widen around breakouts on thinner pairs and at session boundaries. A stop set tight against the swing low can be taken out by the spread alone while the chart price never reaches it. The standard method is a measured move. Take the vertical height of the wedge at its widest point, convert it to pips, and project that distance up from the breakout price. Worked through on an illustrative GBP/USD daily wedge, with the figures kept internally consistent so the arithmetic can be followed: Wedge height at its widest: 1.2905 minus 1.2725 = 180 pips Breakout close: 1.2790 Last swing low inside the wedge: 1.2735, stop placed 10 pips below at 1.2725 Risk: 1.2790 minus 1.2725 = 65 pips Target: 1.2790 plus 180 = 1.2970 Reward: 180 pips. Reward-to-risk: 180 divided by 65 = 2.77 to 1 The projected height is a minimum objective rather than a promise. Plenty of wedges stall part of the way there, which is why taking something off at the halfway mark is a reasonable habit. Two exits are worth setting in advance alongside the stop. The first is a time stop: if the breakout has not made progress within a sensible number of candles, roughly the time the wedge itself took to form, the move has failed to attract follow-through and the position no longer has a reason to exist. The second is thesis invalidation: if price closes back inside the wedge, the target is void immediately. Waiting for the stop to be hit turns a small loss into the full one. The same illustrative GBP/USD setup, run end to end, then run again with the opposite outcome. The figures are self-consistent worked numbers for following the method, not a record of a specific historical trade. Identifying the pattern. Price falls from 1.3180 and spends roughly nine weeks contracting, printing four lower highs along 1.2905 down to 1.2820 and four lower lows from 1.2725 up to 1.2745. The upper line has four touches, the lower line four, and the two converge because the lows are rising relative to the falling highs. The pattern spans 44 daily candles, comfortably inside the workable range. Entry. The daily candle closes at 1.2790, above the upper boundary at 1.2775. It is the close that qualifies the trade; price had poked above the line twice before without closing there, and both of those attempts failed. Risk. Stop at 1.2725, 10 pips below the last swing low inside the pattern. That is 65 pips of risk. On a 0.5 lot position each pip is worth about £3.90, so the risk is roughly £254. On a £20,000 account that is close to 1.3 per cent. Position size is the binding constraint here rather than leverage: FCA rules cap retail leverage on major pairs at 30:1, so a 0.5 lot GBP/USD position requires around £2,130 of margin, which the account covers comfortably. Target and result. Wedge height 180 pips, projected from 1.2790, gives 1.2970. Price reaches 1.2952 eleven candles after the breakout and stalls under the round number, so the position is closed there. That is 162 pips, about £632, a reward-to-risk of 2.49 to 1 against the 2.77 planned. The failure branch. Take the same wedge and the same entry at 1.2790. Three candles later price closes back inside the pattern at 1.2758. The thesis rule fires before the stop does: a close back inside the wedge voids the target, so the position is closed at the next open around 1.2750, a loss of 40 pips instead of the full 65. Re-entry is only considered if price produces another close above the boundary, and only if the wedge structure is still intact. A second failed break on the same pattern is a reason to leave the chart alone, not to average down. The same pattern produced both outcomes. What differed was not the setup but the rules set before the entry, and those rules decided which outcome was expensive. Start with what can be said honestly: there is no reliability figure for the falling wedge that transfers cleanly to forex. The reason is structural. Both boundaries are drawn by hand, and two competent traders looking at the same stretch of price will not draw the same wedge. One includes a swing the other treats as noise, and the pattern's start date, height and breakout level all shift with it. When the sample definition moves, hit rates calculated from different samples cannot be compared. Success rates circulating on trading sites make this worse by quoting precise percentages with no sample, market or period attached. Figures in the sixties and seventies appear regularly without a single citation behind them. Where a genuine pattern study exists, name the author and the method, and say plainly that its sample is almost certainly equities and that applying it to currency pairs requires a discount. False breakouts deserve more attention than the win rate does, because they are where the money goes. The early warning signs are consistent: a breakout candle with a long upper wick and a close barely above the line, a break that occurs in a thin session, or a break straight into a prior swing high. The handling rule is the thesis-invalidation rule from the previous section. A close back inside the wedge ends the trade, and a second failure on the same pattern ends your interest in it. Not always in practice, even though the pattern's bias is bullish. The trend that came before it decides whether it is a reversal, a continuation or a counter-trend bounce that fails at overhead supply, and only the third case regularly catches traders out. Check what sits above the wedge before treating the bias as the answer. Measure the widest part of the wedge, convert it to pips, and project that distance from the breakout price. On a 180 pip wedge breaking out at 1.2790, the target is 1.2970. Treat the projection as a minimum objective and take partial profit around halfway rather than assuming the full move. There is no dependable figure, and the percentages quoted around the web generally carry no sample, market or period. The pattern's boundaries are drawn by hand, so different traders identify different wedges and their hit rates are not comparable. Judge a specific setup on its criteria and its context rather than on a published win rate. Both converge, but the descending triangle has a flat lower boundary while both of the wedge's boundaries slope down. That flat floor marks buyers defending one price against sellers who keep lowering their offers, which usually resolves downward. The two patterns therefore point in opposite directions. Only as a proxy. Platforms show tick volume, the count of price updates, rather than traded size, and the figure varies between brokers and inflates during the London and New York overlap. Use it as supporting evidence for a breakout and rely on the close beyond the boundary as the actual confirmation. Daily and four-hour charts are the practical floor. Below one hour the swings that form the boundaries are short enough that ordinary spread and session noise creates wedge shapes that do not reflect any real shift in pressure. The pattern needs roughly 15 to 50 candles to be meaningful, and lower timeframes reach that count too quickly to mean much. The method has four parts. Confirm all four identification criteria before calling it a wedge, read the prior trend to decide which of the three setups you are in, size the target by converting the wedge height to pips and projecting it from the breakout, and treat tick volume as supporting evidence rather than proof. Three judgements are worth carrying away. A flat lower boundary means you are looking at a descending triangle and the direction flips. The stop belongs below the last swing low inside the pattern, because that is where the premise fails rather than where the drawing ends. And a close back inside the wedge ends the trade immediately, without waiting for the stop. The honest position on reliability is that nobody can give you a trustworthy number for this pattern, and the sites that quote one are not measuring what they claim. That is an argument for rules you set in advance, since those are the part of the outcome you actually control. Open a chart, find three historical falling wedges, and run each one through the four criteria. Counting how many survive is a faster education than any win rate. The RADEX MARKETS editorial team consists of seasoned financial professionals and market observers. Dedicated to delivering objective market summaries, macroeconomic insights, and educational content, the team strives to keep traders well-informed in a fast-paced financial environment. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.

Shares of Aston Martin Lagonda (AML) fell to a daily close of 32.56 pence on Wednesday, establishing the stock’s 27th record low of the year so far. The luxury car manufacturer has suffered a catastrophic loss in share price since first being listed on the London Stock Exchange back in October 2018, with prices plummeting more than 99% over the last 8 years. The long-term chart of AML is so dreadful that it gives even bottom of the barrel altcoins a run for their money in terms of performance. Accounting for a 1-for-20 reverse stock split in December 2020, as well as a 4-for-1 dilutive rights issue in September 2022, the adjusted IPO price for the company sits at over £40 per share. The reason for the decline is a completely broken balance sheet. At just over 1 billion shares outstanding, each worth 32 pence apiece, Aston Martin has a market capitalisation of around £325 million. Unfortunately, as of mid-2026, the company’s net debt stands at over £1.5 billion, representing nearly five times its entire stock market value. In July alone, the company managed to secure a £550 million debt package from a private credit investment manager owned by BlackRock, but according to one source, as part of the deal, a majority of Aston Martin’s non-automotive intellectual property assets would be handed over to Authentic Brands Group, an LLC headquartered in New York. The colossal debt has saddled Aston Martin with hundreds of millions of pounds in annual interest payments, meaning any operational improvement is immediately swallowed up before it can benefit shareholders, whose shares continue to be diluted by desperate financing arrangements. The company is nowhere near being able to generate a positive cash flow and, because of the huge debt repayments, would need to reach a cash profit of around 30% this year just to break even, according to analysts at Citigroup. As bad as it sounds, Aston Marton is beginning to show signs of turning its financial situation around, with the Valhalla hybrid hypercar doing much of the heavy lifting. A total of 220 units were delivered in H1 2026, which may not sound like much, but with price tags starting at £850,000, the sales were enough to significantly push up revenue growth in the first half of this year. The shift in business model may be exactly what the company needs. As expensive as they are, high-end luxury super and hypercars can justify extremely high profit margins, sometimes reaching 30-50%. In comparison, mass-produced family cars may only net the manufacturer a measly 5% net profit. Aston Martin is far from alone. With the exception of the US domestic market, the global automotive industry is suffering badly. Volkswagen (VOW) stock is currently at 16-year lows following a complete loss of profitability within the company, as management warned investors that its 2026 operating profit margin is forecast to sink to just 1%. For the first time, the automotive giant is expected to close factories on German soil and slash roughly 100,000 jobs by the end of the decade. Stellantis, owner of Fiat, Alpha Romeo, Peugeot, Lancia, Maserati and many more, is also struggling to remain profitable. While US operations remain healthy, European businesses have haemorrhaged money in recent years. Stellantis stock now sits at a 12-year low after crumbling 55% so far this year. Maserati in particular is suffering from a complete loss of brand image, with global sales collapsing to just 7,900 vehicles in 2025. Japanese manufacturers are not immune either. Nissan Motor Co. is flirting with record lows on the Tokyo Stock Exchange after crawling out of two consecutive years deep in the red, which prompted Moody’s to downgrade their debt rating to junk status; Mitsubishi Motors is not far off all-time lows of its own; Honda reported its first annual loss in 70 years; even Toyota is beginning to show signs of strain. One major part of the problem is the total miscalculation regarding electric vehicles. Global governments aggressively pushed to phase out combustion-powered cars, causing vehicle manufacturers to invest billions in new production lines. Unfortunately, consumer demand never came close to matching forecasted sales figures, leaving assembly lines around the world sitting idle or running at a loss. Even US companies did not escape the EV trap. The second issue is the dramatic shift in consumer habits in China. As of 2023, the majority of cars in the domestic Chinese market are built by local manufacturers, which easily price out international brands. The sudden shift has left many foreign companies struggling to fill the financial void. Funnily enough, the Chinese market itself is a complete bloodbath, as local manufacturers relentlessly push down prices to attract what few buyers remain. The dynamic has produced a brutal price war that is now so bad that many car dealerships have resorted to selling cars at below production cost to clear inventory and secure market share. The final issue is simply the rise in US tariffs and import duties, which cut straight into the profit margins of manufacturers based outside of the United States. Conversely, the highly defensive local market has insulated US car makers, rendering them quite healthy in comparison. Focusing on luxury cars solves all of the above problems simultaneously. Buyers do not care about additional tariffs, or inflation, or interest rates. The price tag is part of the exclusivity, which is how the market ends up with million-dollar hypercars. Vroom vroom. About the Author Lawrence J. came from a strong technical and engineering background before pivoting into a more financial role later on in his career. Always interested in international finance, Lawrence is experienced in both traditional markets as well as the emerging crypto markets. He now serves as the financial writer for RADEX MARKETS. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning: Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.

A rounded base finishes on your chart, price climbs back towards the old high, and then a small pullback appears on the right-hand side. Is that a handle or the start of another leg down? Every guide tells you to wait for the breakout and check that volume expands, except your platform does not show volume in the way those guides assume. This article fixes the parts that get left out. You get the depth thresholds written as numbers rather than adjectives, the target and the stop worked through in pips, a straight answer on what replaces volume confirmation on a currency pair, and a rule for what to do when the handle breaks down instead of up. A cup and handle is a rounded consolidation base followed by a shallow pullback near the previous high, and it points upward. The trade triggers when price closes above the handle high, and the target is the depth of the cup projected up from that breakout. Open an account with RADEX MARKETS A cup and handle is a continuation pattern that appears after an advance, made of a rounded base followed by a small pullback close to the prior high. Price drifts lower in a curve rather than a spike, works its way back up to the level it fell from, meets profit-taking there, and drops back a short distance before the buyers try again. The shape matters because of what it describes. A curved base means supply was absorbed gradually at improving prices, and the shallow pullback that follows means the sellers who showed up at the old high were not numerous enough to push price far. The pattern was defined by William O'Neil in How to Make Money in Stocks (1988), and its rules were written for equities, which becomes important later. Read more：Forex Technical Analysis: A Step-by-Step Beginner’s Guide The base should round out. A V-shaped low means price fell hard and bounced hard, which is a reaction rather than accumulation, and the recovery tends to run into the same sellers on the way back up. Rounding takes time, because each successive low needs to be met a little higher than the last. That gradual handover from sellers to buyers is the whole point of the shape. The handle forms when price reaches the old high and runs into traders taking profits. It usually drifts down slightly or moves sideways in a small flag. This is the most informative part of the pattern. A shallow, short handle says the selling at the old high was light. A deep or long handle says the opposite, and the setup weakens the further it goes. The pattern points upward, and it only counts when a genuine advance came before it. A rounded base with no prior uptrend is simply a base, not a cup and handle. Upward is the bias, not the outcome. The direction is settled by whether price closes above the handle high, and until that happens the pattern is unfinished. Four patterns share the same broad story of a base followed by a move up, and they are easy to mix up. The entry trigger and the target calculation differ in each case, so naming it correctly changes where you buy and what you aim for. The rounding bottom is the closest relative and the easiest to confuse. It has the same curved base but no handle, which means there is no small resistance level to trade against, so the entry is looser and comes earlier. A double bottom is a different animal despite looking similar from a distance. It has two clearly separated lows with a peak between them, and that middle peak is the level you trade, not a rounded rim. Four things need to be true at once. If any one of them fails, what you have is a base or a pullback, and the measured move that follows does not apply. There must be a recognisable advance before the cup begins, because this is a continuation pattern and the continuation has to have something to continue. As a working rule, look for a run of higher highs and higher lows that is at least as long as the cup you are about to draw. The cup should retrace around one third of the prior advance. In volatile conditions that can stretch to a half, and past a half the pattern loses its meaning because too much of the previous move has been given back. Shape carries more weight than depth. A shallow V is worse than a slightly deep round base. The handle should retrace no more than one third of the advance that formed the right side of the cup, and shallower is better. A close below the handle low voids the pattern outright. The traditional guidance describes the cup in months and the handle in weeks, which comes from equity charts. On a currency pair it is more useful to count candles, because the same shape appears on the daily, the four-hour and the one-hour. Look for a cup spanning roughly 25 to 60 candles with a handle of about 5 to 15, whatever timeframe you are on. A handle that drags on past that range is a warning rather than a detail. It means buyers are not stepping back in, and the longer it lasts the more likely the base fails. Translating the percentages into pips makes them usable. On a 400 pip advance, a cup retracing one third is about 130 pips deep and one retracing a half is about 200. If the right side of the cup climbs 130 pips, the handle should hold within about 43 pips of the high. Almost every guide on this pattern lists expanding volume as a requirement for a valid breakout. That rule was written for stocks, where an exchange publishes how many shares changed hands. Spot forex has no such figure. MT4 and MT5 show tick volume, which counts how many times the quote updated during a candle, not how much was traded. Because the market is decentralised, each broker reports its own feed, so the same candle can carry different tick volume at two brokers. Three substitutes are available, in order of usefulness. Tick volume still works as a proxy for relative participation, so a breakout candle with a clear jump against its neighbours tells you more traders were active, provided you compare candles from the same session. CME currency futures publish genuine volume for the major pairs and can be used as a reference for the same period. Failing both, watch the spread and the range: spreads that tighten as the handle completes, followed by an expansion in candle range on the break, describe the same underlying shift. The rule to work with is simple. A close above the handle high is the first-order confirmation and everything else is supporting evidence. A breakout on unremarkable tick volume is still a breakout, and waiting for a stock-style volume surge on a currency pair means waiting for a signal that the market does not produce. The number of price updates recorded during a period on a forex platform, used in place of traded volume because decentralised markets publish no consolidated figure. Two entries, and the choice is between certainty and price. The breakout puts you in as soon as the pattern completes; the retest gives you a better level at the risk of never filling. Enter on a candle that closes above the handle high. On a daily chart that means the daily close, on a four-hour chart the four-hour close, and the difference matters because price frequently trades above a level without closing there. After the break, price often returns to the handle high and holds above it. Entering on that hold shortens the distance to your stop considerably. When the retest never arrives, leave the trade alone rather than chasing it upward. The stop belongs just below the handle low, with a buffer for normal volatility. That is the level where the pattern is objectively wrong, so it is the level worth paying for. Putting the stop under the cup instead feels more conservative and usually ruins the trade arithmetic. On a cup 130 pips deep, a stop at the base turns a 62 pip risk into a 152 pip one without improving the odds. Note also that spreads widen around breakouts, so a stop set flush against the handle low can be taken out by the spread while the chart price never reaches it. Read more：Breakout trading strategy in forex: how to trade successfully The measured move is the standard approach and it traces back to O'Neil's original description: measure from the right-hand peak of the cup down to the cup low, then add that distance to the breakout point. Worked through on an illustrative GBP/USD daily cup, with figures kept internally consistent so the arithmetic can be followed: Right peak of the cup: 1.2980. Cup low: 1.2850. Cup depth = 130 pips Handle low: 1.2940, which is 40 pips off the high and inside the 43 pip limit Handle high, and the breakout level: 1.2980 Entry on the close above the handle high: 1.2992 Stop 10 pips below the handle low: 1.2930. Risk = 62 pips Target: 1.2992 plus 130 = 1.3122 Reward 130 pips against 62 pips of risk, a ratio of 2.10 to 1 The ratio holds up because the stop sits against the handle rather than the base. Entering on a retest near 1.2985 trims the risk to 55 pips and lifts the ratio to about 2.4 to 1, which is a larger improvement than anything the target side can offer. The projected depth is a minimum objective, not a forecast. Taking part of the position off around the halfway mark is a reasonable habit. One invalidation rule sits alongside the stop: a close back below the handle low voids the target immediately, whether or not the stop has been touched. The same illustrative GBP/USD setup, run to completion and then run again with the opposite ending. These are self-consistent worked figures for following the method, not a record of a particular historical trade. Identifying the pattern. Price advances from 1.2580 to 1.2980, a 400 pip run. It then rounds down to 1.2850 over about seven weeks and curves back to 1.2980. The cup low retraces 130 pips of the 400 pip advance, roughly a third, and the base is curved rather than pointed. The cup spans 38 daily candles. A handle then forms over 9 candles, drifting to 1.2940, which is 40 pips off the high and inside the 43 pip limit set by the one-third rule. Entry. The daily candle closes at 1.2992, above the handle high at 1.2980. Two earlier candles traded above that level intraday and closed back under it, and neither qualified. Risk. Stop at 1.2930, 10 pips below the handle low, giving 62 pips of risk. At 0.4 lots each pip is worth about £3.10, so the risk is roughly £192. On a £20,000 account that is just under 1 per cent. Margin is not the constraint at this size: under the FCA cap of 30:1 on major pairs, a 0.4 lot GBP/USD position needs around £1,700. Target and result. Cup depth 130 pips projected from 1.2992 gives 1.3122. Price reaches 1.3108 fourteen candles later and stalls beneath the figure, so the position closes there for 116 pips, about £360, a realised ratio of 1.87 to 1 against the 2.10 planned. The failure branch. Same pattern, same entry at 1.2992. Four candles later price closes at 1.2932, below the handle low. The invalidation rule fires at the close below 1.2940 rather than waiting for the stop, so the position is closed near 1.2935 for a 57 pip loss instead of 62. Re-entry is only considered if a new handle forms above the cup low and produces its own close above resistance. If price closes below 1.2850, the cup itself is gone and so is the setup. Both endings came from the same chart. The difference was the rules written down before the entry, not the pattern. The mirror image works the same way in reverse. An inverted cup and handle is a rounded top followed by a shallow rally on the right-hand side, and it appears after a decline rather than after an advance. The mechanics invert cleanly. Entry comes on a close below the handle low, the stop goes just above the handle high, and the target is the depth of the inverted cup projected down from the breakdown point. The depth and duration guides from the table above apply unchanged. This variant matters more for currency traders than for equity traders. A CFD position is as easy to open short as long, so half of the pattern's opportunities are available rather than a quarter of them. Most coverage of this pattern either skips the inverted version or mentions it without a single number attached. The pattern comes from O'Neil's 1988 work on US stocks, and the original rules assume an equity market. Three of those assumptions do not survive the move to currencies. The first is volume, covered above: there is no consolidated figure to expand. The second is the trading calendar. Stocks open and close each day, so gaps carry information and a breakout candle is a discrete event; spot forex runs continuously from Sunday evening to Friday night, and the daily boundary is a broker convention rather than an auction. The third is the timeframe guidance. Describing a cup as one to six months long makes sense when the chart you mean is a daily one, and it says nothing useful to someone working on a four-hour chart. The way to hold this is that the geometry transfers and the confirmation rules do not. The rounded base, the shallow handle, the depth ratios and the measured move all describe price behaviour that occurs in any liquid market. The volume requirement and the calendar-based durations need replacing with the substitutes set out earlier. Yes, it is a bullish continuation pattern: a consolidation base followed by a breakout above the handle. The condition people skip is the prior advance, because a rounded base with nothing to continue is not this pattern at all. Check that a clear uptrend preceded the cup before treating the bias as given. The traditional answer is one to six months for the cup and one to four weeks for the handle, which comes from daily equity charts. On a currency pair it is more practical to count candles: roughly 25 to 60 for the cup and 5 to 15 for the handle, on whichever timeframe you are working. A handle that runs well past that range is a sign the buyers have not returned. The cup should ideally retrace about a third of the prior advance, stretching to a half in volatile conditions, and beyond a half the setup loses its meaning. The handle should retrace no more than a third of the cup's right-side climb, and a close below the handle low voids the pattern. On a 400 pip advance that puts the cup low around 130 pips down and the handle within about 43 pips of the high. A close below the handle low invalidates the pattern, and the position should be closed at that point rather than waiting for the stop to be reached. Re-entry is only worth considering if a fresh handle forms above the cup low and produces its own close above resistance. If price closes below the cup low, the base itself has failed and the setup is finished. The shape appears on currency charts as readily as on equities, since it describes accumulation rather than anything exchange-specific. What does not transfer is the confirmation rule, because spot forex publishes no consolidated volume, and the calendar-based durations from equity guides need converting into candle counts. Use the geometry and replace the confirmations. Treat the close above the handle high as the confirmation, since that is the only signal the market reliably provides. Tick volume can support the read as a proxy for relative participation, provided you compare candles from the same trading session, and CME currency futures volume offers a genuine figure for the majors if you want a cross-check. Four checks make the pattern: a real advance beforehand, a rounded rather than pointed base, a cup retracing about a third of that advance, and a handle staying within a third of the cup's right-side climb. The target is the cup depth projected from the breakout, and the stop sits just below the handle low. Three judgements are worth keeping. A base with no handle is a rounding bottom and trades differently. A handle deeper than a third has already told you the answer. And on a currency chart the volume requirement from the textbooks needs replacing rather than waiting for. The arithmetic is worth doing every time rather than assuming it: a 130 pip target against a 62 pip stop is a trade worth taking, and the same pattern with the stop parked under the base is not. Pull up a pair you follow, find two historical cups, and run both through the threshold table. Checking how many clear every line is quicker than reading another description of the shape. The RADEX MARKETS editorial team consists of seasoned financial professionals and market observers. Dedicated to delivering objective market summaries, macroeconomic insights, and educational content, the team strives to keep traders well-informed in a fast-paced financial environment. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.

Free margin is the money in your trading account that is not tied up by open positions, leaving it available to open new trades or absorb floating losses. If you use MT4 or MT5, you will see the Free Margin figure changing in the account row as the market moves. The number is easy enough to spot; understanding what it is telling you is where things become less obvious. Is the amount high enough to place another trade? Should you worry when it starts shrinking? And does reaching zero mean the account is about to be wiped out? Those questions matter because free margin performs two jobs at once. It represents your remaining trading capacity, but it is also the financial cushion supporting your existing positions. A trader who watches only the account balance can therefore miss a problem developing in real time. The balance may look perfectly healthy while floating losses quietly eat through equity and free margin underneath it. This guide explains how free margin is calculated and then follows one trade from entry towards stop out, showing how the key account figures change at every stage. It also explains what actually happens when free margin reaches zero, where to find the figure in MT4 and MT5, and whether floating profit can safely be used to add another position. Free margin is calculated by subtracting used margin from equity. It shows both how much capacity remains for opening new trades and how much floating loss the account can still absorb; reaching zero prevents new trades from being opened, but positions are not automatically closed until the margin level reaches the broker’s stop-out threshold. In MT4, the figure appears in the account row of the Terminal; in MT5, it appears in the corresponding row of the Toolbox. Open your RADEX MARKETS trading account today Free margin is the portion of your account equity that remains after the margin supporting your open positions has been deducted. In simple terms, it is the money that is not currently locked away by your trades. It plays two roles at once: it provides the capacity to open new positions and acts as a cushion against floating losses on positions you already hold. Unlike your balance, free margin can change every second while a trade is open. A profitable move increases equity and usually increases free margin, while an adverse move reduces both. You do not need to open, close or adjust a position for the figure to change; ordinary market movement does the job for you. For example, an account can still show the same balance it had when a trade was opened, even though a growing floating loss has substantially reduced its free margin. This is why the balance alone does not reveal how much room an account has left. Free margin gives the more immediate picture because it reflects what is happening to open trades in real time. The part of account equity not reserved as margin for open positions, calculated as equity minus used margin; it is the capacity available for new trades and the cushion that absorbs floating losses. Free margin is both the account’s cushion against floating losses and its remaining capacity to open new trades. Its value becomes much easier to understand when you see how balance, equity, used margin and margin level connect to it. Free margin answers whether the account has enough available funds to open another trade. Margin level answers how close the account is to the broker’s margin-call or stop-out thresholds. They are related, but they are not interchangeable; the dedicated guide to forex margin levels explains the percentage thresholds and account-health grading in more detail. The calculation is built from three short formulas: Required margin = Notional position size ÷ Leverage Equity = Balance + Floating profit or loss Free margin = Equity − Used margin The notional position size must be expressed in the account’s base currency before the margin calculation is completed. Your trading platform normally performs this conversion automatically, which is why the displayed margin requirement can move slightly when exchange rates change. For example, consider a trader opening a 0.10-lot USD/CHF position in a US-dollar account: The trader began with a $1,000 balance, but the $75 floating loss reduced equity to $925. After the $333.33 required margin was deducted, $591.67 remained available to support the position or meet the margin requirement for another trade. With no positions open, used margin is zero, so free margin equals equity. Free margin changes with every movement in the floating profit or loss on an open trade. The following table continues the same $1,000 account and 0.10-lot EUR/USD position. It assumes used margin remains fixed at $366.67 and uses a 50% stop-out level, so the changing relationship is easy to see. On a 0.10-lot EUR/USD position, each pip is worth approximately $1. The $75 loss therefore represents a 75-pip move against the trade, the $500 loss represents 500 pips, free margin reaches zero after roughly 633 pips, and the assumed 50% stop out arrives at about 817 pips. This example ignores spread, commission, swap charges and any recalculation of required margin so that the mechanics remain visible. What counts as a safe margin level is not universal. Above 100%, the account has positive free margin; at 100%, free margin is zero and the account has reached the practical margin-call line. Many traders use 300% or more as a personal buffer target, but that is a risk-management guideline rather than a guarantee of safety. In fact, this example begins at only 272.73%, showing that being allowed to open a leveraged position is not the same as leaving yourself generous breathing room. The dedicated margin-level guide explains how to interpret the percentages in more detail. The separate guide to margin calls and stop outs covers warnings, broker procedures and forced closures; for UK-regulated retail accounts, the FCA’s margin close-out rule requires firms to act when net equity falls below 50% of the required margin. When free margin reaches zero, you cannot open a new position or add exposure, and a pending order that would require additional margin will not execute. It does not mean the account is immediately wiped out. Positions are closed only when the margin level reaches the broker’s stop-out threshold, not simply because free margin has reached zero. For UK-regulated retail accounts trading covered leveraged products, the framework is more specific. Under FCA COBS 22.5, a firm must close open positions as soon as market conditions allow if net equity falls below 50% of the margin required to maintain them. The same rules provide negative balance protection, limiting the retail client’s liability to the funds held in that trading account. This means that if an extreme price gap carries a protected retail account below zero before positions can be closed, the client should not be left owing the broker the shortfall. The protection applies to eligible retail accounts and covered products; clients classified as professional may not receive the same safeguard. This is why traders should confirm both the close-out percentage and account classification in their broker’s terms rather than assuming every margin account works identically. Both MetaTrader platforms display free margin in the account-information row of the Trade tab, and there is nothing extra to download or install. The main difference is the name of the desktop window: MT4 calls it the Terminal, while MT5 calls it the Toolbox. On the mobile app, open the Trade screen and look in the account-information area at the top. MetaTrader’s mobile documentation lists Equity, Margin, Free Margin and Margin Level there, followed by the open positions and pending orders. The precise layout can vary slightly by operating system, screen size and app version, but the field names remain recognisable. MetaQuotes confirms the desktop shortcuts and Trade-tab locations in its official MT4 Terminal guide, MT5 platform guide and MT5 mobile trading guide. In MT5 hedging mode, opening an equal position in the opposite direction can sometimes leave used margin lower rather than higher. Brokers may apply a reduced hedged-margin amount or calculate margin from the larger side of the long and short exposure; if the margin released is greater than the new spread and trading costs, free margin can rise. MetaTrader’s symbol documentation confirms that the method is chosen by the broker, so the effect is not automatic on every account. That increase is not free money or a new safety cushion. An equal hedge largely freezes the existing net profit or loss instead of repairing it, while spreads, commissions and overnight charges may continue to accumulate on both positions. When one side is closed, its result becomes realised and the remaining position is exposed to price movement again, so traders should check the broker’s hedged-margin rules before relying on this technique. There are three practical ways to increase free margin that a trader can directly control, and each one carries a cost or trade-off. A favourable market move may also lift free margin, of course, but hoping that price eventually comes back is not much of a risk-management plan. Adding money increases the account balance and equity, so free margin rises immediately while used margin remains unchanged. The cost is straightforward: more capital from outside the account is now exposed, while the size and underlying risk of the open positions have not been reduced. Closing part of the exposure releases some of the margin reserved to support it, which can increase free margin without requiring a new deposit. If that portion is losing, however, its floating loss becomes realised when it is closed. The account has less exposure afterwards, but the loss has not disappeared merely because its label changed. Trading smaller is the preventative approach. A smaller position requires less margin, leaving more equity free to absorb ordinary market movement and making the account less likely to become stretched in the first place. As the earlier calculation showed, notional position size and leverage determine the initial margin requirement, so reducing the lot size directly reduces the amount locked away. Read more：What Is Leverage in Forex and How Much Should You Use? Floating profit increases equity in real time and therefore increases free margin, which means unrealised profit genuinely can be used as margin for a new position. If an open trade adds $300 to equity, the platform may treat part of that $300 as available capacity even though the original position has not been closed. The danger is that the trader is treating money that has not yet been banked as permanent capital. If the market reverses, the floating profit can disappear while the added position begins losing at the same time. That combination accelerates the fall in both equity and free margin, turning an apparently healthy winning trade into the familiar pyramiding route towards an overleveraged account. A sensible criterion is to treat floating profit as a reward on the screen rather than capital available for immediate reuse. Add to exposure only with funds or profits that have already been realised and only when the enlarged position still fits the account’s original risk limit. The platform may permit more; that does not mean the risk plan should. Read more：10 Forex risk management tips every trader should know Free margin is the money in a trading account that is not pledged against open positions and remains available to use. As the five-term table shows, it serves the dual purpose of funding new trades and absorbing floating losses. Margin is the money reserved to support open positions, while free margin is the money that remains available. Free margin is calculated by subtracting used margin from equity, as shown in the five-term comparison table. Free margin becomes negative when floating losses reduce equity below used margin. New trades and pending orders that require additional margin will not execute, and the account is moving closer to its stop-out threshold, as explained in the three-stage zero-margin section. You can generally withdraw funds that are not locked as margin, subject to the broker’s withdrawal rules and displayed withdrawable balance. However, withdrawing money reduces equity and removes part of the cushion supporting open positions, bringing a stop out closer if the account is already carrying a floating loss. A margin account can be highly risky because leverage allows a trader to control exposure larger than the capital deposited, magnifying losses as well as gains. Free margin is the remaining cushion inside that account, so monitoring it is a basic part of controlling risk; the dedicated margin-trading guide explains the full mechanics. A margin level above 100% means the account still has positive free margin, while many traders use 300% or more as a personal buffer target. This is a guideline rather than a guarantee, and the dedicated margin-level guide explains the grading and broker thresholds in more detail. Free margin is the account’s breathing room: the formula is only equity minus used margin, but its movement reveals how much flexibility the account really has. Check that the figure leaves enough room before opening a trade, watch how quickly it shrinks while the position is open, and remember that exposure can still be reduced before free margin reaches zero. As a practical next step, open one small position in a demo account and watch Balance, Equity, Margin, Free Margin and Margin Level move across the account row. Seeing the relationship update in real time usually makes the mechanics clearer than another page of theory ever could. Lee W. is a seasoned professional trader with over 10 years of experience. Passionate about sharing valuable expertise and unique market insights, Lee W. now serves as an external and independent market analyst for RADEX MARKETS. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment. Deeper into margin: Related concepts:

SHARE A rounded base finishes on your chart, price climbs back towards the old high, and then a small pullback appears on the right-hand side. Is that a handle or the start of another leg down? Every guide tells you to wait for the breakout and check that volume expands, except your platform does not show volume in the way those guides assume. This article fixes the parts that get left out. You get the depth thresholds written as numbers rather than adjectives, the target and the stop worked through in pips, a straight answer on what replaces volume confirmation on a currency pair, and a rule for what to do when the handle breaks down instead of up. A cup and handle is a rounded consolidation base followed by a shallow pullback near the previous high, and it points upward. The trade triggers when price closes above the handle high, and the target is the depth of the cup projected up from that breakout. Open an account with RADEX MARKETS A cup and handle is a continuation pattern that appears after an advance, made of a rounded base followed by a small pullback close to the prior high. Price drifts lower in a curve rather than a spike, works its way back up to the level it fell from, meets profit-taking there, and drops back a short distance before the buyers try again. The shape matters because of what it describes. A curved base means supply was absorbed gradually at improving prices, and the shallow pullback that follows means the sellers who showed up at the old high were not numerous enough to push price far. The pattern was defined by William O'Neil in How to Make Money in Stocks (1988), and its rules were written for equities, which becomes important later. Read more：Forex Technical Analysis: A Step-by-Step Beginner’s Guide The base should round out. A V-shaped low means price fell hard and bounced hard, which is a reaction rather than accumulation, and the recovery tends to run into the same sellers on the way back up. Rounding takes time, because each successive low needs to be met a little higher than the last. That gradual handover from sellers to buyers is the whole point of the shape. The handle forms when price reaches the old high and runs into traders taking profits. It usually drifts down slightly or moves sideways in a small flag. This is the most informative part of the pattern. A shallow, short handle says the selling at the old high was light. A deep or long handle says the opposite, and the setup weakens the further it goes. The pattern points upward, and it only counts when a genuine advance came before it. A rounded base with no prior uptrend is simply a base, not a cup and handle. Upward is the bias, not the outcome. The direction is settled by whether price closes above the handle high, and until that happens the pattern is unfinished. Four patterns share the same broad story of a base followed by a move up, and they are easy to mix up. The entry trigger and the target calculation differ in each case, so naming it correctly changes where you buy and what you aim for. The rounding bottom is the closest relative and the easiest to confuse. It has the same curved base but no handle, which means there is no small resistance level to trade against, so the entry is looser and comes earlier. A double bottom is a different animal despite looking similar from a distance. It has two clearly separated lows with a peak between them, and that middle peak is the level you trade, not a rounded rim. Four things need to be true at once. If any one of them fails, what you have is a base or a pullback, and the measured move that follows does not apply. There must be a recognisable advance before the cup begins, because this is a continuation pattern and the continuation has to have something to continue. As a working rule, look for a run of higher highs and higher lows that is at least as long as the cup you are about to draw. The cup should retrace around one third of the prior advance. In volatile conditions that can stretch to a half, and past a half the pattern loses its meaning because too much of the previous move has been given back. Shape carries more weight than depth. A shallow V is worse than a slightly deep round base. The handle should retrace no more than one third of the advance that formed the right side of the cup, and shallower is better. A close below the handle low voids the pattern outright. The traditional guidance describes the cup in months and the handle in weeks, which comes from equity charts. On a currency pair it is more useful to count candles, because the same shape appears on the daily, the four-hour and the one-hour. Look for a cup spanning roughly 25 to 60 candles with a handle of about 5 to 15, whatever timeframe you are on. A handle that drags on past that range is a warning rather than a detail. It means buyers are not stepping back in, and the longer it lasts the more likely the base fails. Translating the percentages into pips makes them usable. On a 400 pip advance, a cup retracing one third is about 130 pips deep and one retracing a half is about 200. If the right side of the cup climbs 130 pips, the handle should hold within about 43 pips of the high. Almost every guide on this pattern lists expanding volume as a requirement for a valid breakout. That rule was written for stocks, where an exchange publishes how many shares changed hands. Spot forex has no such figure. MT4 and MT5 show tick volume, which counts how many times the quote updated during a candle, not how much was traded. Because the market is decentralised, each broker reports its own feed, so the same candle can carry different tick volume at two brokers. Three substitutes are available, in order of usefulness. Tick volume still works as a proxy for relative participation, so a breakout candle with a clear jump against its neighbours tells you more traders were active, provided you compare candles from the same session. CME currency futures publish genuine volume for the major pairs and can be used as a reference for the same period. Failing both, watch the spread and the range: spreads that tighten as the handle completes, followed by an expansion in candle range on the break, describe the same underlying shift. The rule to work with is simple. A close above the handle high is the first-order confirmation and everything else is supporting evidence. A breakout on unremarkable tick volume is still a breakout, and waiting for a stock-style volume surge on a currency pair means waiting for a signal that the market does not produce. The number of price updates recorded during a period on a forex platform, used in place of traded volume because decentralised markets publish no consolidated figure. Two entries, and the choice is between certainty and price. The breakout puts you in as soon as the pattern completes; the retest gives you a better level at the risk of never filling. Enter on a candle that closes above the handle high. On a daily chart that means the daily close, on a four-hour chart the four-hour close, and the difference matters because price frequently trades above a level without closing there. After the break, price often returns to the handle high and holds above it. Entering on that hold shortens the distance to your stop considerably. When the retest never arrives, leave the trade alone rather than chasing it upward. The stop belongs just below the handle low, with a buffer for normal volatility. That is the level where the pattern is objectively wrong, so it is the level worth paying for. Putting the stop under the cup instead feels more conservative and usually ruins the trade arithmetic. On a cup 130 pips deep, a stop at the base turns a 62 pip risk into a 152 pip one without improving the odds. Note also that spreads widen around breakouts, so a stop set flush against the handle low can be taken out by the spread while the chart price never reaches it. Read more：Breakout trading strategy in forex: how to trade successfully The measured move is the standard approach and it traces back to O'Neil's original description: measure from the right-hand peak of the cup down to the cup low, then add that distance to the breakout point. Worked through on an illustrative GBP/USD daily cup, with figures kept internally consistent so the arithmetic can be followed: Right peak of the cup: 1.2980. Cup low: 1.2850. Cup depth = 130 pips Handle low: 1.2940, which is 40 pips off the high and inside the 43 pip limit Handle high, and the breakout level: 1.2980 Entry on the close above the handle high: 1.2992 Stop 10 pips below the handle low: 1.2930. Risk = 62 pips Target: 1.2992 plus 130 = 1.3122 Reward 130 pips against 62 pips of risk, a ratio of 2.10 to 1 The ratio holds up because the stop sits against the handle rather than the base. Entering on a retest near 1.2985 trims the risk to 55 pips and lifts the ratio to about 2.4 to 1, which is a larger improvement than anything the target side can offer. The projected depth is a minimum objective, not a forecast. Taking part of the position off around the halfway mark is a reasonable habit. One invalidation rule sits alongside the stop: a close back below the handle low voids the target immediately, whether or not the stop has been touched. The same illustrative GBP/USD setup, run to completion and then run again with the opposite ending. These are self-consistent worked figures for following the method, not a record of a particular historical trade. Identifying the pattern. Price advances from 1.2580 to 1.2980, a 400 pip run. It then rounds down to 1.2850 over about seven weeks and curves back to 1.2980. The cup low retraces 130 pips of the 400 pip advance, roughly a third, and the base is curved rather than pointed. The cup spans 38 daily candles. A handle then forms over 9 candles, drifting to 1.2940, which is 40 pips off the high and inside the 43 pip limit set by the one-third rule. Entry. The daily candle closes at 1.2992, above the handle high at 1.2980. Two earlier candles traded above that level intraday and closed back under it, and neither qualified. Risk. Stop at 1.2930, 10 pips below the handle low, giving 62 pips of risk. At 0.4 lots each pip is worth about £3.10, so the risk is roughly £192. On a £20,000 account that is just under 1 per cent. Margin is not the constraint at this size: under the FCA cap of 30:1 on major pairs, a 0.4 lot GBP/USD position needs around £1,700. Target and result. Cup depth 130 pips projected from 1.2992 gives 1.3122. Price reaches 1.3108 fourteen candles later and stalls beneath the figure, so the position closes there for 116 pips, about £360, a realised ratio of 1.87 to 1 against the 2.10 planned. The failure branch. Same pattern, same entry at 1.2992. Four candles later price closes at 1.2932, below the handle low. The invalidation rule fires at the close below 1.2940 rather than waiting for the stop, so the position is closed near 1.2935 for a 57 pip loss instead of 62. Re-entry is only considered if a new handle forms above the cup low and produces its own close above resistance. If price closes below 1.2850, the cup itself is gone and so is the setup. Both endings came from the same chart. The difference was the rules written down before the entry, not the pattern. The mirror image works the same way in reverse. An inverted cup and handle is a rounded top followed by a shallow rally on the right-hand side, and it appears after a decline rather than after an advance. The mechanics invert cleanly. Entry comes on a close below the handle low, the stop goes just above the handle high, and the target is the depth of the inverted cup projected down from the breakdown point. The depth and duration guides from the table above apply unchanged. This variant matters more for currency traders than for equity traders. A CFD position is as easy to open short as long, so half of the pattern's opportunities are available rather than a quarter of them. Most coverage of this pattern either skips the inverted version or mentions it without a single number attached. The pattern comes from O'Neil's 1988 work on US stocks, and the original rules assume an equity market. Three of those assumptions do not survive the move to currencies. The first is volume, covered above: there is no consolidated figure to expand. The second is the trading calendar. Stocks open and close each day, so gaps carry information and a breakout candle is a discrete event; spot forex runs continuously from Sunday evening to Friday night, and the daily boundary is a broker convention rather than an auction. The third is the timeframe guidance. Describing a cup as one to six months long makes sense when the chart you mean is a daily one, and it says nothing useful to someone working on a four-hour chart. The way to hold this is that the geometry transfers and the confirmation rules do not. The rounded base, the shallow handle, the depth ratios and the measured move all describe price behaviour that occurs in any liquid market. The volume requirement and the calendar-based durations need replacing with the substitutes set out earlier. Yes, it is a bullish continuation pattern: a consolidation base followed by a breakout above the handle. The condition people skip is the prior advance, because a rounded base with nothing to continue is not this pattern at all. Check that a clear uptrend preceded the cup before treating the bias as given. The traditional answer is one to six months for the cup and one to four weeks for the handle, which comes from daily equity charts. On a currency pair it is more practical to count candles: roughly 25 to 60 for the cup and 5 to 15 for the handle, on whichever timeframe you are working. A handle that runs well past that range is a sign the buyers have not returned. The cup should ideally retrace about a third of the prior advance, stretching to a half in volatile conditions, and beyond a half the setup loses its meaning. The handle should retrace no more than a third of the cup's right-side climb, and a close below the handle low voids the pattern. On a 400 pip advance that puts the cup low around 130 pips down and the handle within about 43 pips of the high. A close below the handle low invalidates the pattern, and the position should be closed at that point rather than waiting for the stop to be reached. Re-entry is only worth considering if a fresh handle forms above the cup low and produces its own close above resistance. If price closes below the cup low, the base itself has failed and the setup is finished. The shape appears on currency charts as readily as on equities, since it describes accumulation rather than anything exchange-specific. What does not transfer is the confirmation rule, because spot forex publishes no consolidated volume, and the calendar-based durations from equity guides need converting into candle counts. Use the geometry and replace the confirmations. Treat the close above the handle high as the confirmation, since that is the only signal the market reliably provides. Tick volume can support the read as a proxy for relative participation, provided you compare candles from the same trading session, and CME currency futures volume offers a genuine figure for the majors if you want a cross-check. Four checks make the pattern: a real advance beforehand, a rounded rather than pointed base, a cup retracing about a third of that advance, and a handle staying within a third of the cup's right-side climb. The target is the cup depth projected from the breakout, and the stop sits just below the handle low. Three judgements are worth keeping. A base with no handle is a rounding bottom and trades differently. A handle deeper than a third has already told you the answer. And on a currency chart the volume requirement from the textbooks needs replacing rather than waiting for. The arithmetic is worth doing every time rather than assuming it: a 130 pip target against a 62 pip stop is a trade worth taking, and the same pattern with the stop parked under the base is not. Pull up a pair you follow, find two historical cups, and run both through the threshold table. Checking how many clear every line is quicker than reading another description of the shape. The RADEX MARKETS editorial team consists of seasoned financial professionals and market observers. Dedicated to delivering objective market summaries, macroeconomic insights, and educational content, the team strives to keep traders well-informed in a fast-paced financial environment. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.

Bitcoin enjoyed a thunderous rally on Monday, blasting over $86,000 per coin and matching prices not seen since January. The original cryptocurrency is now almost in the green for the year, having erased most of the losses incurred over the last nine months. The wider crypto sphere likewise saw explosive inflows of capital, prompting Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan to declare that crypto winter was ‘over’. Hougan went on to state that both the SEC and CFTC were the most ‘pro-crypto […] in the history of the US’ and that the failure of the Clarity Act to pass through Congress may in fact pave the way for ‘stronger pro-crypto regulation’. Music to the ears of market participants who have had absolutely nothing to celebrate since the crypto sector peaked back in October 2025, only to nose-dive into a brutal 50% correction during the following winter months. While prices have a long way to go before new records start being broken, particularly in the altcoin market, early signs of thawing are a sight for sore eyes. There has also been a sizeable rotation back into semiconductor stocks early this week, following the explosive launch of Meta’s Muse AI agent. Meta Platforms (META) gained 11% on Monday after third-party tracking data pointed to overwhelming demand for its new product, which also helped to restore confidence in the wider AI trade. A number of semiconductor companies have rallied hard so far this week, including AMD, which shot up 10% on Monday to establish a fresh record high, introducing the chipmaker into the $1 trillion market cap club. AMD recently announced a 10% price increase for AI accelerators, consumer GPUs, and motherboard chipsets in Q4, further showcasing resilient demand in the sector. Arm Holdings (ARM), Intel (INTC) and Qualcomm (QCOM) also outperformed, rising 21%, 14% and 12% respectively since the last weekly close. The strength in chip stocks was enough to push the Nasdaq Composite to back-to-back record highs, finally breaking the prior all-time high established back in early June. Presidents Trump and Xi are scheduled to meet later today for a series of talks, one of which will focus on artificial intelligence. In particular, the two leaders are considering launching a formal notification system that would warn one another about safety incidents that could potentially threaten national security. Trade will also feature heavily on the agenda, as the current truce on tariffs is set to expire on the 10th of November. Iran will undoubtedly come up in conversation, as the conflict prepares to enter its eighth month. Speaking of which, it now appears as though some tangible progress is being made, as Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff for a face-to-face meeting at the UN General Assembly in New York. An initial framework to reopen the Strait of Hormuz emerged as a result of the private talks, while the Iranian delegation confirmed having ‘full authority’ to revive diplomacy. On the other hand, Trump threatened to ‘annihilate’ Iran if it refused to strike a deal, leaving spectators as befuddled as ever. Crude oil prices have fallen modestly since this time last week, from $108 per barrel last Tuesday to $98 late last night. West Texas Intermediate meanwhile broke below $90 per barrel yesterday – the large spread between the two benchmarks reflecting the risk and transport premia affecting seaborne contracts. #BTC #CRYPTO #META About the Author Lawrence J. came from a strong technical and engineering background before pivoting into a more financial role later on in his career. Always interested in international finance, Lawrence is experienced in both traditional markets as well as the emerging crypto markets. He now serves as the financial writer for RADEX MARKETS. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning: Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.