Video summary
+969% Return in 1 Year: The Pullback Strategy of a Trading Champion
Main summary
Key takeaways
Performance / Trading Record & Outcomes
- Started trading Oct 2020 with about $300 (~HKD 10,000); tripled the account in the first ~4 months.
- 2024: joined USIC; finished with ~+280% return.
- 2025: +969% return (per host) / “over 900%”; track record stated:
- 209 winning trades
- 731 losing trades
- Reported win rate: ~20–25% (explicitly mentions it “further decreased to 22%,” but also says it’s not closely watched).
- 2025 pullback vs prior approach: traded more than 2024, attributing part of the increased trade count to trading pullbacks.
Instruments / Tickers Mentioned
ETFs / Funds / Indices / Leverage
- Ques / “Q’s” (generally Nasdaq-100 exposure)
- SQQ (may trade “SQQ,” as stated)
- TQQ (explicitly used for a parabolic long example; treated as leveraged Q exposure)
- IWM (used as a market/benchmark and for regime checks)
- UPs (context suggests UPS)
Crypto / Commodities (Brief)
- Gold / silver
- Mentions “commodities” generally (no specific commodity futures tickers captured)
Stocks / Equities (Many Examples; Some Ambiguity)
- UPS
- QS
- Circle (likely C, but not fully clear)
- Rocket Lab (ticker not clearly stated)
- SoFi (SOFI)
- AO (ambiguous in subtitles; likely AO)
- Futu (FUTU implied)
- SMR
- Oklo (OKLO)
- LTI
- Quantum/theme names: INQ / IQ (repeated ticker appears clearer as IQ), RGTI, QBTS, AL
- Tesla (TSLA implied)
- AMX
- ACR
- AMD
- NVDA / Nvidia
- SoFi / Solar names (solar tickers include):
- CSIQ
- Other mentioned examples (some subtitle ambiguity):
- AQUO (could be AQUA / AQUO ambiguity)
- SNDK
- BBBI
- BBAI
- Short example: UU
- “E” / Echo Fulls (unclear in subtitles)
Energies / Miners / Metals Theme
- Trades a “gold miners ETF” and references “gold minus the ETF”.
- The specific ETF ticker is not clearly captured.
Methodology / Step-by-Step Framework (“Pullback Strategy”)
Core Style
- Swing trader and trend follower
- Strong emphasis on pullback entries (not purely breakouts)
Risk Framework (Explicit Numbers)
- Risk per trade: about 0.5% of portfolio (can be less/more depending on cushioning/conditions).
- Typical position sizing: most positions 25–30% of portfolio.
- ~20% for small/micro caps due to gap-down risk (sometimes 10–20% or even 30%).
- Occasionally >35% for very slow names (including gold/silver or index-type setups), still bounded by the 0.5% risk rule.
- Stops:
- Generally <3%, often ~2.5% or less
- Common stop placements:
- Low of day
- Sometimes low of the entry candle
- Mentions a logic that tighter stops can offset a low win rate.
Signal Inputs / Indicators
- Uses EMAs (explicitly): 9, 21, 50, and also 150.
- Uses Anchor VWAP heavily:
- Applied on daily charts as a key level and shown on intraday charts
- Anchored to swing highs for longs and swing lows for shorts
- Claims effectiveness ~80–90% of the time when used
Market Regime Checks
- Monitors Q’s and IWM (also referenced as “breath/improving” context).
- Trades depend on whether the market is trending vs choppy.
Pullback Entry Structure (Conditions He Looks For)
Pullbacks should align with:
- Pullback into support where price reacts
- Specifically:
- Daily 9 EMA / 21 EMA
- Rising/falling EMAs
- Prior swing highs/lows
- Anchor VWAP
- Timing preference:
- On gaps up, stocks often get “slammed” early (first 30–60 minutes), then may reclaim
- He targets later intraday setups after the early flush/rejection finds support
Intraday “Sniper” Execution (Trigger & Stops)
Trigger Framework
After identifying daily/hourly levels (Anchor VWAP + EMAs), he zooms intraday:
- Often waits for breakout of the previous bar high
- Timeframe usage:
- 1-minute for very early windows
- then 5-minute for the first ~15 minutes to ~60 minutes after the open (he describes switching timeframes)
Stop Placement
- Often at:
- Low of day
- or low of the breakout bar / entry candle
- Depends on candle tightness and risk tolerance.
Stop-Tightening Thesis
He argues the edge comes from:
- tight stops (often 2.5% or less)
- high-quality entries
- derisking into strength quickly
Cautions/disclosures:
- Tight-stop systems can still produce volatile equity curves
- Drawdowns can worsen due to behavioral slip/random trading during losing streaks, especially in gap-down/choppy conditions.
Sell / Profit-Taking Process
- No single rigid sell rule; he uses partials:
- Sell partials into strength on ~3-hour or 5-hour timescales (hourly-based triggers mentioned)
- Typical first trim: ~15–20%
- Often trails the remainder using EMAs (especially 9 EMA) when strength continues
- For shorts:
- Tends to be more aggressive
- First profits typically within 2–3 days
- Prefers “closing into strength” earlier to reduce exposure
- Mentions different behavior depending on whether he can close into strength vs weakness (risk/math edge discussion)
Key Macro / Market Context
Trending Markets
- “Clear uptrends / clear downtrends” are easier to participate in.
Choppy Markets (Notably Dec 2025)
- Strategy got punished because:
- tight-stop + pullback/breakout setups can fail frequently without follow-through
Indirect Regime Call (Relative Strength)
- In late 2025, he observed Q’s vs IWM relative strength:
- used it to infer higher/lower probabilities of deeper pullbacks/corrections
- Empirical finding being studied:
- If IWM leads, Q’s have a lower probability of a deeper correction
- Mentions historical ~15%+ drawdown conditions (numbers somewhat unclear in subtitles), concluding that regime/relative strength matters for shorting frequency.
2025 Drawdown Drivers & Explicit Cautions / Recommendations
- 2025 goal: minimize drawdown
- Missed it due to December 2025 drawdown ~26%
He attributes the December drawdown to three main issues:
- Overtrading
- About 770–80 trades in Dec (subtitles suggest “770–80” or similar range)
- Later says ~46% of trades were “bad trades”
- Long/short flipping while losing follow-through
- switching repeatedly (short → stopped → long → stopped → short again)
- created compounding losses
- Too bearish bias into choppier conditions
- focused on small/micro cap/speculative names that were declining
- ignored that broader leadership (e.g., IWM outperforming Q’s) suggested the market wasn’t as weak as shorts assumed
Lesson / recommendation he explicitly states:
- In choppy conditions, trade less, especially on the short side.
- Also notes partials were sometimes not taken early enough:
- he wanted 3-hour or 5-hour partial targets
- but price only moved about ~4–6% before reversing.
Example Setup: “Parabolic Bottom” (Leveraged Q Exposure)
High-Level Thesis (TQQ example)
- Context:
- after ~20% below the 1-hour EMA, the move is described as abnormally stretched and oversold
- Entry:
- buy at reversal using 1-minute opening range highs / intraday breakouts
- Stop:
- around the low of the breakout bar, roughly ~2%
- Target logic:
- near the hourly 9 EMA / 21 EMA
- also considers a nearby ~5-minute EMA cluster like 150
- Exit:
- sell all into strength quickly due to speed of move
- mentions a very fast intraday move (subtitles suggest something like a “quick 13 hour move in just half an hour,” with timing phrasing inconsistent but meaning: rapid profit)
Position Sizing Math (Explicit Step)
- Determine stop distance from intraday entry range.
- Example given: if candle range is ~3%, stop distance might be ~2–2.5%.
- Risk-based sizing example:
- If account is $10,000 and risk per trade is 0.5%, risk amount is $50.
- Position size ≈ $50 / 0.025 = $2,000, about 20% of portfolio.
- General rule:
- sizing stays roughly stable as a percentage due to consistent risk-per-trade and consistent stop distances.
Disclosures / Disclaimers
- No explicit “not financial advice” disclaimer appears in the provided subtitles.
Presenters / Sources Mentioned
- Richard Mglin (host)
- Martin Luke (guest trader; “Top performer in US investing championship”; return numbers cited)
- Christian Kula / Christian Kulamei (mentor/source; referenced for stop placement and breakout/EPS/parabolic knowledge)
- Mark Minervini (book author on risk management/stop-setting; referenced)
- Brian Shannon (credited with introducing Anchor VWAP / anchor VWAP usage approach)
- Sponsor referenced: public.com (host says episode powered by public.com)