Pine Script · Strategy Validation

You’ve backtested it.
It looks good.
You’re still not sure.

You’ve watched the equity curve. Shown someone. Have a feeling. The doubt is still there. That’s not a confidence problem — it’s a testing problem.

See what it runs through

Starts at £40 · Results in 48 hours · Same framework I use on every strategy

The testing problem

Single asset. One period. No fees. Default settings.
The equity curve went up because you gave it every advantage.

Most prop firm challenge failures aren’t strategy failures. They’re process failures. A strategy that looked fine in backtesting, never stress-tested, running into real drawdown rules. A validation test costs less than the entry fee — and tells you the answer before you pay it.

See what the test covers →

What the data showed

“Same entries. Same exits. Added a London open filter. It went from losing to profitable. One condition.”

I built this because I kept finding strategies that looked convincing — decent win rates, clean entries, equity curves going up. Then I’d run them properly: multiple markets, realistic costs, standardised parameters. Most fell apart. Not because they were badly designed — because they’d only ever been tested on the chart they were built for.

The ones that survived had one thing in common: a time window. London open only. Two hours where price moves with intent. That filter did more for results than any parameter change. In early 2026, ETF flows shifted session structure — strategies built on the previous four years stopped working. The specific ones survived.

One strategy from this process is live right now.
Running on funded prop firm accounts — real drawdown risk. Not a paper test.

The methodology

The same test on yours as on every other strategy.

No adjustments to make a strategy look better. No looser parameters for paid submissions. The same framework, run the same way, every time. You can read the full Pine Script on TradingView before you submit anything.

Strategies with real edge get a second stage: London open session window, stop distance variations, directional confirmation. This is what a basic backtest skips entirely — and where most edge disappears.

Open source — read it before you pay anything:
TradingView: Strategy Validation Framework →

Ready to run yours through this? See the options →

Timeframes 1H and 4H only
Risk per trade1% — same every run
Stop loss ATR-based — scales with volatility
Risk / reward 2:1 fixed
Data range Full history to today, including 2026
Stage 2 Session filter, ATR variation, directional confirmation

Stage 2 is where most edge disappears. If your strategy has something real, it survives here. If it doesn’t survive session filtering, it isn’t ready to trade with real money.

Three questions — pick yours.

£40
one-time · 48 hours
Does this have edge?
“Before I spend another week on this — does the core logic actually work?”
  • Single asset, standardised parameters
  • Realistic transaction costs included
  • Clear verdict: edge present, absent, or inconclusive
Worth doing before you spend another week developing it.
£160
one-time · 48 hours
Is it prop-firm ready?
“I’m about to enter a funded challenge. Is this actually ready for that?”
  • Full cross-market test
  • Drawdown profiling and consistency scoring
  • Session robustness analysis
  • Sizing guidance for challenge rules
Whether to go ahead, what to fix first, and how to size it for challenge rules.

Before you send a script

What if my strategy fails?

Then you just saved yourself from funding it.

A failed test with a clear report is worth more than six months of live trading a broken strategy. You’ll know what failed and why — which usually points directly at what needs to change. Most failures trace back to one of three things: curve-fitting, look-ahead bias, or costs never accounted for.

What happens to my code?

Deleted after delivery. It’s your IP.

Your Pine Script is used only to run the test. Not stored, not shared, not used for anything else. If you want to be careful, strip identifying comments before you submit.

How long does it take?

48 hours. Faster if you submit early in the week.

If there’s a question about your submission, you’ll hear back before the deadline — not silence followed by a late report.

What does the framework actually test on?

1H and 4H timeframes only. Multiple assets. 1% risk per trade, ATR-based stop loss, 2:1 risk/reward — same parameters every time. Strategies with any real edge get a second stage: London open session window, stop distance variations, directional confirmation testing. No adjustments made to improve results. The test is the test.

The full methodology is public: TradingView Framework →

What format does my Pine Script need to be?

Any Pine Script v4 or v5 strategy() script. Not an indicator or study — it needs to generate trade signals with entry and exit logic. Paste it directly in the submission form or upload the .pine file.

Can you fix the strategy if it fails?

Not as part of this — the report gives you the forensics, not the fix. The verdict is written to be actionable: if there’s a clear structural problem it gets named. In most cases the path forward is obvious from the data.

What if I’m not happy with the report?

If the report is incomplete or doesn’t address what was agreed, it gets revised. If you don’t like the verdict — that’s the honest answer you paid for. Refunds aren’t offered on negative results, because a negative result is still a result.

Does it work, or doesn’t it? The test answers that.

Which strategies are passing.
Which aren’t.

No tips. No signals. What the testing pipeline finds — every week.

Sent via Beehiiv. Unsubscribe any time.