The descending triangle pattern is a chart pattern made of a horizontal support line across two or more lows and a falling resistance line across a series of lower highs. Price squeezes between the two lines until it closes outside them. Technical analysis classifies it as a bearish continuation pattern: the textbook expects the price to break down through the flat support.

This guide covers the definition of the descending triangle chart pattern, how to identify a descending triangle on a stock or crypto chart, how traders set entry, stop-loss and profit target, and which way the descending triangle pattern actually broke and what the price did next. Our test bench scanned full price history and detected 4,989 upside and 2,383 downside completed breakouts on daily charts alone across stocks, crypto, forex, ETFs, indices and commodities, and compared the outcome with random days on the same assets. The first surprise: on daily charts, only 32.3% of them broke downward, though our control on random prices leans the same way (39% to 42%).

What is a descending triangle pattern?

A descending triangle pattern is a price consolidation with a flat bottom and a falling top. Sellers step in at lower and lower prices on each rally, a sign of growing selling pressure, while buyers keep defending the same support level, and the price range narrows toward the apex point where the two lines meet. Because one side is horizontal, it is also called a right-angle triangle, the mirror image of the ascending triangle.

In the classic literature, from Edwards and Magee's Technical Analysis of Stock Trends (1948) to modern trading manuals, the descending triangle chart pattern is a bearish continuation pattern: it forms during a downtrend, and a breakdown below the flat line is expected to continue the fall. When the triangle pattern appears at the top of an uptrend, it is read as a bearish reversal pattern instead.

There are three triangle patterns: the ascending triangle, the descending triangle and the symmetrical triangle. Each one indicates a market where the price range is shrinking, and each one is defined by the direction of its two lines. In technical analysis, a triangle pattern indicates a pause in the trend; the breakout point decides which way the price moves next.

Our test bench uses a geometric rule that a computer can apply without judgment: four to six confirmed alternating swing points (a four-point pattern must also show a fifth contact), a falling upper line through the peaks, a flat lower line through the troughs, and a breakout defined as the first close outside the lines before the apex. A line counts as flat when it moves less than 10% of the height of the triangle across the pattern. Swing points are confirmed only after price moves away from them by a multiple of the average true range (ATR), so the bench never uses information from the future.

The charts below are not drawn by hand. They show the median price shape of descending triangle patterns our bench drew at random from all markets, selected as the caption under the chart states, one for each breakout side, with the lines of the position we test: entry at the breakout close, stop loss on the other side of the triangle, target at twice the risk.

Bearish setup on the median shape of 591 daily occurrences drawn at random from all markets, with entry, stop loss (SL) and 2:1 target (TP)

Bullish setup on the median shape of 494 daily occurrences drawn at random from all markets, with entry, stop loss (SL) and 2:1 target (TP)

Characteristics of a descending triangle

A descending triangle pattern has three parts: a flat price floor, a falling price ceiling, and the volume that runs through the formation.

First peakstart of the falling upper line
First troughflat lower line
Lower peakfalling upper line
Trough at the same levelflat lower line
Third peak, lower stillfifth swing point
First close outside the linesbefore the apex

Median shape of 591 daily occurrences drawn at random from all markets (this direction: 32% of all occurrences). Kept: setups with regular legs when enough exist, with the most common number of swing points and no two swing points on the same bar.

The horizontal support level

The lower boundary of the pattern is a horizontal support line drawn through at least two lows at about the same price. Each time the price falls to that support level, buyers absorb the selling pressure and push the price back up. The lows do not need to be exactly equal: our bench accepts a support line that drifts by less than 10% of the height of the triangle. This flat line is the trigger of the bearish trade: a close below it is the breakdown.

The descending resistance trendline

The upper side is a trendline drawn through a series of lower highs. Each rally stops below the previous one, which indicates sellers willing to sell at lower prices: the selling pressure grows while the low holds. This falling line is what separates the descending triangle from a rectangle. It also sets the stop-loss for a short trade, and it is the trigger of the opposite trade if price breaks out upward.

Volume behavior during formation

Classic analysis expects volume to shrink as the triangle narrows, then to increase on the breakdown, as a sign that sellers are committing. We measured breakouts on volume above 1.5 times the 20-bar average, on hourly crypto and on daily charts, and the effect was small: the results are in the indicators section below.

How to identify a descending triangle on a chart

To identify a descending triangle pattern on a stock or crypto chart, check five points in order:

Find at least two lows at about the same price and draw a horizontal support line through them.
Find at least two peaks, each lower than the one before, and draw the falling trendline through these lower highs.
Check that price alternates between the two lines and that the swings get smaller toward the apex.
Look at the trend before the pattern: a prior downtrend makes it a continuation pattern, a prior uptrend makes it a potential reversal pattern at a top.
Wait for a close outside the lines. Until then, it is a range, not a signal.

Two lines that both fall make a falling wedge, not a descending triangle chart pattern. A falling top with a rising bottom is a symmetrical triangle. The flat support level is what defines the descending triangle pattern.

Is the descending triangle pattern bearish or bullish?

The descending triangle pattern is bearish in the textbook, and breaks up more often than not in our data. Counting completed breakouts, it broke downward 32.3% of the time on daily charts (2,383 down, 4,989 up), 36.2% on hourly charts and 29.5% on weekly charts. On every timeframe we tested, the falling line gave way far more often than the flat support: the price breaks upward more often than downward.

Do not read a story of buyers and sellers into this result. Our control runs the same detection on random prices, where nobody defends any level: 58% to 61% of descending triangles already break up there, against 67.7% on real daily data. The ascending triangle shows the same twist in reverse: on daily charts it broke down 4,116 times and up 3,026 times, or 57.6% down, against 63% to 64% on random prices. The exit through the slanted side therefore comes first from the construction of the shape. What remains after that reference leans up on both shapes, by about 5 to 10 points, so it does not favor the slanted side: on the ascending triangle, it favors the flat one.

This does not make the descending triangle a bullish signal either: as the reliability section shows, neither breakout side showed an edge that survives our correction. It makes it a price range with two exits, and the trend direction is only known when the price breaks out.

After a breakdown, a short rally back toward the old flat support that fails there is the same mechanism traders call a dead cat bounce.

How to trade the descending triangle pattern

The classic descending triangle trading strategy sells a close below the horizontal support, places a stop-loss above the falling resistance line, and aims for a target equal to the height of the triangle. This is close to the trade our bench simulates on every breakout, with a 2:1 target instead of the measured move. The same plan applies in reverse to an upside breakout.

Entry strategies for a breakdown

Two entries are possible for a short trade when the price breaks down:

Enter at the close of the breakdown bar, once a candle has closed below the support line. This is the entry we test.
Wait for a pullback to the broken support, which the textbook expects to act as new resistance, and enter there with a tighter stop.

Entry: Close outside the lines, in the direction of the breakout
Stop loss (SL): On the opposite line, at its level on the breakout bar
Target (TP): Twice the risk (2:1)

The trade our bench tests, drawn on the typical shape. Both breakout directions are traded; this drawing shows downward breakouts. Median shape of 591 daily occurrences drawn at random from all markets (this direction: 32% of all occurrences). Kept: setups with regular legs when enough exist, with the most common number of swing points and no two swing points on the same bar.

A clean case from our bench: US stocksChosen on its shape alone, never on the outcome. Stock prices are adjusted for splits and dividends, so they can differ from the prices quoted at the time.

TextbookTXN October 10, 2025Daily chart1.5% in the expected direction after 10 bars2:1 trade: stopped out, −1.00 R, 66 bars after entry, past this chart

Setting stop-loss orders

The stop goes on the other side of the pattern: above the descending trendline, or above the last lower high. Place it at a level where the bearish chart pattern is clearly proved wrong. If the price returns there, the pattern has failed. Because the stop is wide on a tall triangle, size the position on the distance between entry and stop, so that a loss costs a small, fixed share of the account. In our daily data, of the downside trades that hit their stop, 20.0% had first been up 1 R: decide in advance whether you will move the stop or take partial profit.

Defining profit targets using the measuring technique

The measuring technique takes the height of the triangle at its widest part, from the first high to the support line, and projects that distance down from the breakout point. If the triangle is 10 dollars high and breaks at 50, the target is 40. Our bench tests a target set at twice the risk instead, which can be far from the measured move. On daily charts, winning downside trades took a median of 23 days to reach that target, and losing trades a median of 15 days to hit the stop.

Descending triangle trading strategies

Three trading strategies add a filter to the basic breakout trade, and they can be combined. Each one below keeps the same stop logic. Each one should be tested on your own market before you risk money on it.

The pullback and retest strategy

In classical chart analysis (Edwards and Magee), price may come back to test the broken support from below. The trader waits for that retest, sells when the old support holds as resistance, and places the stop just above it. We have not tested the retest entry itself. Our hourly data gives no clear signal on follow-through: 10 bars after a downside breakout, price was lower 49.8% of the time, against 50.7% for random hours on the same assets, yet on average it moved slightly further than chance (all markets, hourly: rated Promising). The two readings point both ways.

Combining moving averages with triangles

Since the descending triangle is meant to be a bearish continuation pattern, one filter takes the short side only when price is below its 200-day moving average, expecting the downtrend to continue; our split uses that position of price, not the slope of the average. On hourly charts, downside breakouts below the 200-bar moving average reached the 2:1 target 26.8% of the time, with an expectancy of +0.05 R, against 30.2% and +0.01 R above it. On daily charts, upside breakouts did the same above and below the 200-day average (33.2% and 35.8% of targets hit). The moving average filter did not change the picture. These breakdowns are descriptive and not corrected for the number of tests.

The role of market context and trend direction

Context also includes the size of the pattern and the price level where it forms: a descending triangle chart pattern above a major support level may have less room to fall, a filter we have not tested. On hourly charts, short triangles (below the median height) that broke down reached the 2:1 target 31.9% of the time, against 22.7% for tall ones: a tall pattern puts the target further away. Check the trend on a higher timeframe and the distance to the next support level before trusting the bearish reading, and manage the trade size accordingly.

Using indicators to confirm the breakdown

A chart pattern can be combined with indicators that describe volume, trend or momentum around the breakout. Here is what our data says about two of them.

Volume as confirmation

One rule wants volume to increase on the breakdown. On hourly crypto charts, downside breakouts on high volume reached the 2:1 target 27.8% of the time, against 27.1% on normal volume, with expectancies of +0.09 R and −0.01 R. On daily charts, upside breakouts on high volume reached the target 31.9% of the time, against 35.2% on normal volume. Volume did not turn a weak signal into a strong one.

Momentum indicators

An RSI check asks that the RSI stays below 50 during the formation, or that the MACD turns down at the breakout. We have not tested these filters. If you use them, test them on your own market before relying on them.

Descending triangle vs. other patterns

Descending triangle vs. ascending triangle

The ascending triangle chart pattern has a flat resistance line on top and rising lows below. It is read as bullish, the mirror image of the descending triangle. In our data it broke down more often than up, the mirror of what the descending triangle did, and random prices lean the same way on both. Neither pattern showed an edge that survives our correction after the breakout; the ascending triangle's daily downside breakouts only pass a simple test (rated promising).

Descending triangle vs. symmetrical triangle

The symmetrical triangle has a falling upper line and a rising lower line, and no expected direction. On daily charts, its downside breakouts reached the 2:1 target 23.3% of the time against 23.1% for the same trade on random dates, close to the descending triangle's 22.4% against 21.6%.

Descending triangle vs. falling wedge

The falling wedge chart pattern also has falling highs, but its lows fall too, and it is read as a bullish reversal. On daily charts, its upside breakouts reached the 2:1 target 31.8% of the time, against 29.2% on random dates. Other related figures are the rising wedge, the pennant and the flag, three other continuation patterns.

When the highs stay at the same level instead of falling, three tests of resistance make a triple top.

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

Identifying false breakouts

A close a few cents below the support, followed by a price move back inside, is the classic false breakdown. Nearly every triangle breaks out sooner or later: on daily charts, 98.4% of descending triangles broke out of their lines within half the pattern duration after the last swing point (a descriptive rate, not in the tables), so a breakout alone proves little. Wait for a close, not a wick, through the line, look for confirmation on the following bar if your trading plan allows it, and accept that some breakouts will fail.

Ignoring the broader market trend

Classic analysis reads a descending triangle in a rising market, with price above its 200-day average, as a weaker candidate for a breakdown, because the larger trend works against the trade; on daily charts across all markets, that filter changed the target hit rate by less than three points, and in the other direction: shorts above the 200-day average hit the target slightly more often (24.3% against 21.7%), for a worse expectancy (−0.21 R against −0.14 R), a difference not corrected for multiple testing. Over the history we tested, prices rose more often than they fell, and a short trade fights that drift: on daily charts, the same short trade placed on random dates had an average expectancy of −0.15 R.

Poor risk management practices

Reliability: what happened after the breakout

The descending triangle pattern is not reliable on its own: in no market and timeframe we tested did it show an edge over random entries on the same assets that survives our correction for multiple testing, whether it broke down or up. Here are the numbers from our test bench.

49.0%vs 47.3% at random

On downward breakouts: moved the expected way 10 bars later, compared with random bars.

Measured on 2,383 daily descending triangle occurrences with downward breakouts across 1,328 assets. Random bars on the same assets are the honest baseline.

No clear edge

Descending triangle against random bars on the same assets, by market, on daily candles. Bars of almost the same length mean no edge.

Moved the expected way 10 bars later, with downward breakoutsDescending triangleRandom bars

All markets
All markets, Descending triangle: 49.0%
All markets, Random bars: 47.3%
Crypto
Crypto, Descending triangle: 54.1%
Crypto, Random bars: 56.5%
US stocks
US stocks, Descending triangle: 48.3%
US stocks, Random bars: 46.1%
ETFs
ETFs, Descending triangle: 54.4%
ETFs, Random bars: 44.1%
Indices
Indices, Descending triangle: 55.3%
Indices, Random bars: 43.5%

2:1 trade hit its target, with downward breakoutsDescending triangle tradeSame trade, random dates

All markets
All markets, Descending triangle trade: 22.4%
All markets, Same trade, random dates: 21.6%
Crypto
Crypto, Descending triangle trade: 32.8%
Crypto, Same trade, random dates: 24.4%
US stocks
US stocks, Descending triangle trade: 20.9%
US stocks, Same trade, random dates: 21.0%
ETFs
ETFs, Descending triangle trade: 20.6%
ETFs, Same trade, random dates: 26.6%
Indices
Indices, Descending triangle trade: 31.6%
Indices, Same trade, random dates: 26.5%

All statistics

Full results for the descending triangle pattern, market by market

Every occurrence our rule finds on full price history, compared with what the same assets did on random bars. A pattern only earns an edge if it beats random entries after correcting for the thousands of tests we run.

Our verdict

Not a reliable signal on its own here. Use it as context, not as a trigger.

10-bar move No clear edge2:1 trade No clear edge

Descending triangle: 2,383 occurrences tested

Bearish pattern · All markets · Daily · Downward breakout · 1,328 assets · 1973-04 to 2026-10

Moved the expected way after 10 bars

49.0%

vs 47.3% on random bars

Excess return vs its market, 10 bars

+0.06%

95% interval −0.24% to +0.38%

Excess return is signed so that positive favors the pattern. On a bearish setup, it means the asset lagged its market.

2:1 trade hit the target

22.4%

vs 21.6% for the same trade on random dates

Average result per trade

−0.15 R

vs −0.15 R on random dates

What this means. No measurable difference from the rest of its market over the next 10 bars.

Timeline

Pattern length, first swing to breakout: 58 days · middle half 40 to 101 · on 2,383 occurrences
Breakout, after the last swing: 4 days · middle half 2 to 9 · on 2,383 occurrences
Time to the 2:1 target, when hit: 23 days · middle half 11 to 43 · on 511 trades that hit it
Time to the stop, when hit: 15 days · middle half 7 to 33 · on 1,451 trades that hit it
Time in the trade, all exits: 22 days · middle half 9 to 54 · on 2,278 trades
Measured-move target reached, when hit: 27 days · middle half 13 to 53 · on the occurrences that reached it; Pattern height projected from the breakout

Size and trade path

Pattern height: 26.7% · middle half 16.1% to 50.5% · on 2,383 occurrences
Best open profit during the trade: 0.81 R · middle half 0.28 R to 1.83 R · on 2,278 trades
Stopped trades that were first up 1 R: 20.0% · on 1,451 stopped trades; Trades a stop moved to breakeven at +1 R would have closed flat instead of at a loss

Medians, each on the cases named on its line; "middle half" spans the 25th to 75th percentile; no value under 30 cases.

How we detect it. Four to six alternating swing points (four need a fifth touch of a line): falling upper line (at least 30% of the height), flat lower line (less than 10%), final width at most 60% of the initial one. Every swing point lies within 10% of the pattern height of its line, no close strays more than 10% outside the lines while the pattern forms, the pattern is at least 3 ATR tall with at least 3 bars between swing points, and the breakout comes within half the pattern duration after the last point. Breakout = first close outside the lines, before the apex.

All measurements (40 rows)

10-bar move: did price go the expected way?

Figures in gray: fewer than 30 occurrences, not interpreted. Excess return is signed so that positive favors the pattern. The test uses the bootstrap’s standard error and the interval its percentiles: near the 0.05 line, or on a few extreme moves, an interval can leave out zero while the test does not pass, and the test decides. Stock data misses most delisted companies, a survivorship bias we have not sized, which can flatter stock rows.
Market	Occurrences	Pattern	Random bars	Excess	10-bar move verdict
Crypto · 1-hour · Upward breakout	9,638	47.2%	48.2%	−0.06%	No clear edge
Crypto · 1-hour · Downward breakout	5,487	49.9%	50.8%	+0.11%	Promising
Forex · 1-hour · Upward breakout	1,184	47.6%	50.6%	0.000%	No clear edge
Forex · 1-hour · Downward breakout	658	49.0%	49.3%	−0.02%	No clear edge
All markets · 1-hour · Upward breakout	10,822	47.3%	48.4%	−0.05%	No clear edge
All markets · 1-hour · Downward breakout	6,145	49.8%	50.7%	+0.09%	Promising
Crypto · 4-hour · Upward breakout	2,686	47.3%	47.3%	+0.11%	No clear edge
Crypto · 4-hour · Downward breakout	1,579	51.6%	52.3%	+0.07%	No clear edge
Forex · 4-hour · Upward breakout	324	50.0%	50.4%	+0.01%	No clear edge
Forex · 4-hour · Downward breakout	167	44.9%	49.8%	−0.05%	No clear edge
All markets · 4-hour · Upward breakout	3,010	47.6%	47.7%	+0.10%	No clear edge
All markets · 4-hour · Downward breakout	1,746	51.0%	52.1%	+0.06%	No clear edge
Crypto · Daily · Upward breakout	563	54.2%	44.5%	−1.30%	No clear edge
Crypto · Daily · Downward breakout	294	54.1%	56.5%	−0.44%	No clear edge
US stocks · Daily · Upward breakout	4,105	54.5%	54.0%	−0.05%	No clear edge
US stocks · Daily · Downward breakout	1,928	48.3%	46.1%	+0.19%	No clear edge
ETFs · Daily · Upward breakout	140	57.1%	55.2%	−0.14%	No clear edge
ETFs · Daily · Downward breakout	68	54.4%	44.1%	−0.66%	No clear edge
Indices · Daily · Upward breakout	66	54.5%	56.9%	−0.16%	No clear edge
Indices · Daily · Downward breakout	38	55.3%	43.5%	−0.47%	No clear edge
Forex · Daily · Upward breakout	56	47.3%	50.5%	−0.10%	No clear edge
Forex · Daily · Downward breakout	29	35.7%	48.8%	−0.24%	Not enough data
Commodities · Daily · Upward breakout	59	52.5%	52.2%	+0.73%	No clear edge
Commodities · Daily · Downward breakout	26	34.6%	48.3%	−0.82%	Not enough data
All markets · Daily · Upward breakout	4,989	54.4%	52.9%	−0.18%	No clear edge
All markets · Daily · Downward breakout	2,383	49.0%	47.3%	+0.06%	No clear edge
Crypto · Weekly · Upward breakout	55	37.7%	40.1%	−4.12%	No clear edge
Crypto · Weekly · Downward breakout	38	67.6%	62.2%	+6.82%	Not enough data
US stocks · Weekly · Upward breakout	742	54.3%	56.5%	−1.08%	No clear edge
US stocks · Weekly · Downward breakout	286	44.8%	45.1%	+0.79%	No clear edge
ETFs · Weekly · Upward breakout	15	73.3%	59.4%	−1.66%	Not enough data
ETFs · Weekly · Downward breakout	7	57.1%	40.2%	+1.87%	Not enough data
Indices · Weekly · Upward breakout	8	75.0%	58.0%	−0.08%	Not enough data
Indices · Weekly · Downward breakout	5	60.0%	39.6%	−1.18%	Not enough data
Forex · Weekly · Upward breakout	12	75.0%	49.3%	+0.92%	Not enough data
Forex · Weekly · Downward breakout	11	27.3%	51.3%	−1.33%	Not enough data
Commodities · Weekly · Upward breakout	10	40.0%	53.1%	−0.85%	Not enough data
Commodities · Weekly · Downward breakout	5	20.0%	48.3%	−0.92%	Not enough data
All markets · Weekly · Upward breakout	842	53.9%	55.4%	−1.24%	Weak, below chance
All markets · Weekly · Downward breakout	352	46.8%	47.0%	+1.34%	No clear edge

2:1 trade: target hit and average result

R = initial risk of the trade. Entry at the close of the signal bar. Exit at the stop or the target, or at the open when a bar opens beyond either one; otherwise at the close after 100 bars. When one bar touches both the stop and the target, the loss is counted. No fees or slippage. n/a = not measured. Per trade: average result, against the same trade on random dates. Figures in gray: fewer than 30 closed trades, not interpreted.
Market	Trades	Target hit	Same trade, random dates	Per trade	2:1 trade verdict
Crypto · 1-hour · Upward breakout	9,630	30.4%	28.4%	+0.06 R vs +0.01 R	No clear edge
Crypto · 1-hour · Downward breakout	5,482	27.5%	25.6%	+0.05 R vs 0.00 R	No clear edge
Forex · 1-hour · Upward breakout	1,184	26.3%	25.2%	+0.02 R vs −0.02 R	No clear edge
Forex · 1-hour · Downward breakout	655	25.5%	26.3%	0.00 R vs 0.00 R	No clear edge
All markets · 1-hour · Upward breakout	10,814	29.9%	28.0%	+0.06 R vs +0.01 R	No clear edge
All markets · 1-hour · Downward breakout	6,137	27.3%	25.7%	+0.04 R vs 0.00 R	No clear edge
Crypto · 4-hour · Upward breakout	2,682	32.6%	29.6%	+0.13 R vs +0.02 R	No clear edge
Crypto · 4-hour · Downward breakout	1,556	26.5%	26.0%	+0.06 R vs +0.05 R	No clear edge
Forex · 4-hour · Upward breakout	322	29.2%	25.8%	+0.09 R vs 0.00 R	No clear edge
Forex · 4-hour · Downward breakout	165	24.2%	29.3%	−0.08 R vs +0.11 R	No clear edge
All markets · 4-hour · Upward breakout	3,004	32.3%	29.2%	+0.12 R vs +0.02 R	Promising
All markets · 4-hour · Downward breakout	1,721	26.3%	26.3%	+0.05 R vs +0.05 R	No clear edge
Crypto · Daily · Upward breakout	552	44.4%	34.3%	+0.39 R vs +0.09 R	Promising
Crypto · Daily · Downward breakout	241	32.8%	24.4%	+0.26 R vs +0.04 R	No clear edge
US stocks · Daily · Upward breakout	4,072	32.9%	32.9%	+0.19 R vs +0.19 R	No clear edge
US stocks · Daily · Downward breakout	1,876	20.9%	21.0%	−0.20 R vs −0.18 R	No clear edge
ETFs · Daily · Upward breakout	140	39.3%	35.4%	+0.35 R vs +0.27 R	No clear edge
ETFs · Daily · Downward breakout	68	20.6%	26.6%	−0.26 R vs −0.07 R	No clear edge
Indices · Daily · Upward breakout	66	30.3%	39.0%	+0.12 R vs +0.41 R	No clear edge
Indices · Daily · Downward breakout	38	31.6%	26.5%	+0.13 R vs −0.01 R	No clear edge
Forex · Daily · Upward breakout	55	21.8%	30.6%	−0.26 R vs +0.07 R	No clear edge
Forex · Daily · Downward breakout	29	31.0%	17.2%	+0.22 R vs −0.24 R	Not enough data
Commodities · Daily · Upward breakout	58	37.9%	36.9%	+0.28 R vs +0.28 R	No clear edge
Commodities · Daily · Downward breakout	26	19.2%	17.6%	−0.29 R vs −0.29 R	Not enough data
All markets · Daily · Upward breakout	4,943	34.3%	33.2%	+0.21 R vs +0.18 R	No clear edge
All markets · Daily · Downward breakout	2,278	22.4%	21.6%	−0.15 R vs −0.15 R	No clear edge
Crypto · Weekly · Upward breakout	53	43.4%	36.8%	+0.30 R vs +0.11 R	No clear edge
Crypto · Weekly · Downward breakout	4	25.0%	18.8%	−0.25 R vs +0.15 R	Not enough data
US stocks · Weekly · Upward breakout	711	40.5%	39.8%	+0.39 R vs +0.33 R	No clear edge
US stocks · Weekly · Downward breakout	234	20.5%	18.0%	−0.24 R vs −0.23 R	No clear edge
ETFs · Weekly · Upward breakout	15	53.3%	54.4%	+0.70 R vs +0.72 R	Not enough data
ETFs · Weekly · Downward breakout	7	57.1%	21.4%	+0.71 R vs −0.18 R	Not enough data
Indices · Weekly · Upward breakout	8	62.5%	34.4%	+0.88 R vs +0.11 R	Not enough data
Indices · Weekly · Downward breakout	5	40.0%	15.0%	+0.20 R vs −0.52 R	Not enough data
Forex · Weekly · Upward breakout	11	36.4%	31.1%	+0.12 R vs +0.10 R	Not enough data
Forex · Weekly · Downward breakout	10	20.0%	25.0%	−0.13 R vs +0.05 R	Not enough data
Commodities · Weekly · Upward breakout	10	50.0%	50.0%	+0.44 R vs +0.58 R	Not enough data
Commodities · Weekly · Downward breakout	4	0.0%	12.5%	−1.11 R vs −0.52 R	Not enough data
All markets · Weekly · Upward breakout	808	41.2%	39.8%	+0.40 R vs +0.32 R	No clear edge
All markets · Weekly · Downward breakout	264	21.6%	18.2%	−0.21 R vs −0.22 R	No clear edge

After the breakout

False start: the stop was hit before price moved half the pattern's height in the breakout direction, within twice the pattern's length. Random dates: the same entry, stop and length on the same asset at random dates. Throwback: price came back within a quarter of an average bar (ATR) of the breakout level, after at least one whole bar beyond it, within the pattern's length.
Market	Occurrences	False starts	Same, random dates	Throwbacks
Crypto · 1-hour · Upward breakout	9,638	58.8%	60.9%	72.3%
Crypto · 1-hour · Downward breakout	5,487	56.2%	57.2%	71.7%
Forex · 1-hour · Upward breakout	1,184	57.8%	59.6%	71.0%
Forex · 1-hour · Downward breakout	658	56.9%	56.1%	77.6%
All markets · 1-hour · Upward breakout	10,822	58.7%	60.8%	72.2%
All markets · 1-hour · Downward breakout	6,145	56.3%	57.0%	72.3%
Crypto · 4-hour · Upward breakout	2,686	60.2%	62.3%	71.9%
Crypto · 4-hour · Downward breakout	1,579	59.1%	58.3%	71.6%
Forex · 4-hour · Upward breakout	324	57.8%	58.7%	69.0%
Forex · 4-hour · Downward breakout	167	60.2%	52.4%	70.7%
All markets · 4-hour · Upward breakout	3,010	59.9%	61.9%	71.6%
All markets · 4-hour · Downward breakout	1,746	59.2%	57.7%	71.6%
Crypto · Daily · Upward breakout	563	54.9%	62.8%	72.4%
Crypto · Daily · Downward breakout	294	57.9%	59.5%	63.5%
US stocks · Daily · Upward breakout	4,105	51.8%	51.5%	73.7%
US stocks · Daily · Downward breakout	1,928	61.1%	61.1%	71.2%
ETFs · Daily · Upward breakout	140	45.7%	52.6%	64.0%
ETFs · Daily · Downward breakout	68	59.7%	57.1%	70.6%
Indices · Daily · Upward breakout	66	50.0%	47.3%	77.3%
Indices · Daily · Downward breakout	38	45.9%	50.7%	65.8%
Forex · Daily · Upward breakout	56	68.5%	59.7%	87.3%
Forex · Daily · Downward breakout	29	52.0%	61.4%	66.7%
Commodities · Daily · Upward breakout	59	49.1%	51.6%	78.9%
Commodities · Daily · Downward breakout	26	70.8%	57.1%	76.0%
All markets · Daily · Upward breakout	4,989	52.1%	52.8%	73.6%
All markets · Daily · Downward breakout	2,383	60.4%	60.5%	70.2%
Crypto · Weekly · Upward breakout	55	53.3%	58.3%	59.5%
Crypto · Weekly · Downward breakout	38	58.3%	54.0%	76.5%
US stocks · Weekly · Upward breakout	742	46.5%	48.9%	70.2%
US stocks · Weekly · Downward breakout	286	61.7%	61.4%	72.6%
ETFs · Weekly · Upward breakout	15	38.5%	35.6%	53.3%
ETFs · Weekly · Downward breakout	7	28.6%	56.0%	42.9%
Indices · Weekly · Upward breakout	8	37.5%	64.6%	87.5%
Indices · Weekly · Downward breakout	5	40.0%	63.3%	20.0%
Forex · Weekly · Upward breakout	12	33.3%	62.1%	90.9%
Forex · Weekly · Downward breakout	11	42.9%	42.4%	70.0%
Commodities · Weekly · Upward breakout	10	42.9%	35.8%	55.6%
Commodities · Weekly · Downward breakout	5	100.0%	91.7%	100.0%
All markets · Weekly · Upward breakout	842	46.3%	49.3%	69.7%
All markets · Weekly · Downward breakout	352	59.9%	60.5%	71.4%

Data updated November 5, 2026 · code version c2a1683f · Read the methodology. We measure every pattern on crypto and forex (1-hour, 4-hour, daily and weekly charts) and US stocks, ETFs, indices and commodities (daily and weekly charts). A market or timeframe from that list missing from the tables above had no occurrence.

What you often read

“The descending triangle pattern is a reliable bearish signal.”

What our data shows

On 2,383 daily occurrences with downward breakouts, it moved in the expected direction 49.0% of the time, against 47.3% for random bars: no clear edge, since the average excess return is not statistically significant.

Table quoted in the text (verdicts and every market: see All measurements)

Market, timeframe and breakout side	Breakouts (2:1 trades)	Moved with the breakout 10 bars later	Random bars	2:1 target hit	Same trade, random dates	Expectancy
All markets, daily, down	2,383 (2,278)	49.0%	47.3%	22.4%	21.6%	−0.15 R
All markets, daily, up	4,989 (4,943)	54.4%	52.9%	34.3%	33.2%	+0.21 R
US stocks, daily, down	1,928 (1,876)	48.3%	46.1%	20.9%	21.0%	−0.20 R
Crypto, hourly, down	5,487 (5,482)	49.9%	50.8%	27.5%	25.6%	+0.05 R
Crypto, hourly, up	9,638 (9,630)	47.2%	48.2%	30.4%	28.4%	+0.06 R
Forex, hourly, down	658 (655)	49.0%	49.3%	25.5%	26.3%	0.00 R
All markets, weekly, down	352 (264)	46.8%	47.0%	21.6%	18.2%	−0.21 R
All markets, weekly, up	842 (808)	53.9%	55.4%	41.2%	39.8%	+0.40 R

Read the table in pairs of columns. On daily charts, 49.0% of downside breakouts were followed by a lower price 10 days later. Random days on the same assets fell 47.3% of the time. The excess return over the rest of the market after 10 days is +0.06%, with a 95% confidence interval from −0.24% to +0.38%. Zero is inside the interval: no clear edge.

The trade column needs the same care. The short trade had an average expectancy of −0.15 R per trade before costs, and the same entry, stop and target placed on random dates −0.15 R. The upside trade averaged +0.21 R, against +0.18 R at random: that profit came from the long-term rise of the assets, not from the triangle. Academic work points the same way: in "Foundations of Technical Analysis" (Journal of Finance, 2000), Andrew Lo, Harry Mamaysky and Jiang Wang detected triangles and other chart patterns automatically on US stocks and found only modest incremental information in them, without showing that they could be traded for a profit.

Hourly charts carry two labeled rows. Both, on crypto charts and on all markets combined (mostly crypto), point both ways. Downside breakouts were followed by a lower price 10 hours later less often than random hours (crypto, hourly: 49.9% against 50.8%). Yet on average they moved 0.11% further than chance after 10 hours, which is why the statistics section marks the row Promising (95% interval from 0.02% to 0.19%). That average excess return passes a simple test but does not survive our correction for the thousands of tests we run, and the average excess shrank from 0.17% in the first half of the history to 0.04% in the second. We read that label as no edge, and not as a reason to sell the breakdown. On weekly charts, upside breakouts were followed by a higher price 10 weeks later 53.9% of the time, against 55.4% for random weeks, with an average excess return of −1.24% (95% interval from −2.13% to −0.02%), marked weak, below chance: slightly worse than chance, by a gap that passes a simple test but not our correction. Last, the upside 2:1 trade passes a simple test on daily crypto charts (44.4% of targets hit against 34.3% on random dates) and on 4-hour charts, all markets combined (32.3% against 29.2%), rated promising: not a confirmed edge. On 4-hour crypto alone (32.6% against 29.6%), the gap does not pass it.

How often does the pattern form?

The pattern occurs often. On daily charts, we found one upside breakout every 1,699 eligible bars and one downside breakout every 3,558. On a watchlist of 50 stocks, that is about one descending triangle a month, and on our daily data most of them broke up, as they do on random prices.

The full table, with every market, timeframe and verdict, is in the statistics section of this page. The method is published in our methodology.

Real-world examples of descending triangle breakouts

Here are real descending triangles, picked by our bench (best and worst results, textbook shapes, most recent, random draws), with their actual outcome. These are recorded market sessions, not simulations. Trade results are in R, the initial risk of the trade.

Case study: the textbook breakdown

BCH/USDT formed lower highs at 669.6 (January 5, 2026), 586.2 (February 22) and 489.3 (May 6), with lows at 423 (February 6) and 419.5 (April 12) along a horizontal support. On May 16, 2026, it closed at 415.8, below the support line. The short trade entered at that close with a stop at 471.44, on the other side of the triangle. The measuring technique, applied to the fitted lines of the triangle, gave a target at 177.50, far away because the triangle was tall, and the 2:1 rule a target at 304.53. That 2:1 target was reached on May 28, twelve days later, and BCH was 17.4% below the breakdown close 10 days after it.

Case study: the upside breakout

NEAR/USDT drew peaks at 4.4 (June 25, 2022) and 3.879 (July 9), with lows at 2.875, 3.125 and 3.038. On July 16, 2022, it closed at 3.643, above the falling trendline. A buy at that close, with a stop at 3.112, reached its 2:1 target at 4.705 on July 22, six days later, and NEAR was 3.1% above the breakout close 10 days after it. The bearish pattern became a bullish trade.

Case study: a breakdown that went the wrong way first

BNB/USDT drew peaks at 657.9 (November 26, 2021), 617 (December 9) and 572 (December 27), with lows near 510, 489.2 and 501.6. On January 5, 2022, it closed at 474.1, below the support line. Ten days later BNB was 4.3% above the breakdown close: judged at that point, the setup looked like a failure. The stop at 545.86 held, and the short trade reached its 2:1 target at 330.58 fifty days after entry. A result read at 10 bars and a trade result can disagree.

Advantages and limitations of the pattern

Advantages

Clear structure: two lines, one breakout level on each side, and a defined stop level.
Found on every market and timeframe we tested, from hourly crypto trading to weekly stocks.
A measured target that gives a simple reward-to-risk check before the trade.

Limitations

The textbook direction was wrong most of the time: 67.7% of daily breakouts went up.
Neither breakout side showed an edge that survives our correction, on any market or timeframe we tested.
The stop is wide on tall triangles, which makes position sizing essential.
Drawing the lines involves judgment, so two traders can see different patterns on the same price chart.
A breakdown comes late in the move: in a downtrend, part of the fall has already happened before the pattern forms.

Frequently asked questions

Is the descending triangle pattern reliable?

Not on its own in our tests of the descending triangle pattern. Downside breakouts on daily charts reached a 2:1 target 22.4% of the time, against 21.6% for the same trade on random dates, with an expectancy of −0.15 R before costs.

Does the pattern always lead to a bearish move?

No. On daily charts, 4,989 descending triangles broke up and 2,383 broke down, a lean that random prices share. Treat it as a range with two exits and wait for the close outside the lines.

What is the best timeframe for this pattern?

No timeframe gave an edge that survives our correction. Weekly upside breakouts had the best raw results (41.2% of 2:1 targets hit), but random weeks with the same trade did almost as well (39.8%). A higher timeframe gives bigger moves, not a better pattern.

How does volume confirm a triangle breakout?

Classic analysis wants volume to increase on the breakout. On daily charts across all markets, high volume changed the target hit rate by about three points or less on either side, so treat it as a minor input.

Summary and conclusion

A descending triangle has a horizontal support line across the lows and a falling trendline across a series of lower highs.
The textbook reads it as a bearish continuation pattern, but on daily charts only 32.3% of breakouts went down (2,383 down, 4,989 up), a lean that comes mostly from the shape: on random prices, 39% to 42% broke down.
Downside breakouts were followed by a lower price 10 days later 49.0% of the time, against 47.3% for random days.
The short trade had an expectancy of −0.15 R before costs, against −0.15 R for the same trade on random dates.
On daily charts across all markets, volume and the 200-day moving average changed the target hit rate by about three points or less.

If you trade it, treat the descending triangle as a range with two exits and a clear invalidation level, not as a promise of a fall. Define the stop before entry, size the position on that distance, and keep the risk per trade small.

This page is educational and is not investment advice. Trading involves a risk of loss, and past statistics are no promise of future results.

About the author and the data. Written by Amaury, founder of PatternsWizard, who is passionate about finance, quantitative trading and data analysis. He built the PatternsWizard test bench, which detects each setup with fixed, published rules on full market history: crypto, forex, US stocks, ETFs, indices and commodities. Trades and win rates are compared with random bars on the same assets, excess returns with the rest of the market, with error margins and a correction for multiple testing, and the whole pipeline is checked on random-walk prices, where nothing can be predicted. Statistics on this page were generated on November 5, 2026. The full methodology explains every step.

How we tested this pattern

Every pattern's results on one sheet