How we tested this pattern
- Sample
- 190 occurrences on 6 markets (crypto, forex, US stocks, ETFs, indices and commodities), 1987 to 2026.
- Detection
- Found by code, never picked by hand: every match of the rule on full price history, winners and losers alike.rising three methods pattern: In an uptrend: a long white candle; three short candles drifting lower inside its range (the first and third black); a long white candle opening above the fourth close and closing above the first close. A long body is at least 1.3 times the average body of the 10 candles before the pattern and at least 0.6 times the largest of them.falling three methods pattern: In a downtrend: a long black candle; three short candles drifting higher inside its range (the first and third white); a long black candle opening below the fourth close and closing below the first close. A long body is at least 1.3 times the average body of the 10 candles before the pattern and at least 0.6 times the largest of them.
- Benchmark
- Each occurrence is compared with the same assets on random bars: the move 10 bars later, and a 2:1 reward-to-risk trade.
- Checks
- Block bootstrap and a correction for the thousands of tests we run, plus a random-walk self-test that the bench passes: on random prices, no pattern should win.
- Updated
- Data updated November 5, 2026, code version c2a1683f. Read the methodology · rising three methods pattern data (JSON) · falling three methods pattern data (JSON)
At a glance: what textbooks say, what we measured
- Pattern
- Bullish: Rising three methods
- Occurrences tested
- 108 occurrences, all markets, daily
- Textbook: price should rise after it
- Too close to call · −0.13% vs the market, 10 bars
- Where it did best, US stocks left out
- Crypto, 1-hour: +0.07 R 2:1 trade vs random dates, not proven
- Verdict
- 10-bar move: No clear edge2:1 trade: No clear edge
- Pattern
- Bearish: Falling three methods
- Occurrences tested
- 82 occurrences, all markets, daily
- Textbook: price should fall after it
- Too close to call · +0.38% vs the market, 10 bars
- Its best market and timeframe, still negative
- Crypto, 1-hour: −0.28 R 2:1 trade vs random dates, not proven
- Verdict
- 10-bar move: No clear edge2:1 trade: No clear edge
On this page
- What is the rising three methods candlestick pattern?
- How to identify the rising three methods pattern
- Components of the rising three methods
- Real examples
- How to trade the rising three methods pattern
- Confirmatory indicators
- Common mistakes when trading this pattern
- Rising three methods vs. falling three methods
- Reliability and success rate statistics
- Rising three methods case studies
- Related candlestick patterns
- Pros and cons of the rising three methods
- Frequently asked questions
- Summary of key points
- Final trading tips
The rising three methods candlestick pattern is a five-candle bullish continuation pattern: in an uptrend, a long bullish candlestick, then three small candlesticks drifting lower, their bodies inside its range, then a long bullish candlestick that closes above the close of the first one. Its bearish mirror, the falling three methods pattern, does the same thing in a downtrend. Both describe a short pause before the move resumes.
This guide covers how traders identify both candlestick patterns, how they use them in trading, and what actually happened next. Our test bench applied the same rule to full price history, for the rising and the falling version, across stocks, crypto, ETFs, indices, commodities and forex, and compared the outcome with random bars on the same markets.
What is the rising three methods candlestick pattern?
Defining the bullish continuation signal
The rising three methods is a bullish continuation pattern. It does not announce a reversal: it says that an existing uptrend paused for a few sessions and then resumed. Steve Nison, who introduced Japanese candlestick charting to Western traders in Japanese Candlestick Charting Techniques (1991), presents it among the continuation candlestick patterns, as a rest rather than a change of direction.
Our bench applies the rule without judgment: in an uptrend (the close before the pattern is at least one average true range (ATR) above the close 10 bars earlier, and in the upper half of the 40 previous closes), a long white candle; three short candles with lower and lower closes, their bodies inside its range (between its high and its low), the first and third black; then a long white candle opening above the fourth close and closing above the first close. "Long" and "short" are measured against the ten previous candles, as in the open-source TA-Lib library for technical analysis. Our rule finds 60% of the rising and 53% of the falling occurrences TA-Lib flags, so our counts are not the total another scanner would report.
The psychology behind the pattern
The first candle shows buyers in control. During the next three sessions, price drifts lower, but sellers cannot close it below the low of the first candle. The last candle tells the market that the pullback is over: buyers return and close the price above where the first session ended. The middle candles are a consolidation phase, not a reversal.
That reading is plausible, but it describes five candles. Whether the trend really continues after them is a question for data, and we answer it in the reliability section.
How to identify the rising three methods pattern
- Long white candlein an uptrend
- Short black candlefirst of three, drifting lower
- Third short candleblack, inside the first range
- Long white candleopens above the fourth close, closes above the first close
- Long black candlein a downtrend
- Short white candlefirst of three, drifting higher
- Third short candlewhite, inside the first range
- Long black candleopens below the fourth close, closes below the first close
The five-candle formation criteria
- An uptrend. Price must be rising before the rising three methods pattern forms: higher highs and higher lows; in our rule, a close at least one ATR above the close 10 bars earlier and in the upper half of the 40 previous closes.
- A long bullish candlestick. The first candle has a large real body and closes near its high.
- Three small candles inside its range. They drift lower, ideally with bearish bodies in the classic definition, and their bodies stay between the high and the low of the first candle. Stricter textbook versions want the whole candles, wicks included, inside that range; our bench checks the bodies only, so a wick may poke slightly outside.
- A long bullish fifth candlestick. It opens above the close of the fourth candle and closes above the close of the first one.
- A completed close. The pattern only exists once that final candle has closed.
Looser versions of the pattern accept two or four small candles in the middle instead of three. The results of a test depend on that choice: our statistics use the strict five-candle version.
Visualizing the pattern on a price chart
The chart below is not drawn by hand. It is the median shape of the rising three methods patterns our bench detected (the falling version is shown in the Rising three methods vs. falling three methods section), with the position we test: entry above the pattern, stop-loss below it, target at twice the risk.
Components of the rising three methods
The first long bullish candle
The first candlestick sets the frame of the whole rising three methods pattern. Its high and low are the limits that the bodies of the three middle candles must respect. On the median daily occurrence, the five candles span 5.30% of price, or 1.99 times the average true range (ATR): a large formation.
The three small counter-trend candles
The middle candles are the rest. Their small bodies show that the pullback lacks force. If one of them closes below the low of the first candle, sellers have taken control and the pattern is void.
The final breakout candle
The fifth candle is the signal. A strong close above the first close shows that buyers are back in control. A stricter version of the rule also wants it to close above the high of the first candle; our bench does not require it.
Real examples
Real occurrences from our test bench, each on its market's main timeframe. Category cards on crypto and US stocks come from liquid assets only (the largest coins, the most traded stocks). Best and Worst are the best and worst 2:1 trade results, Textbook the cleanest shapes (chosen on geometry alone, never on the outcome), Most recent the latest detections among the assets the gallery draws from, Typical a random draw. Rising three methods pattern: on commodities, our bench gives a single example card, so it carries no Best, Worst or other label: it is one real occurrence, not a ranked pick. Shaded area: the pattern. Dashed lines: entry, stop loss (SL) and 2:1 target (TP) of the tested trade. Dotted line: 10 bars after the signal. A result above +2 R or below −1 R means a bar opened past the target or the stop, and the trade was closed at that open. Stock and ETF prices are adjusted for splits and dividends, so they can differ from the prices quoted at the time. We left out 21 cards with a shape that does not read as the definition on this page. They still count in the statistics, and are not replaced: our bench picks a fixed number of cards per category.
Real occurrences 1 of the 2 occurrences on commodities (daily charts)
How to trade the rising three methods pattern
Unless stated otherwise, the figures in this section are for the daily timeframe, all markets combined.
- Entry
- Buy stop at the pattern high
- Stop loss (SL)
- At the pattern low
- Target (TP)
- Twice the risk (2:1)
- Entry
- Sell stop at the pattern low
- Stop loss (SL)
- At the pattern high
- Target (TP)
- Twice the risk (2:1)
A real case from our bench: CommoditiesThe only example card our bench gives on this market, the one in the gallery: not a ranked pick.
A clean case from our bench: ETFsChosen on its shape alone, never on the outcome. ETF prices are adjusted for splits and dividends, so they can differ from the prices quoted at the time.
Determining the ideal entry point
The aggressive entry buys at the close of the fifth candlestick. The conservative entry places a buy stop just above the high of the five-candle pattern. In our tests, that entry was triggered in 86.1% of cases; in 13.0%, price broke below the pattern low first and the setup was canceled before any trade was opened. The few remaining setups touched neither level within the 20 bars our test allows.
Where to place your stop-loss order
Setting profit targets
The target we test is twice the risk (a 2:1 reward-to-risk setup); the next resistance level is another choice. Trades that reached the 2:1 target took a median of 17 days; those that were stopped out took a median of 10 days. Of the trades that hit their stop, 29.0% had first been up 1 R. Moving the stop up once the trade is in profit is one answer to that; our test keeps the stop fixed.
Building it into a trading plan
The rising three methods is best treated as one of several trading signals inside a trading plan: a trend filter, a level, a position size and an exit rule. It can be read on hourly bars for day trading or on daily ones for swing trading. Whatever your trading style, write the rules down before the trade, apply them on every occurrence and keep a trading journal: rare patterns make it easy to remember the winners and forget the losers.
Confirmatory indicators
Candlestick patterns can be combined with technical analysis indicators to filter trading signals. Here is what we tested, and what we did not.
Using volume to validate the breakout
A classic filter wants higher volume on the fifth candle than on the middle ones. We measured high volume (above 1.5 times the 20-day average): on daily charts, those patterns reached the 2:1 target in 16.0% of cases (−0.40 R per trade), against 33.8% on normal volume (+0.05 R), on only 28 high-volume occurrences, too few to interpret. The average excess return over the rest of the market was +1.46% against −0.66%. This breakdown is descriptive, not corrected for multiple testing.
Moving averages as trend filters
Above the 200-day moving average, the 2:1 trade reached its target in 24.1% of cases (expectancy −0.21 R). Only 7 occurrences formed below it, too few to measure, so our data cannot say whether this long-term trend filter helps.
Relative strength index (RSI) for momentum
Another filter checks that the RSI stays above 50 during the pullback, a sign that momentum is intact. We have not tested that filter: if you use it, test it on your own market first.
Fibonacci retracement levels
A pullback that holds near the 38.2% or 50% retracement of the first candle fits the textbook picture. We have not measured it.
Common mistakes when trading this pattern
Entering before the pattern is fully completed
Ignoring the broader market trend
A rising three methods pattern inside a weekly downtrend is a pause in a bounce, not a continuation of the main trend. Read the higher timeframe first.
Misinterpreting consolidation as a reversal
The three bearish candlesticks in the middle look like the start of a decline. While they stay within the first candle, they are a consolidation. Selling them is the classic mistake with this pattern.
Rising three methods vs. falling three methods
Key differences in structure
The falling three methods pattern is the exact mirror: in a downtrend, a long black candle, three small candles with higher and higher closes, their bodies inside its range (the first and third white), then a long black candle opening below the fourth close and closing below the first close. It is a bearish continuation pattern.
Comparing bearish and bullish sentiment
On our data, the two candlestick patterns did not behave the same way. On daily charts, 49.4% of the 82 falling three methods patterns were followed by a lower price 10 days later, against 47.0% of random days: an excess return of +0.38% in the expected direction, with a 95% confidence interval from −1.18% to +1.95%. Zero is inside that interval, so the lean in the expected direction is not a measurable edge. The 2:1 short trade did slightly worse than random dates, a gap our test does not separate from chance: 29.2% of targets hit against 30.0% on random dates, for an expectancy of −0.10 R against −0.01 R at random. On hourly crypto charts, the falling three methods lagged random dates: 24.4% of targets hit against 32.3% on random dates, and −0.24 R against +0.05 R per trade, a negative difference that does not pass our statistical test. In the All measurements table, the row reads No clear edge in the 2:1 trade verdict column, and its 10-bar move verdict reads No clear edge.
How traders trade the falling three methods pattern
Traders use the falling three methods pattern the same way, reversed: a sell stop just below the low of the five candles, a stop above the high of the pattern (the high of the first candle, unless a later wick went above it), and a target at twice the risk. In our daily tests, the sell stop was triggered in 89.0% of cases. Trades that reached the target took a median of 9 days, and those that were stopped out a median of 12 days. Hourly crypto charts remain the weakest case against random dates, as the results above show.
Reliability and success rate statistics
The rising three methods is not reliable on its own: on no market or timeframe with enough data did it beat random bars on the same markets by a margin that clears our tests. Weekly charts came closest on the 10-bar rate alone (63.6% higher after 10 weeks against 57.3%, a gap within the error margin), and both their excess return (+0.25%) and their 2:1 trade (44.7% of targets hit against 43.0% on random weeks) stayed close to chance.
Moved the expected way 10 bars later, compared with random bars.
Measured on 108 daily rising three methods occurrences across 100 assets. Random bars on the same assets are the honest baseline.
No clear edgeMoved the expected way 10 bars later, compared with random bars.
Measured on 82 daily falling three methods occurrences across 82 assets. Random bars on the same assets are the honest baseline.
No clear edgeRising three methods against random bars on the same assets, by market, on daily candles. Bars of almost the same length mean no edge.
- All markets
- US stocks
- All markets
- US stocks
Falling three methods against random bars on the same assets, by market, on daily candles. Bars of almost the same length mean no edge.
- All markets
- US stocks
- All markets
- US stocks
All statistics
Full results for the rising three methods candlestick 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.
Rising three methods: 108 occurrences tested
Bullish pattern · All markets · Daily · 100 assets · 1987-04 to 2026-10
What this means. No measurable difference from the rest of its market over the next 10 bars.
Timeline
- Entry triggered, after the pattern
- 1 day · middle half 1 to 2 · on 93 triggered entries
- Stop order beyond the pattern's extreme.
- Time to the 2:1 target, when hit
- too few to measure · on 27 trades that hit it
- Time to the stop, when hit
- 10 days · middle half 4 to 20 · on 62 trades that hit it
- Time in the trade, all exits
- 13 days · middle half 5 to 26 · on 93 trades
Size and trade path
- Pattern range, high to low
- 5.3% · middle half 3.7% to 8.3% · on 108 occurrences
- Range vs average bar (ATR)
- 1.99× · middle half 1.70× to 2.34× · on 108 occurrences
- Best open profit during the trade
- 1.12 R · middle half 0.30 R to 2.06 R · on 93 trades
- Stopped trades that were first up 1 R
- 29.0% · on 62 stopped trades
- Trades a stop moved to breakeven at +1 R would have closed flat instead of at a loss
- Entry order triggered
- 86.1% · on 108 occurrences
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. In an uptrend: a long white candle; three short candles drifting lower inside its range (the first and third black); a long white candle opening above the fourth close and closing above the first close. A long body is at least 1.3 times the average body of the 10 candles before the pattern and at least 0.6 times the largest of them. Candlestick counts are not checked against planted examples, so they may not be exhaustive.
All measurements (12 rows)
10-bar move: did price go the expected way?
| Market | Occurrences | Pattern | Random bars | Excess | 10-bar move verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crypto · 1-hour | 197 | 45.7% | 48.6% | +0.05% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 58 | 43.1% | 47.5% | +1.44% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 15 | 53.3% | 46.4% | −0.64% | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Daily | 89 | 51.1% | 54.4% | +0.06% | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 2 | 50.0% | 57.2% | −0.13% | Not enough data |
| Commodities · Daily | 2 | 0.0% | 49.4% | −4.28% | Not enough data |
| All markets · Daily | 108 | 50.5% | 53.2% | −0.13% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 1 | 100.0% | 31.1% | −69.75% | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 40 | 62.5% | 57.7% | +2.01% | No clear edge |
| Indices · Weekly | 2 | 100.0% | 60.1% | +1.15% | Not enough data |
| Forex · Weekly | 1 | 0.0% | 59.0% | −2.01% | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 44 | 63.6% | 57.3% | +0.25% | No clear edge |
2:1 trade: target hit and average result
| Market | Trades | Target hit | Same trade, random dates | Per trade | 2:1 trade verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crypto · 1-hour | 158 | 35.4% | 32.8% | +0.13 R vs +0.07 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 47 | 27.7% | 32.4% | −0.10 R vs +0.10 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 12 | 25.0% | 37.5% | −0.21 R vs +0.25 R | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Daily | 78 | 30.8% | 39.2% | −0.01 R vs +0.19 R | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 2 | 0.0% | 50.0% | −1.00 R vs +0.50 R | Not enough data |
| Commodities · Daily | 1 | 0.0% | 25.0% | −1.00 R vs −0.25 R | Not enough data |
| All markets · Daily | 93 | 29.0% | 39.1% | −0.07 R vs +0.20 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 1 | 100.0% | 0.0% | +2.00 R vs −1.00 R | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 34 | 44.1% | 45.1% | +0.38 R vs +0.36 R | No clear edge |
| Indices · Weekly | 2 | 0.0% | 25.0% | −1.00 R vs −0.27 R | Not enough data |
| Forex · Weekly | 1 | 100.0% | 50.0% | +2.00 R vs +1.04 R | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 38 | 44.7% | 43.0% | +0.40 R vs +0.31 R | No clear edge |
Our verdict
Not a reliable signal on its own here. Use it as context, not as a trigger.
Falling three methods: 82 occurrences tested
Bearish pattern · All markets · Daily · 82 assets · 2000-04 to 2026-10
What this means. No measurable difference from the rest of its market over the next 10 bars.
Timeline
- Entry triggered, after the pattern
- 1 day · middle half 1 to 2 · on 73 triggered entries
- Stop order beyond the pattern's extreme. 1 of these entries is not among the 72 trades: still open at the end of our data, or left out by the trade rules.
- Time to the 2:1 target, when hit
- too few to measure · on 21 trades that hit it
- Time to the stop, when hit
- 12 days · middle half 6 to 18 · on 49 trades that hit it
- Time in the trade, all exits
- 12 days · middle half 6 to 23 · on 72 trades
Size and trade path
- Pattern range, high to low
- 7.5% · middle half 5.0% to 12.9% · on 82 occurrences
- Range vs average bar (ATR)
- 1.95× · middle half 1.70× to 2.26× · on 82 occurrences
- Best open profit during the trade
- 0.86 R · middle half 0.37 R to 2.07 R · on 72 trades
- Stopped trades that were first up 1 R
- 24.5% · on 49 stopped trades
- Trades a stop moved to breakeven at +1 R would have closed flat instead of at a loss
- Entry order triggered
- 89.0% · on 82 occurrences
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. In a downtrend: a long black candle; three short candles drifting higher inside its range (the first and third white); a long black candle opening below the fourth close and closing below the first close. A long body is at least 1.3 times the average body of the 10 candles before the pattern and at least 0.6 times the largest of them. Candlestick counts are not checked against planted examples, so they may not be exhaustive.
All measurements (11 rows)
10-bar move: did price go the expected way?
| Market | Occurrences | Pattern | Random bars | Excess | 10-bar move verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crypto · 1-hour | 251 | 43.4% | 50.8% | −0.16% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 70 | 34.3% | 52.2% | +0.54% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 11 | 54.5% | 56.6% | −0.93% | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Daily | 64 | 50.8% | 46.0% | +0.75% | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 3 | 33.3% | 42.8% | +1.16% | Not enough data |
| Indices · Daily | 4 | 25.0% | 40.6% | −2.52% | Not enough data |
| All markets · Daily | 82 | 49.4% | 47.0% | +0.38% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 2 | 0.0% | 52.5% | −12.75% | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 18 | 11.1% | 44.7% | −10.51% | Not enough data |
| Indices · Weekly | 1 | 100.0% | 45.2% | +16.88% | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 21 | 14.3% | 45.5% | −9.42% | Not enough data |
2:1 trade: target hit and average result
| Market | Trades | Target hit | Same trade, random dates | Per trade | 2:1 trade verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crypto · 1-hour | 209 | 24.4% | 32.3% | −0.24 R vs +0.05 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 49 | 22.4% | 29.3% | −0.29 R vs −0.02 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 9 | 55.6% | 27.8% | +0.67 R vs +0.05 R | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Daily | 56 | 23.2% | 29.3% | −0.28 R vs −0.03 R | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 3 | 33.3% | 41.7% | +0.21 R vs +0.20 R | Not enough data |
| Indices · Daily | 4 | 50.0% | 35.4% | +0.49 R vs +0.05 R | Not enough data |
| All markets · Daily | 72 | 29.2% | 30.0% | −0.10 R vs −0.01 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 0 | n/a | n/a | n/a vs n/a | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 10 | 10.0% | 14.2% | −0.70 R vs −0.36 R | Not enough data |
| Indices · Weekly | 1 | 0.0% | 25.0% | −1.00 R vs −0.25 R | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 11 | 9.1% | 15.2% | −0.73 R vs −0.35 R | Not enough data |
Data updated November 5, 2026 · code version c2a1683f · Read the methodology. The falling three methods had no occurrence on forex or commodities. 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). On 1-hour and 4-hour forex charts the rising three methods only forms at the weekly open, across the weekend gap, so we do not publish those forex rows. Any other market or timeframe from that list missing from the tables above had no occurrence.
What you often read
“The rising three methods pattern is a reliable bullish continuation signal.”
What our data shows
On 108 daily occurrences, it moved in the expected direction 50.5% of the time, against 53.2% for random bars: no clear edge, since the average excess return is not statistically significant.
What you often read
“The falling three methods pattern is a reliable bearish continuation signal.”
What our data shows
On 82 daily occurrences, it moved in the expected direction 49.4% of the time, against 47.0% 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)
| Pattern, market and timeframe | Patterns tested (2:1 trades) | Moved as expected 10 bars later | Random bars | 2:1 target hit | Same trade, random dates | Expectancy (R) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rising, all markets, daily | 108 (93) | 50.5% | 53.2% | 29.0% | 39.1% | −0.07 |
| Rising, US stocks, daily | 89 (78) | 51.1% | 54.4% | 30.8% | 39.2% | −0.01 |
| Rising, crypto, hourly | 197 (158) | 45.7% | 48.6% | 35.4% | 32.8% | +0.13 |
| Rising, crypto, 4-hour | 58 (47) | 43.1% | 47.5% | 27.7% | 32.4% | −0.10 |
| Rising, all markets, weekly | 44 (38) | 63.6% | 57.3% | 44.7% | 43.0% | +0.40 |
| Falling, all markets, daily | 82 (72) | 49.4% | 47.0% | 29.2% | 30.0% | −0.10 |
| Falling, crypto, hourly | 251 (209) | 43.4% | 50.8% | 24.4% | 32.3% | −0.24 |
Read the table in pairs of columns. "Moved as expected" means higher for the rising three methods and lower for the falling three methods. In the first row, 50.5% of rising three methods patterns were followed by a higher price 10 days later, against 53.2% of random days in the same market. The excess return over the rest of the market is −0.13%, with a 95% confidence interval from −2.11% to +2.15%: zero is inside, so there is no clear edge. The important comparison is between the two columns of each pair, not the raw percentage.
What the success rate really means
The 2:1 trade reached its target 29.0% of the time, for an expectancy of −0.07 R per trade before costs. The same entry, stop-loss and target on random dates did better, +0.20 R, because random dates on these markets were followed by a gain more often than not (53.2% were higher 10 days later). The difference is not statistically significant, but the direction is the opposite of what the pattern promises. On 4-hour crypto charts the gap points the same way (27.7% against 32.4%, −0.10 R against +0.10 R), and it is also within the margin of error.
Results by timeframe
Weekly charts gave the best raw numbers, 44.7% of targets hit and +0.40 R, and random weeks in the same market did nearly as well (43.0%, +0.31 R). The first bar after the pattern was even weaker than chance on the daily timeframe: 42.1% of patterns were followed by a higher close the next day, against 50.5% of random days (descriptive figures, not in the tables, not tested for significance). These results agree with academic research: in "Candlestick technical trading strategies: Can they create value for investors?" (Journal of Banking & Finance, 2006), Ben Marshall, Martin Young and Lawrence Rose found that candlestick strategies did not create value on large US stocks. The method is published in our methodology.
Rising three methods case studies
The gallery in the Real examples section shows more cases, and the three examples written up below come from daily charts, two on crypto and one on natural gas futures. Daily crypto charts produced only 15 rising three methods patterns, too few for our bench to interpret, so those examples are illustrations, not evidence.
Example 1: a pattern that worked
From January 6 to 10, 2020, EOS/USDT formed a rising three methods: a white candlestick closing at 2.8506 with a high at 2.8602, three black candlesticks with lower closes whose bodies stayed inside its range, then a white candlestick closing at 2.9866. The second black candle pushed its upper wick to 2.9692, above that high, which our rule allows because it checks bodies, not wicks. The buy stop at 3.0054, the highest point of the five candles, was triggered on January 11, with a stop-loss at 2.65 and a target at 3.7162, reached on January 14. Price was 21.2% higher 10 days after the pattern.
Example 2: a breakout that failed
From August 9 to 13, 2021, BTC/USDT completed the pattern: a white candlestick closing at 46,253.4, three black candlesticks closing lower, then a white one closing at 47,800. The buy stop at 47,886 was triggered on August 14, with a stop-loss at 42,779 and a target at 58,100. Price was 3.5% higher 10 days after the pattern and climbed to 52,920 on September 7, about 1 R in profit, then fell back through the stop-loss on September 20: a full 1 R loss.
Example 3: identifying a failed pattern
On December 12, 2003, natural gas futures completed a rising three methods between 6.15 and 7.55, the level of the buy stop, set by the upper wick of the second black candle. Price fell under 6.15 on December 23 before reaching the entry, so the setup was canceled without a trade, and the contract was 8.6% lower 10 sessions after the pattern. That is the case the conservative entry is designed for.
Related candlestick patterns
Several other candlestick patterns describe a pause or a strong push in one direction. Each has its own page with our statistics.
- Upside gap three methods and downside gap three methods: three-candle continuation patterns built around a gap.
- Three white soldiers and three black crows: three strong candlesticks in the same direction.
- Three-line strike: three candlesticks in a row, then one that erases them.
- Flag pattern: the chart pattern version of the same idea, a short consolidation against the trend.
Pros and cons of the rising three methods
Advantages of using this strategy
- A clear structure: five candles, a defined range, a defined breakout.
- A clear risk: the stop goes below the low of the pattern.
- Most setups reach the entry: 13.0% are canceled before it on the daily timeframe.
Potential risks and limitations
- No edge over random dates on any market with enough data.
- Very rare: once every 76,402 daily bars and once every 74,525 hourly crypto bars.
- A wide stop, so trades must be smaller.
Frequently asked questions
How many candles are in the rising three methods?
Five: a large bullish candlestick, three short candlesticks whose bodies stay inside it, and a second bullish candlestick closing above the first close.
Is the rising three methods pattern reliable?
Not on its own in our tests. On 93 closed trades on daily occurrences, the 2:1 trade reached its target 29.0% of the time against 39.1% for the same trade on random dates.
Do the middle candles have to be bearish?
Classic definitions want them mostly bearish, drifting lower. Our rule requires the first and third to be black; the second can be either color. What matters most is that their bodies stay inside the range of the first candlestick.
What timeframe works best for this pattern?
None stood out. Weekly charts had the best raw results (44.7% of 2:1 targets hit, +0.40 R against +0.31 R per trade), but the gap with random weeks in the same market is not statistically significant.
Can traders use it for day trading?
On hourly crypto charts, the 2:1 trade reached its target 35.4% of the time against 32.8% on random dates, with an expectancy of +0.13 R against +0.07 R before costs, a gap that is not statistically significant. Trading fees would take almost all of it. The bearish version lagged chance on the same charts, by a margin that does not pass our statistical test (see the results above).
What is the falling three methods candlestick pattern?
It is the bearish version: in a downtrend, a strong black candle, three short candles drifting higher, their bodies inside it, and another black candle closing below the first close. Nison presents it, like the rising version, as a continuation pattern: here, a sign that the downtrend continues.
How does it differ from three white soldiers?
The three white soldiers are three strong white candlesticks in a row, read as a reversal or a strong advance. The rising three methods has a pause in the middle. On daily charts, the three white soldiers trade reached its 2:1 target in 34.4% of cases against 33.3% on random dates, also with no clear edge.
Summary of key points
- The rising three methods is a five-candle bullish continuation pattern; the falling three methods is its bearish mirror.
- On 108 daily occurrences, 50.5% of rising three methods patterns were higher 10 days later, against 53.2% of random days.
- The 2:1 trade reached its target 29.0% of the time against 39.1% on random dates.
- Both candlestick patterns are rare, and neither showed an edge that survives our statistical correction.
Final trading tips
If you trade the three methods, treat them as a location for a trade in the direction of the trend, not as a reason for one. Wait for the fifth candlestick to close, define the stop beyond the pattern before entry, size the trade on that distance and keep the risk per trade modest.
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. This page is educational and is not financial advice: every trade carries a risk of loss, and past results on our bench do not guarantee future ones.
Passionate about finance, quantitative trading and data analysis. Amaury built the PatternsWizard test bench, which detects each pattern on full price history and measures what happened next against random entries.
Statistics on this page come from our open methodology: every occurrence our rule finds on full history, compared with chance. How we test patterns.