Members ยท 01
The orientation page showed a bench of specialist systems run by one Allocator. This piece zooms in on a single box on that bench: what a trading system actually is, the five decisions every one of them must answer in writing, and three worked shapes that show how far the same skeleton stretches.
The definition
Every system, from a monthly rotator to an intraday scalper, is a complete written answer to five questions. If any answer is missing or vague, it is not a system yet. It is an opinion.
The reason for this strictness is the gauntlet from the orientation page. A backtest can only judge rules that are written down. "Buy strong stocks and sell when it feels toppy" cannot be tested. "Hold the three strongest of these ten ETFs, re-ranked on the first trading day of each month, sized equally" can.
The range
Here are three shapes we will build out fully in later pieces, using well-known public-domain rules. Look at how differently they answer the five questions, and then at what they still have in common.
| Monthly rotation | Daily swing | Intraday breakout | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Where | a fixed menu of ~10 large ETFs | a shortlist of liquid US stocks, re-screened as it goes | one index future |
| When | first trading day of each month | every evening after the close | every morning after the open |
| What | relative strength: hold the leaders | a sharp pullback inside an uptrend | a break of the opening range |
| How much | equal weight across holdings | small fixed risk per position | small fixed risk, one trade at a time |
| When out | next month's re-ranking | strength returns, or a few days pass | target, stop, or the closing bell |
| Rhythm | ~12 decisions a year | dozens of trades a year | hundreds of trades a year |
| Weather it likes | steady, persistent trends | upward but choppy markets | high-energy, fast-moving days |
None of these is "the best one". That is the wrong question. They make and lose money at different times, in different conditions, and that disagreement is exactly what the bench is for: a portfolio of specialists is steadier than any single specialist, however good.
The point
Underneath, all three are a page of strategy rules sitting on the same shared foundation you saw in the orientation: identical risk limits, identical honest cost assumptions, identical safety checks, and every result recorded in the same database. That has two consequences worth internalising.
First, adding a new shape is cheap. The intraday system did not need its own risk engine or record-keeping; it needed its five answers written down. Second, the Allocator can compare them fairly. Because a monthly rotator and an intraday breakout report through the same machinery, in the same units, "who is earning their capital?" is one question with one honest answer, not three incompatible spreadsheets.