Harmonic patternBullish GartleyBearish Gartley
Gartley Pattern: Rules, Ratios and How to Trade It
Gartley pattern rules (B at 0.618 and D at 0.786 of XA), a worked example, entry, stop and targets, and our test: on 3,256 bullish daily setups, no edge over random dates.
How we tested this pattern
- Sample
- 6,838 occurrences on 6 markets (crypto, forex, US stocks, ETFs, indices and commodities), 1970 to 2026.
- Detection
- Found by code, never picked by hand: every match of the rule on full price history, winners and losers alike.bullish Gartley pattern: Five swing points: X (low), A, B, C, then D. B retraces 0.587 to 0.649 of XA (0.618 within 5%), C retraces 0.382 to 0.886 of AB. When C is confirmed, the reversal zone for D is where a 0.747 to 0.825 retracement of XA (0.786 within 5%) overlaps a 1.272 to 1.618 projection of BC. Signal at the close of the first bar that trades into the zone without trading below X. Stop at X. The swing points before the reversal zone span at least 3 ATR, with at least 3 bars between consecutive points. The first swing point is a true extreme: over the duration of the first leg before it, price never went more than 10% of that leg beyond it.bearish Gartley pattern: Five swing points: X (high), A, B, C, then D. B retraces 0.587 to 0.649 of XA (0.618 within 5%), C retraces 0.382 to 0.886 of AB. When C is confirmed, the reversal zone for D is where a 0.747 to 0.825 retracement of XA (0.786 within 5%) overlaps a 1.272 to 1.618 projection of BC. Signal at the close of the first bar that trades into the zone without trading above X. Stop at X. The swing points before the reversal zone span at least 3 ATR, with at least 3 bars between consecutive points. The first swing point is a true extreme: over the duration of the first leg before it, price never went more than 10% of that leg beyond it.
- 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 · bullish Gartley pattern data (JSON) · bearish Gartley pattern data (JSON)
At a glance: what textbooks say, what we measured
- Pattern
- Bullish Gartley
- Occurrences tested
- 3,256 occurrences, all markets, daily
- Textbook: price should rise after it
- Too close to call · −0.03% vs the market, 10 bars
- Textbook: target reached most of the time
- 43.1% vs 42.5% on random dates
- Where it did best, US stocks left out
- Forex, 1-hour: +0.14 R 2:1 trade vs random dates, not proven
- Verdict
- 10-bar move: No clear edge2:1 trade: No clear edge
- Pattern
- Bearish Gartley
- Occurrences tested
- 3,582 occurrences, all markets, daily
- Textbook: price should fall after it
- Too close to call · −0.01% vs the market, 10 bars
- Textbook: target reached most of the time
- 30.1% vs 30.8% on random dates
- Where it did best
- Forex, daily: +0.50 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 Gartley pattern?
- How to identify the Gartley pattern
- The psychology behind the pattern
- Bullish vs. bearish Gartley patterns
- Gartley vs. other harmonic patterns
- Real examples
- How to trade the Gartley pattern
- Is the Gartley pattern reliable?
- Advantages and disadvantages of harmonic trading
- Common mistakes when trading harmonic patterns
- Tools to find the Gartley pattern
- Frequently asked questions about the Gartley pattern
- Summary of key points
The Gartley pattern is a five-point harmonic pattern, labeled X, A, B, C and D, in which each move must respect specific Fibonacci ratios. It marks the end of a pullback inside a larger move: the trader buys (bullish version) or sells (bearish version) at D, where the last move completes a 78.6% retracement of the first one.
This guide gives the exact rules, a worked example, how to trade the setup, how it differs from its cousins, and an answer from data to the question that matters: does it work? We give our own test results, on every market, next to the choices the test required.
What is the Gartley pattern?
Described in 1935, it is older than the bat, the butterfly or the crab: a retracement structure in four moves. After a strong first move from X to A, price retraces to B, bounces to C, then retraces again to D, a level calculated in advance. In harmonic trading as Carney defines it, D is the potential reversal zone: the place where the pullback should end and the original trend resume.
Origin: H.M. Gartley and page 222
It is named after the man who described it in his book Profits in the Stock Market (1935). Because the description appears on page 222, it is also called the Gartley 222. He described the shape and how to use it, not the ratios used today.
How the ratios became part of it
The ratios came later. Larry Pesavento linked the structure to Fibonacci, and Scott Carney set precise ratios and coined the term harmonic trading in The Harmonic Trader (1999). The version below is the one Scott Carney defines.
How to identify the Gartley pattern
Find the five turning points first, then check each move. If one measure fails, it is not a valid setup: it may be another harmonic structure, or no pattern at all.
- Swing low where the pattern starts; the stop sits here
- End of the XA leg
- Retraces 0.587 to 0.649 of XA (0.618 within 5%)
- Retraces 0.382 to 0.886 of AB
- D zone: signal0.747 to 0.825 of XA (0.786 within 5%), overlapping a 1.272 to 1.618 projection of BC; entry at the close of the first bar that reaches it
- Swing high where the pattern starts; the stop sits here
- End of the XA leg
- Retraces 0.587 to 0.649 of XA (0.618 within 5%)
- Retraces 0.382 to 0.886 of AB
- D zone: signal0.747 to 0.825 of XA (0.786 within 5%), overlapping a 1.272 to 1.618 projection of BC; entry at the close of the first bar that reaches it
The rules of a "perfect" Gartley 222
- X to A: the initial XA leg, a clear move up or down, starting at X. It has no required size, but it should be a significant move that stands out on the chart.
- A to B: price gives back 61.8% of XA. This is its signature: a B far from 0.618 means another structure.
- B to C: the third leg, where price retraces 38.2% to 88.6% of AB, and C never goes beyond A.
- C to D: the last leg extends 127.2% to 161.8% of BC and ends at 78.6% of the first leg. D never goes beyond X.
- AB=CD: in the classic version, CD is about as long as AB, so the pattern contains an ABCD.
Fibonacci ratios and structure
| Point | Rule | Measured on |
|---|---|---|
| B | 0.618 | XA |
| C | 0.382 to 0.886 | AB |
| D | 0.786 | XA |
| D | 1.272 to 1.618 | BC |
The three measures for D rarely meet at one exact price. They form a small area of prices, the potential reversal zone (PRZ). The tighter it is, the cleaner the setup.
A worked example with numbers
A Fibonacci retracement drawn on the first move gives D in advance. Here is the calculation.
Illustrative values, not a real chart. For a long setup, X is at 100 and A at 150, so the first move is 50. B should sit near 150 minus 0.618 times 50, which is 119.1. If C is at 135, BC is 15.9. D at 78.6% of XA is 150 minus 39.3, which is 110.7. Check CD: from 135 down to 110.7 is 24.3, or 1.53 times BC, inside the 1.272 to 1.618 range. The AB move is 30.9 against 24.3 for the last one: close, but not a perfect match. The order waits at 110.7, and the setup is invalid below 100.
The psychology behind the pattern
It describes an advance that pauses in two waves. After the first move, early buyers cash in. New buyers step in, but fail to push beyond A. A second wave of selling takes price deeper, yet not below X: the low that started the move holds. Traders waiting at D are betting that the first move is still alive. Whether these ratios capture that behavior better than any other pullback is a question for data, not for the story.
Bullish vs. bearish Gartley patterns
A bullish Gartley pattern forms after a strong rise, as a pullback in that rise: A is above X, D is a low, and you buy. Drawn on a chart, it looks like an M. The bearish version is the mirror image after a decline: A is below X, D is a high, and you sell. It looks like a W. The ratios are the same in both, and the order at D always follows the first move.
Gartley vs. other harmonic patterns
Several harmonic patterns share this five-point frame. The location of B and the depth of D tell them apart.
- BatBullish or bearishBullish, 10-bar move, daily No clear edgeBearish, 10-bar move, daily No clear edge
- ButterflyBullish or bearishBullish, 10-bar move, daily No clear edgeBearish, 10-bar move, daily No clear edge
- CrabBullish or bearishBullish, 10-bar move, daily No clear edgeBearish, 10-bar move, daily No clear edge
| Pattern | Point B | Point D |
|---|---|---|
| Gartley | 0.618 | 0.786 |
| Bat | 0.382 to 0.50 | 0.886 |
| Butterfly | 0.786 | 1.27, beyond X |
| Crab | 0.382 to 0.618 | 1.618, beyond X |
The Gartley and the Bat end inside the first move, so X stays close and limits the loss. The Butterfly and the Crab end beyond X and need another exit rule. The Cypher and the 5-0 use other ratios again; our XABCD guide covers the common frame.
Real examples
Real occurrences from our test bench, each on its market's main timeframe. Crypto examples come from liquid assets only (the largest coins). 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. 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. We left out 8 cards: 7 with a shape that does not read as the definition on this page, 1 with a single bar so large that the pattern or the trade levels could not be read. They still count in the statistics, and are not replaced: our bench picks a fixed number of cards per category.
How to trade the Gartley pattern
The appeal of harmonic setups is that the entry, the exit if wrong and the targets are all known in advance.
Entry, stop loss, and take profit strategies
- Buying (or selling) at D: a limit order around the 0.786 level, or a confirmed order once price reacts in the reversal zone (see below).
- Exit if wrong: just beyond X. If price goes past X, the structure is invalid. Another choice is to cut losses just beyond the PRZ: the loss is smaller, but it is hit more often.
- Targets: the 0.382 and 0.618 retracements of the move from A to D, then C or A. One way to manage the trade is to close part of it at the first target and move the exit to breakeven.
- Entry
- Close of the first bar that reaches the near edge of the reversal zone
- Stop loss (SL)
- At X
- Target (TP)
- Twice the risk (2:1)
- Entry
- Close of the first bar that reaches the near edge of the reversal zone
- Stop loss (SL)
- At X
- Target (TP)
- Twice the risk (2:1)
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.
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.
With the values above, buying at 110.7 and exiting below 100 risks about 10.7. A target at C (135) offers about 24.3: a reward of about 2.3 times the possible loss.
Our bench tests one standardized version of this trade, with the same entry and target rules for every harmonic pattern so that results can be compared, and this pattern's own stop: it enters at the close of the first bar that reaches the reversal zone, places the stop at X and targets twice the risk. The classic target, the 0.618 retracement of AD, is measured separately.
Confirmation at D
Trading size and money management
Size each trade on the distance between your order and your exit, and put only a small, fixed share of your account at stake.
Is the Gartley pattern reliable?
Detecting it without judgment requires choices, and we set ours from chart reviews, never from results. Turning points are swings of 2, 4 or 8 times the average true range, and X must be a real turning point: over a stretch as long as XA before it, price never went more than 10% of XA beyond X. A ratio published as a single value is accepted within 5% of it (0.618 becomes 0.587 to 0.649), and a published range is used as is. Once C is confirmed, the reversal zone is where the 0.786 retracement of XA (0.747 to 0.825) overlaps the 1.272 to 1.618 projection of BC; the AB=CD condition is not required. The signal is the first bar that trades into the zone without trading beyond X (below it for the bullish version, above it for the bearish one).
Moved the expected way 10 bars later, compared with random bars.
Measured on 3,256 daily bullish Gartley occurrences across 1,457 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 3,582 daily bearish Gartley occurrences across 1,470 assets. Random bars on the same assets are the honest baseline.
No clear edgeBullish Gartley against random bars on the same assets, by market, on daily candles. Bars of almost the same length mean no edge.
- All markets
- Crypto
- US stocks
- Forex
- ETFs
- Indices
- Commodities
- All markets
- Crypto
- US stocks
- Forex
- ETFs
- Indices
- Commodities
Bearish Gartley against random bars on the same assets, by market, on daily candles. Bars of almost the same length mean no edge.
- All markets
- Crypto
- US stocks
- Forex
- ETFs
- Indices
- Commodities
- All markets
- Crypto
- US stocks
- Forex
- ETFs
- Indices
- Commodities
All statistics
Full results for the Gartley 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.
Bullish Gartley: 3,256 occurrences tested
Bullish pattern · All markets · Daily · 1,457 assets · 1970-07 to 2026-10
What this means. No measurable difference from the rest of its market over the next 10 bars.
Timeline
- Pattern length, first swing to signal
- 53 days · middle half 35 to 100 · on 3,256 occurrences
- Signal, after the last confirmed swing
- 4 days · middle half 1 to 9 · on 3,256 occurrences
- Time to the 2:1 target, when hit
- 18 days · middle half 8 to 36 · on 1,120 trades that hit it
- Time to the stop, when hit
- 8 days · middle half 3 to 21 · on 1,819 trades that hit it
- Time in the trade, all exits
- 13 days · middle half 5 to 38 · on 3,241 trades
Size and trade path
- Pattern height
- 24.5% · middle half 15.2% to 42.5% · on 3,256 occurrences
- Best open profit during the trade
- 1.10 R · middle half 0.32 R to 2.06 R · on 3,241 trades
- Stopped trades that were first up 1 R
- 20.3% · on 1,819 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. Five swing points: X (low), A, B, C, then D. B retraces 0.587 to 0.649 of XA (0.618 within 5%), C retraces 0.382 to 0.886 of AB. When C is confirmed, the reversal zone for D is where a 0.747 to 0.825 retracement of XA (0.786 within 5%) overlaps a 1.272 to 1.618 projection of BC. Signal at the close of the first bar that trades into the zone without trading below X. Stop at X. The swing points before the reversal zone span at least 3 ATR, with at least 3 bars between consecutive points. The first swing point is a true extreme: over the duration of the first leg before it, price never went more than 10% of that leg beyond it.
All measurements (20 rows)
10-bar move: did price go the expected way?
| Market | Occurrences | Pattern | Random bars | Excess | 10-bar move verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crypto · 1-hour | 6,589 | 49.6% | 48.3% | +0.03% | No clear edge |
| Forex · 1-hour | 857 | 51.6% | 50.6% | +0.01% | No clear edge |
| All markets · 1-hour | 7,446 | 49.9% | 48.5% | +0.03% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 1,688 | 47.3% | 47.5% | +0.27% | No clear edge |
| Forex · 4-hour | 212 | 60.0% | 50.4% | +0.11% | Promising |
| All markets · 4-hour | 1,900 | 48.7% | 47.8% | +0.25% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 222 | 52.0% | 45.0% | +1.14% | No clear edge |
| US stocks · Daily | 2,787 | 53.1% | 53.9% | −0.12% | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 108 | 54.6% | 56.8% | −0.38% | No clear edge |
| Indices · Daily | 73 | 56.2% | 57.2% | +0.06% | No clear edge |
| Forex · Daily | 31 | 64.5% | 51.3% | +0.05% | No clear edge |
| Commodities · Daily | 35 | 62.9% | 53.6% | +0.97% | No clear edge |
| All markets · Daily | 3,256 | 53.4% | 53.5% | −0.03% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 3 | 50.0% | 39.7% | −7.32% | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 442 | 59.7% | 56.7% | +0.16% | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Weekly | 11 | 54.5% | 60.8% | −4.16% | Not enough data |
| Indices · Weekly | 6 | 50.0% | 60.4% | −3.20% | Not enough data |
| Forex · Weekly | 6 | 66.7% | 50.9% | +0.15% | Not enough data |
| Commodities · Weekly | 8 | 62.5% | 54.3% | −2.13% | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 476 | 59.5% | 56.6% | −0.05% | 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 | 6,587 | 26.3% | 28.4% | −0.04 R vs +0.01 R | No clear edge |
| Forex · 1-hour | 857 | 34.5% | 30.3% | +0.15 R vs +0.01 R | Promising |
| All markets · 1-hour | 7,444 | 27.2% | 28.6% | −0.01 R vs +0.01 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 1,682 | 24.9% | 28.2% | −0.04 R vs +0.03 R | No clear edge |
| Forex · 4-hour | 209 | 34.0% | 28.1% | +0.15 R vs −0.02 R | No clear edge |
| All markets · 4-hour | 1,891 | 25.9% | 28.2% | −0.02 R vs +0.02 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 219 | 22.4% | 32.4% | −0.12 R vs +0.10 R | No clear edge |
| US stocks · Daily | 2,776 | 35.3% | 35.0% | +0.17 R vs +0.18 R | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 108 | 34.3% | 39.6% | +0.13 R vs +0.26 R | No clear edge |
| Indices · Daily | 73 | 39.7% | 31.7% | +0.22 R vs 0.00 R | No clear edge |
| Forex · Daily | 31 | 38.7% | 30.6% | +0.30 R vs +0.03 R | No clear edge |
| Commodities · Daily | 34 | 41.2% | 32.6% | +0.37 R vs +0.08 R | No clear edge |
| All markets · Daily | 3,241 | 34.6% | 34.8% | +0.15 R vs +0.17 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 2 | 50.0% | 50.0% | +0.50 R vs +0.50 R | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 426 | 36.6% | 39.9% | +0.25 R vs +0.35 R | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Weekly | 11 | 36.4% | 32.6% | +0.07 R vs +0.19 R | Not enough data |
| Indices · Weekly | 6 | 33.3% | 29.2% | +0.40 R vs −0.09 R | Not enough data |
| Forex · Weekly | 6 | 33.3% | 30.6% | +0.40 R vs +0.03 R | Not enough data |
| Commodities · Weekly | 8 | 25.0% | 32.3% | −0.26 R vs +0.14 R | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 459 | 36.4% | 39.3% | +0.24 R vs +0.33 R | No clear edge |
Our verdict
Not a reliable signal on its own here. Use it as context, not as a trigger.
Bearish Gartley: 3,582 occurrences tested
Bearish pattern · All markets · Daily · 1,470 assets · 1975-02 to 2026-10
What this means. No measurable difference from the rest of its market over the next 10 bars.
Timeline
- Pattern length, first swing to signal
- 52 days · middle half 34 to 100 · on 3,582 occurrences
- Signal, after the last confirmed swing
- 5 days · middle half 2 to 11 · on 3,582 occurrences
- Time to the 2:1 target, when hit
- 14 days · middle half 6 to 30 · on 925 trades that hit it
- Time to the stop, when hit
- 10 days · middle half 4 to 23 · on 2,383 trades that hit it
- Time in the trade, all exits
- 12 days · middle half 4 to 32 · on 3,565 trades
Size and trade path
- Pattern height
- 21.7% · middle half 14.2% to 34.6% · on 3,582 occurrences
- Best open profit during the trade
- 0.78 R · middle half 0.26 R to 2.01 R · on 3,565 trades
- Stopped trades that were first up 1 R
- 18.9% · on 2,383 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. Five swing points: X (high), A, B, C, then D. B retraces 0.587 to 0.649 of XA (0.618 within 5%), C retraces 0.382 to 0.886 of AB. When C is confirmed, the reversal zone for D is where a 0.747 to 0.825 retracement of XA (0.786 within 5%) overlaps a 1.272 to 1.618 projection of BC. Signal at the close of the first bar that trades into the zone without trading above X. Stop at X. The swing points before the reversal zone span at least 3 ATR, with at least 3 bars between consecutive points. The first swing point is a true extreme: over the duration of the first leg before it, price never went more than 10% of that leg beyond it.
All measurements (20 rows)
10-bar move: did price go the expected way?
| Market | Occurrences | Pattern | Random bars | Excess | 10-bar move verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crypto · 1-hour | 5,872 | 53.1% | 50.6% | +0.03% | No clear edge |
| Forex · 1-hour | 938 | 53.5% | 49.2% | +0.02% | No clear edge |
| All markets · 1-hour | 6,810 | 53.1% | 50.4% | +0.03% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 1,349 | 52.9% | 51.8% | −0.14% | No clear edge |
| Forex · 4-hour | 225 | 56.9% | 49.5% | +0.13% | Promising |
| All markets · 4-hour | 1,574 | 53.4% | 51.5% | −0.10% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 198 | 59.1% | 55.2% | −0.29% | No clear edge |
| US stocks · Daily | 3,122 | 45.8% | 45.5% | +0.02% | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 124 | 41.9% | 43.6% | −0.24% | No clear edge |
| Indices · Daily | 59 | 37.3% | 42.8% | +0.11% | No clear edge |
| Forex · Daily | 37 | 48.6% | 49.4% | +0.36% | No clear edge |
| Commodities · Daily | 42 | 40.5% | 46.5% | −1.41% | No clear edge |
| All markets · Daily | 3,582 | 46.2% | 46.0% | −0.01% | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 10 | 70.0% | 62.6% | +24.68% | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 559 | 44.5% | 42.9% | +0.77% | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Weekly | 25 | 32.0% | 39.1% | +2.00% | Not enough data |
| Indices · Weekly | 11 | 54.5% | 39.3% | +1.27% | Not enough data |
| Forex · Weekly | 8 | 62.5% | 46.0% | +0.40% | Not enough data |
| Commodities · Weekly | 10 | 30.0% | 47.8% | −5.50% | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 623 | 44.6% | 43.1% | +1.11% | Promising |
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 | 5,869 | 27.0% | 28.9% | −0.06 R vs −0.01 R | No clear edge |
| Forex · 1-hour | 938 | 32.7% | 30.9% | +0.09 R vs +0.04 R | No clear edge |
| All markets · 1-hour | 6,807 | 27.8% | 29.2% | −0.04 R vs −0.01 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · 4-hour | 1,347 | 24.9% | 28.0% | −0.09 R vs −0.03 R | No clear edge |
| Forex · 4-hour | 225 | 24.9% | 32.3% | −0.10 R vs +0.06 R | No clear edge |
| All markets · 4-hour | 1,572 | 24.9% | 28.7% | −0.09 R vs −0.02 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Daily | 195 | 33.8% | 29.9% | +0.15 R vs −0.01 R | No clear edge |
| US stocks · Daily | 3,109 | 25.4% | 25.5% | −0.15 R vs −0.16 R | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Daily | 124 | 25.0% | 23.1% | −0.17 R vs −0.27 R | No clear edge |
| Indices · Daily | 59 | 23.7% | 28.4% | −0.24 R vs −0.06 R | No clear edge |
| Forex · Daily | 36 | 38.9% | 28.2% | +0.40 R vs −0.10 R | No clear edge |
| Commodities · Daily | 42 | 23.8% | 30.4% | −0.29 R vs −0.15 R | No clear edge |
| All markets · Daily | 3,565 | 25.9% | 25.7% | −0.13 R vs −0.16 R | No clear edge |
| Crypto · Weekly | 8 | 25.0% | 28.1% | −0.25 R vs −0.08 R | Not enough data |
| US stocks · Weekly | 548 | 22.1% | 23.2% | −0.31 R vs −0.25 R | No clear edge |
| ETFs · Weekly | 25 | 16.0% | 24.0% | −0.51 R vs −0.23 R | Not enough data |
| Indices · Weekly | 11 | 18.2% | 25.0% | −0.46 R vs −0.25 R | Not enough data |
| Forex · Weekly | 8 | 50.0% | 25.0% | +0.50 R vs −0.25 R | Not enough data |
| Commodities · Weekly | 10 | 0.0% | 35.0% | −1.00 R vs +0.05 R | Not enough data |
| All markets · Weekly | 610 | 21.8% | 23.6% | −0.32 R vs −0.25 R | No clear edge |
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 bullish Gartley is a reliable buy signal.”
What our data shows
On 3,256 daily occurrences, it moved in the expected direction 53.4% of the time, against 53.5% for random bars: no clear edge, since the average excess return is not statistically significant.
What you often read
“The bearish Gartley is a reliable sell signal.”
What our data shows
On 3,582 daily occurrences, it moved in the expected direction 46.2% of the time, against 46.0% for random bars: no clear edge, since the average excess return is not statistically significant.
On 3,241 closed trades on bullish setups on daily charts, all markets together, the 2:1 trade reached its target 34.6% of the time, against 34.8% for the same trade on random dates. On 3,565 closed trades on bearish setups, it was 25.9% against 25.7%. Neither setup beat random dates on the average result per trade (+0.15 R against +0.17 R, −0.13 R against −0.16 R): on daily charts, the Gartley did no better than chance. The classic target, the 0.618 retracement of AD, was reached in 39.9% of bullish daily setups and 28.7% of bearish ones. Our strict rule also misses some setups, especially in choppy markets: on simulated patterns with medium noise, it recovered about 65% of the bearish setups and 66% of the bullish ones, so these counts are what the bench detected, not every Gartley that formed.
Before trusting a success rate quoted for a harmonic pattern, check that it says how the setups were detected, on which markets, and how the result compares with chance.
What the bench measured
Every occurrence on full price history, in crypto, forex, US stocks, ETFs, indices and commodities, compared with the same trade placed on random dates on the same assets.
Table quoted in the text (verdicts and every market: see All measurements)
| Setup tested | Closed trades | 2:1 target hit | Same trade, random dates | Expectancy before costs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bullish, all markets, daily | 3,241 | 34.6% | 34.8% | +0.15 R vs +0.17 R |
| Bearish, all markets, daily | 3,565 | 25.9% | 25.7% | −0.13 R vs −0.16 R |
| Bullish, all markets, hourly | 7,444 | 27.2% | 28.6% | −0.01 R vs +0.01 R |
| Bullish, forex, hourly | 857 | 34.5% | 30.3% | +0.15 R vs +0.01 R |
Read each row in pairs: the setup against the same trade on random dates. On daily charts, the 2:1 trade reads No clear edge for both the bullish and the bearish Gartley. Forex is the only market where bullish setups showed a gap with the rest of their market that passes a simple test, on the 10-bar move on 4-hour charts only (promising). On hourly forex, the bullish 2:1 trade looks better than random dates in the table, by a gap that passes a simple test but not our correction (rated Promising). No gap of this kind survives our correction for multiple testing: with thousands of tests across markets, timeframes and patterns, a few results this size are expected by chance alone. The method is published in our methodology.
Advantages and disadvantages of harmonic trading
Advantages
- The whole plan is written before the trade, which makes losses easy to control.
- D sits at 0.786 of XA, so X is only 0.214 of XA away and the potential reward can be large compared with the loss.
- The ratios are exact: once the turning points are chosen, two people should compute the same D.
- It applies the same way to stock, forex and crypto markets, on every timeframe.
Disadvantages
- Perfect structures are rare, and it is tempting to stretch the ratios to find more.
- Turning points are chosen by eye, so two traders may label X differently.
- A limit order at D buys a falling price, with no sign yet of a turn.
- Our own test found no measurable edge on daily charts, all markets together.
Common mistakes when trading harmonic patterns
- Forcing the ratios: calling a B at 0.50 or 0.786 by this name. Those are other patterns, with other exits.
- Acting before D: the setup is only complete in the PRZ.
- Ignoring the larger trend: a long setup in a market making lower lows on the higher timeframe fights that trend (a filter our bench does not test).
- Moving the exit: once price passes X, the structure is invalid. Moving your exit to keep the trade alive turns a small loss into a large one.
- Remembering only the winners: on past charts, the setups that worked are easy to see. Keep a record of every one you would have traded.
Tools to find the Gartley pattern
Spotting the pattern by hand takes time, and it is easy to see patterns that are not there. The following tools help.
- XABCD drawing tool: TradingView includes one that shows the measures as you click.
- Scripts and indicators: the TradingView community library has free scripts that detect harmonic patterns automatically. Check which ratios and tolerances each one uses: results differ.
- Harmonic scanners: paid services (some with a free trial) scan many markets and send alerts when a setup completes. Test them on past data before paying.
Whatever the tool, practice for free on a demo account first: mark the last completed setups on your market, write the plan for each, and record the outcome.
Frequently asked questions about the Gartley pattern
Is the Gartley pattern a Fibonacci pattern?
Yes. It is called one because, in its modern form, point B sits at 0.618 of the first move and point D at 0.786. H.M. Gartley described the shape in 1935; Larry Pesavento and Scott Carney added the ratios later.
Is it bullish or bearish?
Both: the order at D follows the first move, up or down. One comes after a rise, the other after a decline.
What is the most powerful pattern in trading?
No pattern we test works everywhere. A few earn a Proven edge label on the 10-bar move on specific markets and timeframes, such as the bearish harami on daily charts, never across the board, and no 2:1 trade earns it anywhere; many classics, like the dragonfly doji on daily charts, read no clear edge. In our tests, the Gartley, the double top, the double bottom and the hammer did not show an edge that survives our statistical correction on daily data, once compared with random dates on the same assets.
Does it work in forex trading?
The method is the same on every market, forex included. On our bench, forex is the only market where bullish setups gave a lead, on the 10-bar move on 4-hour charts and on the 2:1 trade on hourly charts, without surviving our correction for multiple testing. Bearish forex setups also read promising on the 4-hour 10-bar move, again without surviving our correction; their daily 2:1 trade reads no clear edge, on only 36 trades. On hourly charts, 34.5% of 2:1 trades reached the target, against 30.3% on random dates, over 857 trades. The average result per trade (+0.15 R against +0.01 R) passes a simple test but not our correction: the row reads Promising.
What timeframe suits this setup?
None stood out on our bench: on all markets together, bullish setups reached the 2:1 target 27.2% of the time on hourly charts (random dates: 28.6%), 25.9% on 4-hour charts (28.2%) and 34.6% on daily charts (34.8%); in average result per trade, none differed measurably from random dates (daily: +0.15 R against +0.17 R).
Summary of key points
- The rules: B at 0.618 of the first move, C at 0.382 to 0.886 of the second move, D at 0.786 of the first move.
- The setup is invalid beyond X, which gives a natural exit.
- The position of point B separates the pattern from the Bat, the Butterfly and others.
- Tested on our bench with one fixed rule: on daily charts, all markets together, its average excess return did not differ measurably from the rest of the market, nor its average result per trade from random dates, in either direction.
This guide is general information about technical analysis and financial markets, not financial or investment advice. Trading carries a risk of loss: never trade money you cannot afford to lose.
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 applies the same published rules to 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. The Gartley rule (swings of 2, 4 or 8 times the average true range, ratios within 5%) was set from chart reviews, never tuned on results. Statistics on this page were generated on November 5, 2026. The full methodology explains every step.
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.