Logging how far each entry was from the nearest round number

[Fairman]

Logging how far each entry was from the nearest round number

I started recording the distance from each entry to the nearest 00 or 50 level, in pips. It's a quick column to fill in and has given some interesting results.

The idea is that round numbers attract orders. Stops, take profits and limit orders cluster there. A long entry 3 pips below 1.0800 has a level just above it where price might stall. A long entry 3 pips above 1.0800 might have support underneath.

For each trade I log:
Nearest round number, like 1.0800 or 1.0850.
Distance from entry in pips, signed, so plus if the round number is above, minus if below.
Whether the trade direction was towards the round number or away from it.

After a couple of hundred trades you can group them. Longs entered just below a round number, within 5 pips, versus longs entered just above. Trades with the target beyond a round number versus trades with the target before it.

For JPY pairs I use the 00 and 50 levels too, like 150.00 and 150.50.

Anyone else tracked something like this?

[FXS HongKong Scalper]

Signed distance is the right choice. One extension is to note whether price had already tested the round number earlier in the session. A first test often behaves differently from a later one. A level that has held twice may break on the third test, while a fresh level may hold more often. Adding a simple count of previous touches during the session gives more context. After enough trades, the pattern can show whether entries near tested levels are worth taking.

[Fairman]

A refinement I'm thinking about is including the 20 and 80 levels too, like 1.0820 and 1.0880. Some traders say these matter as well, but the evidence I've seen is mostly anecdotal. Logging them separately means I can test whether they matter for my trades without assuming either way. It's one more column, but cheap to add. Some traders say 20 and 80 levels are where banks place orders, but I haven't seen evidence that convinces me. Logging both lets the data decide. If they show nothing after a few hundred trades, I'll drop the column.

[Fairman]

For targets, the opposite question is interesting. Do take profits just before a round number fill more often than ones just beyond it? If price tends to stall a couple of pips short of 1.0900, a target at 1.0898 might be hit when 1.0905 isn't. Logging the target's distance from the round number tells you whether that's happening in your trades. A target sitting just in front of the level could be the easiest change to make if the data supports it. It doesn't change entries, only exits, which means it can be tested on past trades by checking the highs and lows after each entry. That's a quick test with data you already have.

[Fairman]

It might also interact with time of day. Round numbers might matter more in quiet hours, when there's less flow to push through them, and less in busy periods. Grouping by session as well as distance will need more trades, but it's the kind of thing that becomes visible after a few months of data. Splitting by session needs more data, so it's a longer project. The London morning, New York afternoon and Asian session might all behave differently. Keeping the column filled for every trade means the data will be ready when the sample is large enough.

[Fairman]

Automating this is easy in a spreadsheet. If the entry price is in column B, MROUND(B2, 0.005) gives the nearest 50 level on a four decimal pair, and the difference times 10,000 gives pips. For JPY pairs, use 0.5 and multiply by 100. That saves typing and avoids mistakes. With an extra column for the session and one for the outcome, a pivot table can show win rate by distance and session in a few clicks. The spreadsheet does the boring work, and you can focus on whether the pattern makes sense. If it doesn't make sense, treat it with suspicion even if the numbers look good.