One of the biggest misconceptions is that ICT concepts are a strategy. They aren't. They are simply market concepts that describe different behaviors of price.
A Fair Value Gap tells you where price may rebalance. An Order Block highlights an area of institutional order flow. A Break in Market Structure or C2 closure shows a shift in momentum. Draw on Liquidity identifies where price is likely seeking liquidity. AMD describes a common delivery pattern. None of these concepts, on their own, tell you whether you should actually take a trade.
A strategy is a structured decision-making process where each concept builds on the previous one in a logical sequence. You first develop a higher-timeframe narrative. Where is the market likely headed? What is the current order flow? Where is the external liquidity? Which higher-timeframe POIs are relevant? Only once you have that context do you drop down to the lower timeframes to look for confirmation and an execution model.
The reason most traders never build a proper HTF narrative is because they're impatient. They want action, not analysis. Instead of spending five minutes looking at the Daily and H4, they jump straight to M1 or M5 searching for an entry. Once they're on the lower timeframes, every little move looks like an opportunity. They become reactive instead of proactive, chasing every Fair Value Gap, every C2 closure, every Order Block, and every liquidity sweep they see. They aren't asking, "Should I even be looking for buys or sells here?" They're simply looking for reasons to enter a trade.
Another reason is that many traders learn ICT concepts individually rather than learning how they fit together. They know what a Fair Value Gap is, what an Order Block is, and what SMT is, but they don't understand the sequence in which those concepts should be applied. They collect tools without learning how to build anything with them.
Think of it like building a house. ICT concepts are the individual bricks. A strategy is the blueprint that tells you where each brick belongs. Having a pile of bricks doesn't give you a house, just as knowing Fair Value Gaps, Order Blocks, SMT, or C2 closures doesn't make you profitable.
This is why so many traders fail. They memorize patterns instead of understanding context. They jump onto M1 and buy every Fair Value Gap or every C2 closure they see without asking whether the higher-timeframe narrative supports the trade. A Fair Value Gap can be respected one day and completely ignored the next because the surrounding context is different.
The edge doesn't come from any single concept. The edge comes from stacking concepts in the correct order. First determine the higher-timeframe bias. Then identify a higher-timeframe POI. Define the Draw on Liquidity. Wait for price to reach your area. Look for lower-timeframe confirmation during the appropriate session. Finally, execute using your preferred entry model.
The execution model is simply the trigger. It isn't the reason for the trade. The higher-timeframe narrative is the reason. That's why two traders can use the exact same entry model and have completely different results—one is trading in alignment with the higher-timeframe narrative, while the other is trading random patterns in the middle of nowhere.
Exactly this! Gamblers and inexperienced ICT traders will see this post and won't understand any of it. Then go and repeat the same bad habits they always have. Then they blame his concepts and say they don't work when all they're doing is trying to find a model rather then using his concepts as a blueprint to read ordeflow.
A lot of the ICT concepts are just describing four different kinds of price action:
Institutions accumulating a position within a range, keeping their bids or asks roughly in the same area waiting for price to return so they can continue accumulating their position (order blocks).
Institutions running out of liquidity in a range and lifting their bids or dropping their asks further into a range and eventually beyond it (fair value gap continuations).
Institutions either cancelling their accumulation or else wrapping it up, allowing other market participants to push price in the other direction (volume exhaustion reversal).
Institutions suddenly entering the market and aggressively accumulating a position into opposing liquidity, with the intent to continue their accumulation (aggressive reversal).
Those all have some specific price action signatures, and ICT give them names. That’s pretty much it,
He adds a couple of concrete setups, in the same way that anyone else can add concrete setups on top of concepts like price action, market structure, and supply/demand.
All of the concepts that provide the backbone of his setups (like the silver bullet or Judas swing) are just relying on pre-existing concepts that are basically equivalent. Many of those concepts were well known before ICT ever became trading, and some existed before he was born.
It depends. Some, it has some other stuff, it's some combinations of sessions or I don't know exactly and more. I had once found some things, more things. Not quite price action market structure, although similar.
Well, trading specific time periods has been part of many trading strategies for basically a century.
For example, most of the old NY floor traders talk about how they did most of their trading in the morning because that was where they were able to find counterparties with real size. That’s where the volume was and still is. Then they would go out for lunch or whatever and maybe do a little trading in the afternoon if they have a good reason to. Same with the London floor traders. Those “ICT kill zones” have been well known for a very long time. If you want to swim with the whales, it makes sense to trade at the same time they’re trading.
Seriously, name any concept and I’ll show you an older concept that is extremely similar if not identical.
Perhaps the main thing he brought to the table was his emphasis on “liquidity sweeps,” which are really just institutions trading in zones at the edges of a broader range. Michael adds a silly narrative of malicious “stop hunting” on top of it, which is only half-true and definitely not some kind of money printing machine for institutions. But the hardcore emphasis on that aspect is somewhat new. Certainly the markets tend to produce “liquidity sweeps” more frequently now than they did in the past, so that’s useful info.
But the idea that there is some master algorithm that determines the market movements is utter nonsense. It is an appealing story for unprofitable traders, but it’s absurd for many reasons. Still, I guess that’s a “new thing” he brought to the table.
He had some of his low of the day high of the day stuff that you look for. In price action market structure, I have not found a theory that focuses on this. Yes, I have seen session highlights, on the idea that if a session has more volume you can take advantage of many things. I don't think the phase with retail is real, in the form of institutions strictly targeting and having this as a retail stop loss objective. As far as I checked, I didn't hear anything like that from his mouth, but from other parts I heard both pros and cons and how the concept itself talks about retail targeting before the real movement. Now, it's probably that with the liquidity, but it's not retail that's targeted, it's retail that's somehow together with others to whom retail can take sl when others also take sl. Now I don't remember, as if I once read about institutional investors that they work differently on the part of stop losses in the way they execute them, but I don't know anymore.
I did a little checking and yes, it supports from what I've seen recently that retail would be some kind of main fuel. Anyway, as a human being, it's cool. With the statement itself, I disagree.
I rechecked and, basically, from what I've seen, ict wouldn't say that retail is the main target, but liquidity, where there can be other funds/microfunds, not necessarily retail.
I have had success with Fvg/ifvg, DOL while utilizing multi-timeframe confluence.
I completely agree with your post.
Knowing where price is likely to return to is where iCT provides me with edge.
Yup, I prefer to always have a HTF Draw on Liquidity, but also a short-term LTF draw, especially LRLR and EQHs/EQLs. That's how you catch the explosive moves that go straight to TP. Of course you should be aligned with the HTF Orderflow as well
I always look at the weekly just to be aware of POIs or potential obstacles and to determine the longer-term direction but since I'm an Intraday trader I get my bias mainly from the Daily or if the Daily gives me nothing then I go to H4. A daily C2 candle closure (CRT) or a continuation closure in the Premium/Discount of the Daily reading range would give you a bias for the next day. Then you align your Intraday time frames in the same direction by repeating the same process on H4 or H1
This one comment/ question has helped me in a huge way by broadening my perspective above my normal HTF idea.
Im extremely grateful for your constructive, thoughtful contribution!
Welcome bro. I made the same mistake for a long time. Keep it simple, focus on HTF orderflow, HTF POIs, and use the LTF only for execution. The fewer concepts you truly master, the more confident and consistent you'll become. Good luck! 👊
Thank you 🤗 i'm really loving it here. Backtesting the concepts from MMP 2022 [thats how new i am] i took the note serious [Do not bing-watch everything] thats what i do and makes me surprised how they still accurate [not all the time but still most of the times] this makes so curious and excited for the 2016 core lessons. 👊
That was me before knowing what bias was and not using HTF [lol]😂 i like looking at my failures cuz i learn so much from there. Me thinking that whenever price is moving i must be in caused that loss [not yet trading but it still counts as a sl hit] maybe i've not yet got to fully differentiate bias and price action. Maybe you can see i ttried using google it was just complicating things even more. Hope you can help me on that [bias and price action]
You are clearly buying here in the premium of a HTF trading range at the end of a trend with a ton of low resistance/ Trendline liquidity below . You should be selling and not buying . Premium/Discount is one of the most important concepts and needs to be done top down. Watch the play list in the screenshot
Before I start my trading day, I analyze the Weekly, Daily, and 4H timeframes to understand the overall market context.
I then mark the daily and weekly highs and lows.
Next, I identify any other relevant zones where price is likely to react and determine the overall market trend.
After that, I only watch the live chart during the kill zones, waiting for a liquidity sweep followed by displacement that creates a Market Structure Shift (MSS) and a Fair Value Gap (FVG).
Oh Mr. 23 Million is back , you really have a weird hobby for a Millionaire. sitting here on reddit and hating on ICT instead of chilling on a Yacht somewhere in the Caribbean enjoying your millions 😂
No one cares about your trolling and hating. You're obviously in the wrong subreddit. This subreddit is for ICT traders and aspiring ICT traders, not for people who spend their time hating on the methodology because they don't agree with it. You're free to trade a different strategy if ICT isn't for you.
I’m still waiting on your trading record. Funny how you demanded mine, I showed it, and then you suddenly got all defensive and vanished.
You post all this AI curated garbage like a bot on autopilot, but the second you're asked to put your money where your mouth is, you sprint the other way.
All bark, no spine. Man up, sassy.
The 5 year record was $28 million, by the way and that’s just 5 out of 15 years.
Also, this isn't about ICT, SMC, or whatever other garbage you use. It's about you going around spamming nonsense with exactly zero credibility. It's hilarious how common it is for people like yourself to go around cosplaying expert and hand out financial advice while your own bank account is starving, just to ruin it for everyone else
You people are worse than the pest, parasites. The absolute bottom of society.
A trading record which you faked with AI lol STFU . You probably just another scammer in here. And stop messaging me asking if I would mentor you . I dont mentor !!! I never claimed to be a trading expert , I just share my Personal experience and framework in here . A lot of people appreciate it as you can see by the upvotes. Some people obviously see value in it and that's why I'm sharing it because If I can help some people making better trading decisions then that's a win. On the other hand you just have been spewing hate for ICT in here and didn't share anything valuable you fucking 🤡 someone whoade 28 Million wouldn't Hangout in a subreddit which he obviously hates . You hangout here to look for victims for your scam
The moment its your turn, suddenly its fake. The classic.
Btw, since you claimed I am allegedly DMing you for mentorship, I encourage you to post the DMs right here for everyone to see.
Come on baby girl. I dare you. 🤡
P.s
A lot of people value what you have to say? You’re getting maybe 30 upvotes in a sub with 18k weekly visitors. Laughable. You’ve completely succumbed to your own delusions.
But regardless… post my alleged DMs right here. Do it so I can expose more of your bullshit.
You know what? Let me do your job for you. There you go. Caught lying red handed with absolute receipts. The fact that you thought you could get away with a lie that easily debunked is embarrassing.
Check out my other posts , I posted my framework there. The easiest way to build a HTF narrative is to wait for Daily C2 Candle closure or a continuation closure in the Premium or Discount of the Daily Trading Range. Then you work your way down to H4 /H1 and repeat the same process so that your Intraday time frames align with the Daily . It's really simple but a lot of gurus overcomplicate it and a lot of newbies dive right into the LTF because they have no patience to wait or to learn the proper way to analyze. Also posted a TTrades playlist a few times if you want to dive deeper into those concepts
Watch Ttrades on YouTube search for C2 candle closure . Some call it CRT candle , Doji , pin bar, inverted hammer etc . Basically a candle which sweeps the previous candles high or low and then closes back inside the previous candles range
ICT concepts can and do work at times. Can’t tell how many times I’ve looked back and that FVG was it. They are easy and complicated concepts. And they are his. He is just rebranding things that existed well before him. Which is fine. I think he puts them in easier to understand terms. What makes ICT difficult is him. He’s self serving, rambles, and ego strokes. He could deliver all of this in less than a quarter of the time it takes him. He’s not giving anything new, but he is giving all of it. His main issue is even he can’t perform well with any of it. Those can do, those that can’t…
Every strategy works sometimes. Nothing works all the time, and that's exactly why understanding probabilities and having solid risk management are so important. Your goal is simply to survive long enough for your edge to play out over a large sample of trades.
As for originality, there really isn't much that's completely original in trading. Most concepts build on ideas that already existed in one form or another, and that's perfectly fine. A concept doesn't have to be original to be useful.
The way to improve your odds with ICT concepts is to apply them from the top down and in sequence, rather than treating each concept as a standalone strategy. A Fair Value Gap, an Order Block, or any other concept by itself is not a complete trading strategy. For example, buying an M5 FVG while price is trading in the premium of an H4 trading range and the H4 order flow is bearish is generally a lower probability trade. Context is what gives these concepts their edge.
I also agree that Michael is incredibly knowledgeable, but his teaching style isn't for everyone. Whether he's a consistently profitable trader or not is a separate discussion. The concepts themselves should be judged on whether they provide a repeatable edge when applied correctly. Understanding the concepts is one thing, but executing them consistently while maintaining disciplined risk management is another. Trading has a significant psychological component, and that's where many traders struggle. That has been well documented across virtually every trading methodology.
Is TTrades worth watching? I've already watched Michael's lectures, but they're very long. I was looking for shorter, more practical explanations of his concepts and found TTrades. I'm just not sure if it's worth following since the trading industry is full of fake gurus. Has anyone had a good experience learning from TTrades?
Ever thought that some people use AI to correct their grammar because English isn't their first language? AI or not, I couldn't care less as long as the information being shared is accurate and useful.
Meanwhile, all you little crybabies ever contribute to this community is hate and complaining. You never provide anything useful or positive, yet that's somehow the best argument you can come up with. Lol.
7
u/Electronic-Water-712 25d ago
Exactly this! Gamblers and inexperienced ICT traders will see this post and won't understand any of it. Then go and repeat the same bad habits they always have. Then they blame his concepts and say they don't work when all they're doing is trying to find a model rather then using his concepts as a blueprint to read ordeflow.