Multi-session plan · thesis to invalidation

6C Swing Trading Strategy: Build a Falsifiable Plan

“The Bank of Canada may become less dovish than the Federal Reserve” is a plausible macro thesis. It is not yet a trade. The market may already price it, the next catalyst may contradict it, the dated 6C contract may be approaching a roll, or the chart may offer no invalidation that fits the loss budget.

A swing plan needs two ways to be wrong: an evidence condition that breaks the macro thesis and a price condition that invalidates the actual entry. Either can close the plan.

Evidence first

Write Conditional Branches, Not a CAD Story

A Canadian-dollar swing can reflect relative policy expectations, Canadian and U.S. growth data, inflation and labor evidence, broad U.S.-dollar repricing, trade conditions, commodity channels and global risk. These mechanisms can conflict. The plan must specify which evidence has decision weight now.

Ledger fieldBullish-CAD branch exampleFalsification example
Relative policy priorExpected Canadian rate path reprices upward relative to the U.S. pathRate differentials move the opposite way after new evidence
Growth / laborCanadian surprises improve relative to already-priced expectationsBroad deterioration is confirmed across releases and revisions
Terms-of-trade contextRelevant export-price conditions improve without a dominant offsetThe proposed channel fails to transmit or reverses
USD channelBroad USD pressure does not overwhelm the Canadian evidenceU.S. repricing dominates and 6C fails to confirm
Market confirmationDated 6C holds above the declared structural zonePrice closes through the plan's invalidation

These are mechanism examples, not forecasts or fixed relationships. The complete weekly evidence-integration process belongs in the 6C fundamental analysis guide. A swing worksheet should link to that evidence ledger instead of recreating a new story at every entry.

Path risk

Map Every Catalyst the Position Is Expected to Survive

A multi-session trade is exposed to gaps and rapid repricing across scheduled events. “I will hold for several days” is incomplete until the plan names what happens before, during and after each catalyst.

  1. Build the calendar from primary institutions.Include Bank of Canada decisions and communications, Statistics Canada releases, Federal Reserve events and material U.S. data. Convert clocks with dates and zones.
  2. Classify the event.Thesis-defining events can invalidate the evidence; execution events may only require smaller size or a no-entry window. Declare the category beforehand.
  3. Choose hold, reduce or exit.Do not leave event exposure implicit. State the quantity and order plan that will exist immediately before release.
  4. Define post-event confirmation.Specify which market evidence and closing horizon confirm, contradict or leave the thesis unresolved.
  5. Record surprises relative to expectations.The reported level alone does not determine repricing; compare with the market prior and revisions without forcing one deterministic response.
A stop cannot guarantee the planned event loss.

The market may gap or move through the trigger before executable liquidity appears. Use a separate event-shock scenario and smaller quantity—or hold no position—when that scenario breaches the account's hard risk limit.

Dated exposure

Select the Contract Before Reading the Pattern

6C is a series of physically delivered dated futures, not a perpetual chart. Current standard mechanics, listed months, termination and roll limitations are maintained on the 6C specification page. The execution contract and chart contract must agree.

1. Time horizon

Does the expected holding period approach the personal roll deadline, exchange termination or broker's earlier delivery cutoff? If yes, choose a later suitable month or shorten the plan.

2. Liquidity migration

Compare current volume, open interest, spread and usable depth in adjacent months. A fixed calendar roll date is a convention, not proof of where execution is best now.

3. Basis

Record the price difference between months and how the research series is adjusted. A roll can realize that difference and transaction costs even when the macro thesis is unchanged.

4. Working orders

Do not copy prices mechanically into the next month. Recalculate structure, invalidation, tick distance, notional and quantity for the new dated contract.

Price gate

A Valid Thesis Can Still Have No Valid Entry

Choose one entry branch tied to observable dated-contract structure. Every branch needs an expiry condition so an old thesis does not chase a new price.

Continuation branch

Acceptance beyond structure

Require a predeclared level and acceptance rule. Use the 6C breakout workflow for breach, hold and failure states. Invalidation follows the structure that negates acceptance.

Pullback branch

Retest within the thesis

Define the eligible retracement zone before arrival, the evidence needed to enter and the price that breaks the higher-timeframe premise. A lower price is not automatically better value.

StateActionReason
Thesis valid; price not confirmedWaitMacro plausibility does not authorize entry
Price confirmed; major event violates blackoutWait or rejectCalendar rule overrides pattern
Thesis and price pass; invalidation too wideUse smaller contract or rejectNever squeeze structure to make size fit
Thesis falsified before entryCancelOld working order no longer has a rationale
Price invalidated after entryExecute exit planDo not wait for the narrative to rescue price

Overnight sizing

Budget for the Path, Not Just the Closing Thesis

Suppose a hypothetical standard 6C entry is 0.72480 and structural invalidation is 0.72180, a 0.00300 move. With the standard 100,000 CAD unit, gross stop risk is $300 per contract before costs. The arithmetic is straightforward; survival through the path is harder.

Risk layerOne standard 6CPlanning response
Structural stop0.00300 × 100,000 = $300Add fees and ordinary adverse-fill allowance
Worse 0.00400 event exit$400 before costsTest quantity against event policy
0.00600 weekend / shock scenario$600 before costsAccount survival and correlated-loss test
Two-contract shock$1,200 before costsMay breach hard cap even if margin permits two

The scenarios are not worst-case bounds. Size with the risk-budget method, then constrain further for open CAD, USD, rate, equity or crude positions that could lose together. Margin is a separate funding gate and may change while the trade is open.

Micro MCD can provide finer dollar granularity, but its price increment, available contracts, spread, depth and per-ticket cost differ. Recalculate; do not assume ten micros are operationally identical to one standard contract.

While open

Update Evidence Without Moving the Goalposts

A swing plan can respond to new evidence, but each response must be declared. Otherwise “adaptive management” becomes a label for keeping a losing position.

A

Evidence improves

Keep the existing risk plan unless a predeclared add rule passes. Any add is a new risk calculation, not a reward for unrealized profit.

B

Evidence weakens

Reduce or exit only under the declared evidence rule. Record whether price has confirmed or contradicted the change.

C

Evidence conflicts

Preserve unresolved status. Do not cherry-pick the strongest confirming indicator while ignoring the failed premise.

D

Roll approaches

Close, roll or exit under the calendar plan. The new month creates a new basis, structure and cost decision.

A profit target can be structural, time-based or conditional on evidence, but it needs the same clarity as invalidation. “Take profit when it feels extended” cannot be reproduced or audited.

After exit

Separate Thesis Quality, Timing and Execution

One P&L number cannot diagnose the plan. A thesis may be directionally right after the position is stopped; an entry may be good but the contract roll mishandled; a profitable trade may violate the event rule.

Thesis

Were priors, competing channels and falsification conditions explicit? Which evidence actually changed, and was it available at decision time?

Trade construction

Did contract, entry branch, invalidation, event policy and size match the worksheet? Was there enough room after costs?

Execution

Compare planned and actual fills, spread, fees, roll basis, gaps and exit reason. Tag deviations without rewriting the original plan.

Aggregate only like-version plans. Report net distributions, drawdowns, exposure time, event losses and regime dependence. This page reports no original swing-strategy result; it defines the record needed to learn honestly.

Ready-to-use structure

The 6C Swing Plan Worksheet

FieldRequired entryFail-closed test
ThesisOne conditional sentence and market priorNo vague “CAD should rise” statement
FalsificationEvidence condition and price conditionBoth must be observable and dated
CatalystsSource, date, time zone and hold/reduce/exit ruleNo unknown event exposure
ContractExact month/year, liquidity comparison and roll deadlineNo continuous symbol as order
EntryBranch, trigger, expiry and order typeNo chase after branch expires
RiskStop, costs, gap scenario, quantity and portfolio capReconciled total fits every cap
ManagementAdd, reduce, target and time-exit rulesNo discretionary expansion of risk
ReviewThesis, construction and execution gradesOriginal worksheet remains unchanged
Sources and methods

Sources and methods were reviewed August 13, 2026. The thesis branches, prices and stress distances are hypothetical planning examples. This page reports no original strategy test, makes no forecast and does not claim that the illustrated relationships or entries produce a trading edge.