Converting my trade log to R multiples changed what I see

[FXS London Scalper]

For years I tracked results in pips and money. Then I switched to R: result divided by the planned risk.

What became visible:

• My trades on GBPJPY looked great in pips, but in R they were average, because the stops were also larger.
• Small winners I closed early looked fine in pips, but in R they showed I was cutting at 0.4R regularly.
• My best setup by R wasn't my best by pips.

R makes trades with different stops comparable. Since switching, my decisions about which setups to keep are much clearer.

Anyone still tracking only pips? I'd be curious why.

[Amanhasnoname]

The early exits were the thing that hit me hardest when I made the same switch. In pips my winners looked respectable, but once everything was in R the median winner on my London breakouts was 0.6R against a planned 1.5R. I had been reading a decent pip total as proof the exits were fine, when really I was leaving most of the planned reward on the table.

One extra step helped me a lot. I log the planned R at entry as well as the result, so I can see the gap between what the setup offered and what I actually took. On my worst month the average gap was close to a full R per winning trade, which was a fairly blunt message.

The only place I still look at pips is costs. Spread and commission are fixed in pips, so a setup with tight stops can look great in R and still lose a big share of each trade to costs. I keep a column for cost as a fraction of R and drop anything where that figure creeps above about 0.15.