Table of Contents

Historical Audit: The 1 August 2018 EUR/USD Forecast and a Risk-First Checklist

This post was first published on 1 August 2018 as a short-term EUR/USD directional and price-level forecast. Those old levels are long expired and are not instructions for trading today. This 1 September 2026 revision retains the forecast as a historical sample, removes direct “bullish” and “bearish” calls to action, and does not repackage later market movements as profit, a win rate, or current financial advice.

What the Original Forecast Actually Preserved

The old text and chart recorded the following. This table is an archival transcription, not a list of prices at which to place orders.

Item	Record in the 2018 archive
Currency pair and chart interval	EUR/USD, 30-minute chart
Time shown in the chart	2018-08-01 07:07:48 CET
Attribution in the chart	Trading Central research chart
Approximate price shown	About 1.1680
Dividing level	1.1705
Old scenario below that level	1.1665, followed by 1.1645
Old alternative above that level	1.1730, followed by 1.1745
Technical rationale	RSI pointing down; the text said stars measured support/resistance strength, but no star ratings were preserved

Old EUR/USD analysis chart from 1 August 2018, retained only as historical audit evidence

Historical image: its arrow and levels record the forecast made at the time; they are not a current signal.

The “15–35 points” in the original title appears to come from the differences of 0.0015 and 0.0035 between 1.1680 and 1.1665/1.1645. The post did not define the unit called a “point.” An audit should not silently relabel it as another point convention, a spread, or achievable profit.

Evidence We Can Check—and Evidence We Cannot Recreate

The surviving archive establishes the chart interval and time, the approximate displayed price, the dividing level, the two scenarios, and the RSI description. It does not preserve several facts needed for an outcome test:

the timezone used for the blog publication timestamp, or the sequence between chart creation, publication, and a reader seeing the post;
the original quote source, whether the displayed price was bid, ask, or midpoint, and whether the platform clock was accurate;
the forecast horizon, entry trigger, order type, stop or other invalidation rule;
the executable spread, commission, markup, overnight financing, slippage, and latency at the time;
tick- or minute-level bid and ask quotes covering the full window after publication;
a preregistered, consistently scored series of forecasts, including its unsuccessful cases.

None of these gaps can be filled from memory or a chart viewed today. In particular, it would be hindsight to see that the price later fell and then choose a favourable holding period or execution price.

What Official Daily Data Can Tell Us

Two official daily series provide bounded historical context. They do not represent the same instant, and neither is an executable dealer quote.

Date	ECB: US dollars per euro reference rate	Federal Reserve/FRED: US dollars per euro spot rate
2018-07-31	1.1736	1.1706
2018-08-01	1.1696	1.1666
2018-08-02	1.1617	1.1612

The ECB says its reference rates are based on a daily concertation procedure between European central banks, normally around 14:10 CET, and are published at around 16:00 CET for information only; their use for transactions is discouraged. FRED’s DEXUSEU series comes from the Federal Reserve’s H.10 release and is described as noon buying rates in New York City for cable transfers payable in foreign currencies. Different sampling times and methods can naturally produce different values.

These observations support one limited statement: the later daily reference observations were lower. They do not establish that, after publication and within a fixed horizon, a reader first triggered one scenario and then reached a target at an executable price. They also cannot establish net profit without a price path, bid/ask data, and costs.

Audit Result: Indeterminate, Not “Hit”

The first target of 1.1665 is close to FRED’s single observation of 1.1666 on 1 August, while both daily observations for 2 August are below the old second target of 1.1645. That is still insufficient to call the forecast a hit: it had no recorded expiry, the official series are not continuous executable quotes, and the trigger, invalidation, and cost rules were not preserved.

The appropriate label for this historical sample is therefore indeterminate. It cannot honestly be counted as a verified successful trade, nor should it be declared a failure without evidence. The directional resemblance in hindsight demonstrates why an audit protocol must be fixed before the outcome is observed.

Reusable Forecast-Audit Checklist

1. Freeze the Forecast Before Looking at the Outcome

Record the publication date, exact time, timezone, author or provider, and any payment, referral, or other conflict.
State the quotation direction, market or venue, data provider, bid/ask/midpoint convention, and chart interval.
Define the trigger, targets, stop or other invalidation condition, maximum horizon, and order type.
Define the unit meant by “point,” “pip,” or percentage rather than inferring it from a title.
Keep read-only copies of the source text, image, and data with retrieval dates; do not change the rules after an outcome appears.

2. Match the Data to the Question

Testing whether an intraday level was touched requires sufficiently granular, timestamped bid and ask quotes across the entire validity window. A daily reference or closing value cannot reconstruct the intraday path.
Preserve the raw data and its documentation, including timezone, daylight-saving treatment, missing values, revisions, bad ticks, and provider changes.
Use only information that became available after publication and avoid look-ahead bias. Do not choose the most favourable dealer, observation time, or quote side after the fact.
When the evidence is inadequate, label the result indeterminate instead of manufacturing certainty through interpolation or a different retrospective chart.

3. Define Outcome Labels in Advance

At minimum, distinguish: not triggered, target first, invalidation first, expired unresolved, and insufficient data.
For multi-target forecasts, specify how partial targets count and evaluate trigger, target, and invalidation in time order.
Apply one rule set to every sample. Do not display only successes or extend the horizon after seeing the result.
Evaluate “directionally right” separately from “an executable trade was positive after costs.”

4. Write Down Risk Before Opportunity

In any simulated study, first set the maximum tolerable loss for a position and the portfolio. Without a defined invalidation point, risk exposure cannot be estimated reliably.
Stress-test the spread, commission, markup, financing, slippage, latency, gaps, and rejected orders instead of calculating only midpoint changes.
Leverage magnifies both gains and losses. The CFTC also warns that retail OTC forex generally puts the customer directly against the dealer, which controls the platform and displayed prices.
Validate the process in a demo environment first. Before considering a real account, verify a firm’s authorization, disciplinary record, funding protections, and trading terms under the rules where you live; CFTC/NFA registration tools cover only their US jurisdiction.

5. Evaluate a Sample, Not a Story

Preregister a batch of forecasts and preserve a consecutive sample, including failed, untriggered, and indeterminate outcomes.
Report the sample size, coverage, invalidation rules, average gross and after-cost outcomes, maximum drawdown, and worst case. Hit rate alone does not establish profitability.
If historical data informed the parameters, separate the research/selection interval from out-of-sample evaluation and log every rule change.
Never promote a favourable chart, one directional resemblance, or simulated result as a guarantee of future returns.

When Reading Forex Analysis Today

Do not copy this post’s 2018 levels into today’s market. For any new analysis, first ask four questions: When does it expire? How is the maximum loss bounded? Which quote side and source will verify it? How will it be assessed after all costs? A chart should not make you trust material that cannot answer these questions, promises high returns, urges immediate funding, or funnels readers into private messages or referral sign-up links.

US NFA rules require the relevant retail forex members to disclose commissions, other fees, markups or markdowns, or midpoint-spread costs. The CFTC also tells retail customers to check dealer registration and disciplinary history and to be wary of unsupported outsized-return claims, hidden marketing relationships, and excessive leverage. These US materials are risk-identification references; they do not replace the law where the reader lives or personalised professional advice.

Primary Sources Consulted

Verified on 1 September 2026. Official historical series can be revised; any replication should retain the version used and its retrieval date.