Why a 1 to 3 target is often unrealistic on a sweep setup

[Shadow Trader]

Many traders aim for three times their risk on every trade because the math looks attractive. On sweep and reversal setups, the realistic target is often smaller. After a sweep and structure break, price typically travels to the nearest internal liquidity, such as the previous swing high or session level, and that distance may only be one to two times your stop. Demanding three can mean you hold through a retracement and lose the profit, or skip valid setups because they do not look big enough. I plan the target based on the chart, not on a fixed number. I mark the next obvious liquidity pool and measure the distance. If it gives at least one point five times my risk, I consider the trade. If not, I skip it. I also consider taking partial profit at the first internal level and moving the stop to breakeven for the rest. Whether that improves results depends on your win rate and average runner. Test it on a sample before assuming that bigger targets always produce better outcomes.

[FXS HongKong Scalper]

Agreed, targets should come from the chart. A simple way to check this on your own sweep trades: for each one, measure the distance to the first opposing level in multiples of the stop, and note whether price reached 3R before coming back to entry. If the median distance is, say, 1.6 times the stop, a fixed 3R target is asking for a move the chart rarely offers, and taking most of the position at the first internal level with a small runner is the more realistic plan.