<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Candlesticks on FX Backtest Diary</title><link>https://etherpoc.com/en/tags/candlesticks/</link><description>Recent content in Candlesticks on FX Backtest Diary</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://etherpoc.com/en/tags/candlesticks/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Ten engines that translate chart-reading talk into testable numbers</title><link>https://etherpoc.com/en/posts/engine-upgrades/</link><pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://etherpoc.com/en/posts/engine-upgrades/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;ldquo;Buy the bounce off support.&amp;rdquo; &amp;ldquo;An engulfing candle means reversal.&amp;rdquo; Discretionary trading is taught in sentences like these, and as long as they stay sentences, you can never find out whether they actually make money. So across two rounds of work (studies 77 and 80 in my research log), I built a set of ten engines that translate that language into numbers a backtest can judge. This article is not about a win or a loss. It is about building the courtroom.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>