When a setup works for someone else and not for you

[Fairman]

When a setup works for someone else and not for you

It's frustrating. Someone posts a setup, shows good results, maybe others agree it works. You try it, and it doesn't work for you. You start wondering if you're doing something wrong.

Sometimes you are. Often the difference is in the details. They might trade it on a different pair or session. Their definition of the setup might be stricter than what was in the post. Their stop and target placement, or how they manage the trade, might be different. Small differences can change the results a lot.

There's also personality. A setup that needs patience to sit through pullbacks might suit one person and not another. If a strategy requires something you find hard to do consistently, it'll work worse for you even if it's a good strategy.

And sometimes the results that were posted are just a good stretch, not a reliable edge. Short samples can look great by chance.

What I'd do: write down the exact rules as you understand them, then compare with the original source and ask questions if anything's unclear. Test it on enough trades. If it still doesn't work for you after that, it's okay to drop it.

There's no rule that says every working setup should work for everyone.

[Fairman]

Spread and execution can explain a lot. If the person posting has much lower costs, a strategy with small targets might work for them and not for someone with wider spreads. Asking about their broker type, spreads, and typical trade size can reveal a lot. It's not about doubting them, it's about understanding the conditions their results came from. A scalping strategy that barely works at low cost can fail completely at higher cost. Asking politely about their conditions is fair, and most people who share setups are happy to explain.

[Fairman]

It also helps to look at what you do differently in practice versus in theory. Recording screen videos of a few sessions and watching them back can show things like entering early, moving stops, or skipping trades you should take. The rules might be the same on paper, but the execution differs. That's uncomfortable to watch, but it's often the most direct way to find out why a setup that works for others isn't working for you. Watching yourself back is uncomfortable, but it's usually where the answer is. It feels awkward, but it helps.

[FXS Prop Desk]

The details often make the difference: time of day, pair, spread, the exact definition of the setup and the stop. A setup that works on GBPUSD during London may fail on EURUSD in New York.

Asking the person for their exact rules and trying to copy them precisely for a set number of trades is a fair test. If it still does not work after that, the setup may not suit your conditions, which is fine. Not every setup fits every trader.

[Fairman]

Personality and schedule matter too. Someone who trades a strategy successfully might be comfortable sitting through long periods of nothing, or holding through big swings, while you find that stressful. If the strategy suits their temperament and not yours, you'll probably break the rules at the hard moments. It's not a failure, just a mismatch. Asking yourself which parts of the strategy feel uncomfortable, and whether those parts are where your results differ, can show this quite clearly. Sometimes a small change, like a wider stop or fewer trades per day, makes the strategy fit you much better without changing what it's really doing.

[Fairman]

Is it possible the other person's results just aren't as good as they look? Many people share results selectively, show a good period, or leave out costs. Before assuming you're doing something wrong, it's fair to ask how robust their results are. A long track record with costs included and drawdowns shown is much more convincing than a few screenshots. Sometimes the difference between their results and yours is just that you're seeing your full results and only part of theirs. It's not about doubting everyone, just checking the evidence before blaming yourself. A fair comparison needs the same costs, the same period and the same rules on both sides.