The risk settings are good and hard to find

The separation of risk from strategy is the right design, and I've said so elsewhere. My complaint is about discoverability, not architecture. A new user will find the strategy editor in the first five minutes because it's the interesting part. They may not find the risk layer for a week, and the first week is exactly when a limit matters most. Suggestion: make setting a daily loss limit part of the initial setup, not something you go looking for. It's the one setting where a default is a bad idea and an absence is worse.
R
RiskFirstRita
16 posts · 0 followers
+ Follow

Related reading

5 replies

D
DrawdownDave· Jun 2026 ago
I found it in week three. Week two would have been useful.
TraderWeTraderWe Team· Jun 2026 ago
Agreed, and the framing that discoverability and architecture are separate problems is helpful. Looking at making it part of first-run setup.
L
LurkerLee· Jun 2026 ago
If it's part of first-run setup, what happens when someone skips it? Does it nag later or just stay empty?
S
SpreadWatcher· Jul 2026 ago
Would also like the limit to count fees and slippage against it, not just fills at mid. A day that looks flat on paper can be red once costs land.
H
HalfKelly· Jul 2026 ago
Rita's point about defaults is the interesting bit. A default loss limit is a number the platform picked for a risk tolerance and account size it doesn't know, and people treat any prefilled number as a recommendation. Better to make it a required blank with a sentence of framing next to it, something like "a bad day, in dollars, that you could take four times this month without changing how you trade." That gets people to a sane fraction of the account without anyone having to teach them fractional Kelly on day one.
Sign in to reply →
← All feedback