Educational material
Status of this document - read before continuingThis document is not a user manual and not a recommendation. It is educational material describing one possible approach to interpreting the technical levels calculated by BvsB Zone Scanner.

• The company is not a licensed financial adviser and does not provide investment, financial, legal or tax advice
• What follows is not a suggestion to act and is not tailored to any person's financial situation, experience, risk tolerance or objectives
• The approach described carries elevated risk and is not suitable for most users. The risks are set out in detail in section 6
• The software performs none of the actions described here. It calculates and displays levels; every action on the platform is taken by the user
• Nothing here guarantees any outcome. Past and theoretical results are not indicative of future results

If you are not experienced with leveraged products, margin requirements and position management, this approach is not advisable. Consult a licensed professional in your jurisdiction before making any decisions.


1. Context

BvsB Zone Scanner calculates technically significant price levels and attaches several calculated fields to each notification: Level, TP, REV and RR. The technical meaning of these fields is described in Part 3 of the user manual.

This document explains the logic behind how those fields are calculated — specifically, why the software computes a level on the opposite side at all, and what that represents conceptually. The purpose is to help the user understand what the data depicts, not to instruct anyone how to act.

2. The REV Level Concept

Most trading approaches use a Stop Loss — an order that closes a position once the loss reaches a defined limit.
The methodology underlying the software's calculations uses a different construct in place of a Stop Loss. At the distance where a Stop Loss would sit, an opposite-direction level is calculated — the REV field:

• If the calculated direction is SELL, REV BUY STOP sits above the entry level
• If the calculated direction is BUY, REV SELL STOP sits below the entry level

The conceptual difference: if price reaches that level, the first position is not closed; instead an opposite position comes into existence. Two positions in opposite directions then exist simultaneously — a hedge, or lock.
Essential to understand: a hedge does not prevent a loss, it fixes it. The gap between the two entry prices remains as a fixed negative result that does not change while both positions are open. This is not a protective mechanism — it is a deferral of the loss in time.
The RR field is simply a geometric ratio between the distance to TP and the distance to REV. It expresses no probability and is not a forecast.
Lifecycle of the opposite orderIf price never reaches the REV level and the first position closes at the TP level, the opposite-direction pending order remains active on the platform. It does not disappear on its own, and it is not cancelled by the fact that the position it related to no longer exists.
The practical consequence: if price later reaches that level — even days afterwards — the order fills and creates a separate, unrelated position with no TP and no SL, which the user may not notice.
The approach described therefore involves the user cancelling the opposite pending order themselves as soon as the first position has closed. The software does not see, monitor or cancel pending orders — this is purely a user action on the platform.
Example: a BUY position is open with a Sell Stop pending order placed below it. The market moved up, the Sell Stop never filled, and the BUY position closed at its TP. At that moment the Sell Stop is still sitting on the platform, waiting. If it is not cancelled, the next move down will open an entirely new, unprotected SELL position.

3. The Position-Count Principle

The methodology assumes that no more than two positions exist on one instrument at a time — one BUY and one SELL.

When the software generates a new notification for an instrument where a position already exists in that direction, the methodology involves changing the parameters of the existing position rather than opening a third one. The reason is exposure control: without such a limit, every new notification would increase the position count and margin load.

The software neither applies nor enforces this limit — it belongs to the methodology, not to the software.

4. Volume Progression on Repeated Levels

When a new level is calculated in the same direction at a more favourable price (lower for a BUY, higher for a SELL), the approach described involves doubling the volume of the existing position.

A numerical illustration using a nominal starting value of 0.10:


These figures are an arithmetic illustration of the progression, not a recommended size. Position size is determined solely by the user, and the software never specifies a volume.

The conceptual objective: the position's average entry price moves closer to the most recently calculated level. A cTrader position's entry price is recorded as the volume-weighted average price (VWAP) of all filled deals, so increasing the volume recalculates that average.

This is a progressive-sizing approach (also known as averaging down, or a martingale-type progression). It is among the highest-risk position-management approaches that exist. The risks are set out in section 6 and must be read before any decision.

5. Managing the Hedge

Once both positions exist, the approach described involves removing the TP level from the first position. The reason is technical: the TP was calculated for a single position in isolation, on the assumption that it would run alone, and it is not a combined target for both positions together.

The methodology does not automate or prescribe what happens afterwards. The approach used by the author involves closing the positions at different moments rather than simultaneously.

Critical note: it is sometimes claimed that such an approach means a position is "never closed at a loss". That claim is false. The decision to close can be overridden by the broker — if free margin runs out, a forced closure (stop out) is executed on the broker's terms regardless of the user's plan. This approach does not eliminate losses; it moves them in time while increasing their potential size.

6. Risks

The approach described carries specific risks that differ from ordinary trading with a Stop Loss.


6.1. No loss limit

Without a Stop Loss there is no predefined maximum loss per trade. The size of the loss is determined by market movement and available margin, not by the user's plan.


6.2. Exponential volume growth

The progression 0.10 → 0.20 → 0.40 → 0.80 → 1.60 → 3.20 means that after five steps the volume is 32 times the original. The loss per price point grows just as fast.


6.3. Margin exhaustion

Each increase requires roughly as much free margin as all previous steps combined. A sustained move in one direction can lead to a stop-out, in which control over the timing of closure is lost.


6.4. Time and swap costs

Hedged positions can remain open indefinitely. Over that period swap charges accrue on both positions and capital stays tied up.


6.5. Statistical character

A progressive-sizing approach characteristically produces many small positive results and rare but very large negative ones. A long run of positive results does not mean the approach is working — that is its normal behaviour, and the large negative result may still lie ahead.


6.6. Who this approach is not suitable for

• Accounts with small capital relative to the intended volume
• High-leverage accounts
• Users without experience in margin calculations
• Accounts where a loss would affect the user's financial situation
• Prop-firm accounts with drawdown limits, where such an approach typically breaches the rules