Assemble the decision packet

Page one contains only information recorded at the decision time. In our fictional exercise, a learner models buying 100 ABC shares at $50 at 10:05. The note says the exercise ends at 10:15 unless a defined stop condition is reached sooner. A last-sale observation at or below $49.60 is the stated stop trigger for a simulated market exit.

The packet also contains the chart excerpt available at 10:05, the learner's reason for studying it, and the sentence: “Current bid and ask were not saved.” Keep that missing information visible. The $50 entry is explicitly an assumed simulated fill. The quantity and prices are teaching inputs, and the example excludes fees.

First pass: review the record before the outcome

Ask whether the instrument, time, decision rule, and next checkpoint are identifiable. Mark each answer “documented,” “missing,” or “unclear,” with a sentence explaining why. Here, the instrument and checkpoint are documented. Current quote evidence is missing. You cannot resolve that omission by guessing what the spread probably looked like.

Next, distinguish an observation from an interpretation. If the note says price was above a marked level, identify the actual value and time that support it. If it says buyers were certain to keep control, mark that as an unsupported interpretation. Your review should explain the evidence gap rather than replace the sentence with a better story after the fact.

Save this first-pass review without editing it. Its purpose is to describe the quality and limits of the original record. It is not a score for readiness to trade real money, and it does not establish whether the chosen rule has any predictive value.

Second pass: open the outcome packet

Page two says that a qualifying last-sale observation of $49.58 appeared at 10:10. The simulation recorded an exit fill of $49.40. Under the exercise's assumptions, the trigger condition occurred, the exit instruction was followed, and the modeled loss was $0.60 per share multiplied by 100 shares, or $60 before fees.

The distance from the $50 entry to the $49.60 trigger was $40 for the chosen quantity. That planned figure differs from the $60 modeled loss. The SEC explains that a standard stop becomes a market order when triggered and that the stop price does not guarantee an execution price. This example illustrates that distinction without claiming to reconstruct a real fill.

Test your review against two different endings

Create two fictional versions of what happened after the exit. In Ending A, the price continues lower. In Ending B, it later rises above the original entry. Neither ending changes what was documented at 10:05 or whether the stated trigger occurred at 10:10.

If your first-pass review changes only because you now prefer one ending, explain what changed in your reasoning. A later recovery can suggest a research question about the rule. It cannot supply missing information to the earlier packet or establish that ignoring the rule was justified at the time.

The same separation applies to a favorable outcome. An assumed entry followed by a rise still has an assumed entry. A missing quote does not become verified because the final number looks good. Preserve the evidence labels in both versions.

Choose a repair that matches the actual gap

For this packet, a practical next exercise is to record the relevant quote information and the simulator's fill convention. That addresses a documented weakness. Moving the stop level because Ending B feels frustrating would introduce a new rule before you have separated the evidence problem from the outcome.

If you want to study another rule, create a new exercise, state the change in advance, and retain both versions. Do not overwrite the original note. A small set of fictional examples can teach review habits, but it cannot establish a rule's expected return or reliability across real market conditions.

Write the review in three sentences

Close with: “The trigger and checkpoint were documented. The modeled exit followed the stated rule, but entry and exit realism remain unverified. My next exercise will preserve quote evidence and explain the fill convention.” Each sentence corresponds to something the record can support.

Keep the two packets and both review passes together. You have produced a review another learner can inspect without needing to agree with your market opinion. That makes the next discussion about specific evidence and decisions rather than whether the chart eventually rewarded the idea.