A post-trade review is a structured review you perform after a position is closed. Its purpose is not to decide whether the trade was “good” because it made money. The purpose is to compare your original plan with what you actually did, identify any execution error, record what the market did, and produce one specific lesson you can test across future trades.

The most useful post-trade review asks four questions:

Was the setup valid before entry?
Did I execute the plan I had before the outcome was known?
Did the result come from process, normal uncertainty, or a rule violation?
What one behavior or rule should I keep, test, or change next?

Key takeaways

Review winners, losers, and breakeven trades. A profitable trade can still contain bad process.
Compare the trade with the plan that existed before entry, not with the perfect decision visible in hindsight.
Separate decision quality from trade outcome.
Make one specific observation per trade; do not rewrite an entire strategy because of one result.
Use weekly or monthly journal review for pattern detection. A single-trade review is the raw material, not the final statistical conclusion.

What Is a Post-Trade Review?

A post-trade review is the closed-trade layer of a trading journal. It examines one completed position in enough detail to answer a simple question:

Given the information and rules available at the time, did I execute this trade as intended?

That is different from asking whether the trade made money.

A good trade can lose. A bad trade can win. Markets contain uncertainty, so outcome alone cannot tell you whether the decision process was sound.

CME Group's trade-plan education recommends keeping a trade log with entry and exit points, price targets, timing, technical context, and written conclusions so traders can later identify successes and mistakes. Schwab likewise recommends reviewing entries, stops, exits, and the assumptions behind a trade after it is closed.

This page owns the single-trade post-mortem. For how to record a complete journal and calculate aggregate statistics, use the Trading Journal Guide. For weekly, monthly, and quarterly pattern analysis, use the Trading Journal Review System.

Post-Trade Review vs Trading Journal Review

These activities are related but should not be treated as the same task.

Review layer	Unit of analysis	Main question	Typical output
Post-trade review	One closed trade	Did I execute this trade correctly?	One process grade and one lesson
Daily review	One session	What repeated today?	Session notes and rule violations
Weekly/monthly journal review	Many trades	Is there a repeatable pattern?	Setup, timing, risk, and behavior trends
Performance analysis	Large trade sample	What do the numbers say?	Expectancy, drawdown, profit factor, R metrics

The distinction matters because one trade is evidence about execution, not proof that a strategy works or fails.

The First Rule: Freeze the Original Trade Plan

The easiest way to fool yourself during review is to rewrite history.

After a trade closes, the chart already shows the future. Levels that looked uncertain before entry may now look obvious. An early exit may suddenly seem foolish because price later continued. A losing setup may look “clearly bad” only because you already know it lost.

To reduce hindsight distortion, preserve what existed before the outcome:

setup name;
thesis or trigger;
planned entry;
invalidation or stop level;
target or exit rule;
intended position size;
market context;
any planned management rule.

If the plan was not written before entry, record that fact. Do not reconstruct a perfect plan afterward and pretend it was the original one.

For rules that apply while a position is open, the separate Trade Management After Entry guide covers stops, partial exits, trailing rules, add-ons, and same-bar ambiguity.

A 10-Question Post-Trade Review Checklist

You do not need a 30-minute essay after every trade. A useful review can be compact if every question has a purpose.

1. What setup did I actually trade?

Name the setup precisely enough that you can group similar trades later.

Weak label:

Breakout.

Better label:

Daily resistance breakout after a three-day consolidation with above-normal volume.

The goal is classification, not storytelling.

2. Was the setup valid before entry?

Compare the trade against the rules in your trading plan.

For example:

Was the required trend present?
Was the trigger completed?
Was the trade inside your allowed session or market?
Was required confirmation present?
Was there a known condition that should have disqualified it?

Mark the setup as valid, invalid, or unclear. “Unclear” is useful when your written rule is too vague to judge consistently.

3. Did I enter where the plan said I would?

Record the planned entry and the actual fill.

Then classify any difference:

normal slippage;
deliberate early entry;
late chase;
different order type;
missed trigger followed by improvisation.

Do not label every imperfect fill a mistake. The question is whether the difference came from market execution or from abandoning your rule.

4. Was the position size consistent with the risk plan?

Check the size against the stop distance and the risk amount you intended before the trade.

If sizing was wrong, record why:

calculation error;
stop changed after sizing;
position manually increased;
leverage misunderstood;
emotional oversizing.

For the underlying calculation, use the Position Sizing methods guide.

5. Did I manage the open trade according to the pre-defined rule?

Compare the actual management sequence with the version you intended to trade.

Examples of deviations:

moved the stop without a predefined trigger;
took a partial earlier than planned;
widened risk after entry;
added to the position outside the add-on rule;
closed because of discomfort rather than an exit condition.

If you intentionally changed the plan because genuinely new information appeared, record the new information rather than automatically calling the change a mistake.

6. Was the exit rule followed?

Classify the exit before judging the P&L:

planned target;
planned stop;
trailing rule;
time exit;
discretionary but rule-allowed exit;
unplanned emotional exit;
execution problem.

A winner exited outside the rules should not receive a perfect process grade merely because it was profitable.

7. What was the market context?

Record only context that was relevant to the setup, such as:

trend or range;
volatility regime;
sector or index direction;
scheduled news;
opening-session conditions;
liquidity or spread conditions.

This lets you later ask whether a setup behaves differently under different conditions. Do not invent a market explanation after the fact just because the trade lost.

8. What was my decision state?

Use short, observable labels instead of a long emotional diary.

Examples:

calm;
rushed;
hesitant;
chasing;
revenge-oriented;
distracted;
overconfident.

Then connect the state to an action only when the evidence supports it.

For example:

I felt rushed and entered before the trigger candle closed.

is more useful than:

I was emotional.

9. Was this a good decision, independent of the result?

Use a simple process matrix:

Process	Outcome	Interpretation
Followed plan	Win	Good process, favorable outcome
Followed plan	Loss	Good process, unfavorable outcome
Broke plan	Win	Bad process that happened to work
Broke plan	Loss	Bad process and unfavorable outcome

This prevents two common review errors:

rewarding rule-breaking because it made money;
changing a valid rule because one compliant trade lost.

10. What is the single next action?

Finish with one specific action, not ten vague promises.

Examples:

“Do not enter this setup until the breakout bar closes.”
“Use the position-size calculation before sending the order.”
“Tag this trade as late-entry and check the next 20 similar trades before changing the rule.”
“Keep this setup unchanged; execution matched the plan.”

The best review may conclude that nothing should change.

A Compact Post-Trade Review Template

You can copy this directly into a spreadsheet, note app, or trading journal.

Trade facts

Date/time:
Symbol/market:
Direction:
Setup:
Planned entry:
Actual entry:
Planned stop/invalidation:
Planned exit rule:
Actual exit:
Planned risk:
Actual P&L or R result:

Process check

Setup valid before entry? Yes / No / Unclear
Entry followed rule? Yes / No
Size followed rule? Yes / No
Management followed rule? Yes / No
Exit followed rule? Yes / No
Relevant market context:
Decision state:

Review conclusion

Process grade: A / B / C / D
Biggest execution strength:
Biggest execution error:
One lesson:
One next action:
Tag for later aggregation:

A letter grade is optional. If you use one, define it consistently. Do not change the grading standard based on whether the trade won or lost.

Example: Good Trade, Bad Outcome

Assume a trader has a written pullback setup:

trend must be up;
price must pull back to a predefined area;
confirmation must occur before entry;
risk must stay within the trader's written limit;
the stop must remain at the invalidation level unless the management rule changes it.

The trade meets every condition, triggers correctly, and is stopped out.

A poor review says:

Loss. The setup did not work. Need a better indicator.

A better review says:

Setup valid. Entry, size, stop, and management all matched the plan. No rule violation. Tag as a compliant loss and include it in the next sample-level review. No strategy change from this trade alone.

That conclusion preserves a crucial distinction: a losing outcome does not automatically identify an execution problem.

Example: Bad Trade, Good Outcome

Now assume the same trader enters before confirmation because price starts moving quickly. The trade makes money.

A weak review says:

Great trade. Good instinct.

A better review says:

Profitable outcome, but entry violated the confirmation rule. Tag as early-entry. Do not reward the violation. Compare future early-entry cases with rule-compliant entries during the weekly review.

Profitable rule violations can be more dangerous than obvious losing mistakes because the market may reinforce behavior that is inconsistent with the plan.

What Not to Change After One Trade

A single post-trade review should rarely trigger a major strategy rewrite.

Avoid changing all of the following from one result:

indicator settings;
stop methodology;
target logic;
time filter;
setup definition;
position-size framework.

Instead, record the observation and tag the trade. Then use a larger sample to determine whether the issue repeats.

That is where the Trading Journal Review System becomes the next layer: weekly and monthly review can compare setup performance, rule violations, time-of-day effects, and recurring mistakes across many trades.

For numerical analysis such as expectancy, drawdown, profit factor, or category performance, use the Trading Performance Metrics guide.

When Should You Review a Trade?

There is no universal requirement that every trader perform an identical review at an identical time.

A practical structure is:

Immediately after exit: capture facts that are easy to forget—actual fill, exit reason, rule compliance, screenshot, and decision state.

Later the same day: add context if you need a calmer second look.

At the weekly review: stop treating the trade as an isolated story and compare it with similar trades.

CME's education material emphasizes recording trade details and performing a daily post-mortem, while Schwab's trade-plan material recommends reviewing closed trades and periodically analyzing journal activity. The exact cadence should be sustainable enough that you actually follow it.

How to Use ChartMini for Post-Trade Review

ChartMini can support the practice and reconstruction part of the review process, but it is not an automated trading-journal coach.

In the current v2 product:

completed simulator sessions can retain local history;
authenticated training completions can sync a compact summary such as symbol, interval, bar count, trade count, P&L percentage, and duration;
replay lets you revisit historical price action without risking real capital.

A useful workflow is:

Run a replay session in Market Replay.
Complete the simulated trade using your predefined rules.
Preserve the session result and relevant chart context.
Fill out the post-trade checklist above.
Tag the mistake or strength.
Review repeated tags later in your journal.

ChartMini does not currently replace your written post-trade analysis, automatically decide whether a trade was valid, or generate a personalized weekly coaching report from these notes.

Post-Trade Review: A Practical Checklist to Learn From Every Trade