Tiny targets: when a 0.3R scalp can't pay for itself

[FXS London Scalper]

Some scalpers take profit very quickly, at a fraction of their stop. On paper it gives a high win rate. In practice, the math gets brutal once costs are included.

Example on EURUSD:
- Stop: 5 pips. Target: 1.5 pips (0.3R).
- All-in cost: 0.7 pips per trade.
- Net win: 0.8 pips. Net loss: 5.7 pips.

Break-even win rate = 5.7 / (0.8 + 5.7) = about 88%.

Very few setups win 88% of the time over hundreds of trades once slippage and occasional spikes are included. A single bad fill wipes out the gains of seven or eight winners.

Ways to make small targets work, if you insist on them:
- Reduce the stop too (keeping R closer to 1), which needs very precise entries.
- Trade only when spread is at its tightest.
- Trade instruments where cost is small relative to typical movement.

Or move the target out to at least 0.8–1R, accepting a lower win rate.

Do you take small targets? Have you checked your break-even win rate with real costs?

[PTScalper]

Some scalpers take profit very quickly, at a fraction of their stop. On paper it gives a high win rate. In practice, the math gets brutal once costs are included.

Example on EURUSD:
- Stop: 5 pips. Target: 1.5 pips (0.3R).
- All-in cost: 0.7 pips per trade.
- Net win: 0.8 pips. Net loss: 5.7 pips.

Break-even win rate = 5.7 / (0.8 + 5.7) = about 88%.

Very few setups win 88% of the time over hundreds of trades once slippage and occasional spikes are included. A single bad fill wipes out the gains of seven or eight winners.

Ways to make small targets work, if you insist on them:
- Reduce the stop too (keeping R closer to 1), which needs very precise entries.
- Trade only when spread is at its tightest.
- Trade instruments where cost is small relative to typical movement.

Or move the target out to at least 0.8–1R, accepting a lower win rate.

Do you take small targets? Have you checked your break-even win rate with real costs?

Hi FXS London Scalper,

i agree in core, but on another hand it depends on you scalping style.
The math you outlined is absolutely bulletproof, and I completely agree with your core premise. For the vast majority of traders, an inverted risk-to-reward ratio is a fast track to a blown account precisely because of the spread and commission drag you highlighted.

That being said, I want to offer a counter-perspective from my own live trading: I actually run a TP:SL ratio of up to 1:5, and it works exceptionally well for my specific edge.

[PTScalper]

Here is how I navigate that brutal math and make it profitable:

1. Achieving the 90–95% Win Rate

The only way a 1:5 ratio survives is by operating at a 90–95% win rate during high-probability trading series. I achieve this by being hyper-selective with my entries. I focus heavily on established price action and structural S&R levels, reading the broader context on the M15 and H4 timeframes before executing. When you are entering at optimal exhaustion points or clear momentum breaks on highly liquid markets, those micro-targets are hit with extreme reliability before the market has a chance to breathe or reverse.

[PTScalper]

2. The Stop Loss is a Catastrophic Fail-Safe, Not a Routine Exit

While my hard stop might technically sit at 5R (e.g., Target 2 pips, Stop 10 pips), I very rarely sit on my hands and let a trade hit that full stop. If the structural premise of my trade breaks, I cut the position manually. The 5R stop is there to protect against sudden flash spikes or connectivity drops, not to dictate my average losing trade size.

3. Eliminating the "All-in Cost" Drag

Your example noted an all-in cost of 0.7 pips. When your target is 1.5 pips, 0.7 is an unacceptable handicap. To make small targets work, your infrastructure has to be flawless. I trade exclusively on Raw ECN accounts (specifically IC Markets) where the spread on pairs like EURUSD or assets like XAUUSD is extremely tight, often 0.0 on the majors. When you eliminate the spread and only pay a flat commission, the break-even math shifts significantly in your favor.

[PTScalper]

4. Exponential Money Management

Because a single bad slippage event or news spike can wipe out multiple winners, my risk model is built to absorb it. I risk a very small baseline capital and scale my position sizing exponentially, but solely using accumulated market gains. If a bad fill catches me, it is taking back the market's money, not my initial deposit.

So to answer your question: Yes, I do take small targets with an inverted R:R, and yes, I track the break-even math meticulously. It requires nearly flawless execution, institutional-grade spreads, and the discipline to step away when the market gets choppy. It’s definitely not a style I’d recommend to anyone without years of screen time, but once you can read the micro-structure of the market, it’s a highly consistent way to trade.

[FXS Prop Desk]

PTScalper, cutting the trade on a broken premise instead of waiting for a hard stop at 5R makes the tiny target workable. It does mean the real risk per trade is the average cut size, not the stop on the order. Recording that average separately would show the real reward-to-risk of the method. For example, if the average cut were around 1.5R, a 0.3R target would need a very high win rate to pay for itself once costs are included.