Trading quiz

✓ Right: with a CFD you trade the price change and never own the gold or the currency itself.

✗ That describes physical ownership, and a CFD gives you no ownership of the asset at all.

✗ A CFD pays no interest and can lose money fast, so it is nothing like a savings account.

✗ A CFD is a contract with the broker, not a part of the broker's business.

✗ That is 1% of $4,000, but the position is 10 ounces, so its value is $40,000, not $4,000.

✓ Right: 0.10 lot is 10 ounces, 10 × $4,000 = $40,000, and $40,000 ÷ 100 = $400.

✗ The broker does not take the whole account; it sets aside only the margin the position needs.

✗ That would be 1:10 leverage, while at 1:100 the margin is one hundredth of $40,000.

✗ $50 would be the loss on 0.01 lot, but 0.10 lot moves $10 for every $1.00.

✗ That is the margin, and your loss comes from the full position, not from the margin.

✓ Right: 0.10 lot is $10 per $1.00 move, so $50 × $10 = $500, half the account.

✗ That would need 1 full lot, and a $1,000 account could not hold that loss anyway.

✗ You only see what the channel chose to post, so nothing here proves the method or justifies more risk.

✓ Right: losses are often skipped, deleted or reframed, so the true record needs to be checked independently.

✗ A channel has no real member limit, and pressure to hurry is a sales trick, not information.

✗ A posted record is not a full record, and real methods lose often, even good ones.

✗ That counts the wins only and leaves out the two 100-pip losses.

✗ That subtracts only one loss, but there were two of 100 pips each.

✗ The wins add up to 160 pips and the losses to 200 pips, so they do not cancel out.

✓ Right: 8 × 20 = 160, 2 × 100 = 200, and 160 − 200 = −40, despite an 80% win rate.

✗ The referral link exists so the broker knows whom to pay for bringing you.

✓ Right: this is the usual model, and the channel is paid whether you win or lose.

✗ Referral and per-lot payments do not depend on your profits at all.

✗ No one pays a channel for winning signals; payment comes from the broker for clients and volume.

✗ A $40 move is a $400 loss, which leaves equity at $600 and a margin level of 150%.

✓ Right: equity must fall to $400, which is a $600 loss, and $600 ÷ $10 = $60.

✗ $80 is where a 50% stop-out would happen, after equity falls to $200.

✗ A $100 move is a $1,000 loss, the whole account, long after the margin call.

✗ Instant replies at any hour and a follow-up deadline are a sales script, not care.

✗ A chat channel has no real member limit, so the 'spot' is invented.

✓ Right: it uses fear of losing something to rush you, and a real opportunity survives two weeks of checking.

✗ No rule requires anyone to chase you, and checking slowly is always allowed.

✗ 0.01 lot is 1 ounce, so a $1.00 move is worth $1, not one cent.

✓ Right: 0.01 lot is 1 ounce, so each $1.00 move is $1.

✗ $10 per $1.00 move is 0.10 lot, which is ten times bigger.

✗ $100 per $1.00 move is a full standard lot of 100 ounces.

✗ The real yield subtracts inflation from the rate; it does not add them.

✗ That would be true with 3% expected inflation, but here inflation is higher than the rate.

✗ The rate and expected inflation are not equal, so the real yield is not zero.

✓ Right: 4% − 5% = about −1%, which makes gold's lack of interest matter less.

✗ They often move in opposite directions, and nothing in markets happens always.

✓ Right: a stronger dollar makes gold dearer for buyers in other currencies, but this is a tendency, not a rule.

✗ The link is loose and changes over time, so there is no fixed ratio.

✗ Gold is priced in dollars all over the world, so the dollar's value matters.

✓ Right: that is the usual slot, and gold can move many dollars in seconds around it.

✗ NFP is monthly, and 14:00 New York time is when Fed rate decisions usually come out.

✗ 8 meetings a year is the FOMC schedule, not the jobs report.

✗ NFP is listed in advance in every economic calendar, so you can plan around it.

✗ That is the spread in price terms, which you must multiply by $10 for 0.10 lot.

✗ $12 is the extra cost compared with the normal $3, not the total cost.

✓ Right: $1.50 × $10 = $15, five times the normal $3 for the same trade.

✗ $150 would be the cost on 1 full lot, not on 0.10 lot.

✗ A stop hit without the chart touching it is usually normal mechanics, not an error.

✓ Right: sells close at the ask, which many charts do not show, so a wider spread can hit the stop.

✗ A stop-loss is a pending order that works in every session.

✗ Delay is possible on some free charts, but the bid and ask difference is the usual cause.

✗ $50 is the planned loss at 4,040, but a gap means the stop cannot fill at that level.

✗ $100 would be a fill at 4,030, but the first available price was 4,020.

✓ Right: the stop fills near 4,020, so 30 × $5 = $150, three times the plan.

✗ The trade stays open over the weekend and is closed at the first price on Monday.

✓ Right: $50 ÷ (8.00 × $100) = 0.0625, rounded down to 0.06, for a real risk of $48.

✗ That rounds up, which gives a risk of $56, above your $50 plan.

✗ 0.10 lot loses $80 at an 8.00 stop, which is 1.6% of the account.

✗ That puts the decimal point in the wrong place, and it would lose $496 at the stop.

✗ 0.30 lot loses $90 at 30 pips, almost twice the plan.

✓ Right: 30 × $10 = $300 per lot, $50 ÷ $300 = 0.1667, rounded down to 0.16, for $48 of risk.

✗ That rounds up, which gives $51 of risk, a little above the plan.

✗ That is ten times too big and would lose about $500 at the stop.

✓ Right: the chart decides the stop, and the position size makes that distance cost your planned risk.

✗ A stop chosen from money alone is often too tight and gets hit by normal movement.

✗ A mental stop is easy to ignore under stress, and a small loss can turn into a large one.

✗ Price does not respect round numbers reliably, and a stop exactly on a level is often hit by noise.

✗ That raises your risk after the market has already shown the idea may be wrong.

✗ Sometimes the price does not come back, and the loss then has no limit.

✓ Right: a stop may move in the direction of your trade, but never against it.

✗ Adding to a losing trade multiplies the risk on an idea that is failing.

✗ That assumes each loss is 5% of the starting $10,000, but each one is 5% of a smaller balance.

✗ This is not the result of any of the rules here; 0.95 to the power of 10 gives about 0.599.

✓ Right: $10,000 × 0.95 to the power of 10 is about $5,987, a loss of about 40%.

✗ That is the result at 1% risk per trade, Trader A's rule.

✗ 40% of $6,000 is only $2,400, which brings you to $8,400.

✗ 50% of $6,000 is $3,000, which brings you to $9,000.

✓ Right: you need $4,000 on $6,000, and $4,000 ÷ $6,000 is about 66.7%.

✗ 80% of $6,000 is $4,800, which overshoots to $10,800.

✗ Margin is a deposit to keep the trade open, not the money you lose at the stop.

✓ Right: risk is what you actually lose at the stop, usually shown as a percentage of the account.

✗ The deposit is your whole account, and one trade should risk only a small part of it.

✗ The spread is a cost, but your risk is the full loss at the stop.

✗ Each trade has its own stop, so the losses add up if all three are hit.

✗ Risk is not divided between trades; each one carries its full 1%.

✓ Right: three trades at 1% are 3% at risk, and trades on the same market often move together.

✗ A stop limits each loss, but each loss still happens if the price reaches it.

✗ An edge only changes the average; streaks still happen inside random results.

✓ Right: over 1,000 flips, runs of five or more tails are normal even with a 55% edge.

✗ A fair process with an edge still produces long streaks; it does not need to be broken.

✗ Streaks have no fixed schedule, and several can happen in 1,000 flips.

✗ That is what one loss leaves, not ten.

✗ That would be true if each loss were 1% of the starting balance, but each one is 1% of a smaller balance.

✓ Right: 0.99 to the power of 10 is about 0.904, so less than 10% is gone.

✗ About 60% is what remains at 5% risk per trade, not at 1%.

✗ A method can lose most trades and still make money if the winners are larger.

✗ One test does not prove the future, but losing often is not a sign of luck either way.

✗ This example shows the opposite: a 40% win rate was still positive overall.

✓ Right: the result depends on the size of wins and losses, not only on how often you win.

✓ Right: it feels like taking control, but it raises risk when your thinking is worst.

✗ The term is about chasing your own losses, not about any channel.

✗ A break is the opposite of revenge trading and protects the account.

✗ Cutting risk is a planned defence, while revenge trading increases risk on impulse.

✗ A limit with exceptions is not a limit, and the exciting trades are where rules break.

✗ That is revenge trading, and one more loss could turn a bad day into real damage.

✗ Changing a rule in the middle of a loss defeats the reason you wrote it.

✓ Right: the limit was set in advance for exactly this moment, and setups will come again.

✗ That is 1% of the old peak, but you are now in a drawdown and the balance is lower.

✗ That is 1% of $9,500, but your rule says to cut to 0.5% at this point.

✗ That is 0.5% of the peak, but risk is calculated on the current balance.

✓ Right: the account is exactly 5% below the peak, so 0.5% of $9,500 = $47.50.

✗ Five losses are within a normal streak, and switching every week means you never learn what works.

✓ Right: if the rules were followed, the problem is not discipline, and streaks are expected.

✗ Past losses do not make the next trade more likely to win.

✗ The journal is what told you the rules were followed, which is valuable information.