Weekly Trading Signal Results: 94% Average Accuracy by Points, +135,081 Net Points

The record at a glance: 25 published weeks

These are the real, published weekly trading signal results behind this site — the same numbers, week by week, that appear on the performance page. From 25 August 2025 to 3 July 2026 the service published 25 weekly reports covering gold, forex, oil, indices and crypto signals, every one with entry, take profit and stop loss.

The measure that matters in any results claim is not the best week but the whole ledger — winners, losers and the average across time. Weekly accuracy across the record ranged from 86.7% at the bottom to two perfect 100% weeks at the top, and every reported week closed with positive net points. That consistency, rather than any single headline number, is what the rest of this page unpacks. Here is the whole ledger:

What 'accuracy by points' means — and why we measure it that way

Most signal channels quote a win rate by trade count: ten wins out of twelve trades reads as 83%. The problem is that trade-count win rates are trivially easy to game — bank ten tiny winners of 20 points each, take two 300-point losses, and you can boast an 83% win rate on a week that actually lost money.

Accuracy by points closes that loophole. Each week we compare the points won against the points lost across all closed signals: a 94% weekly figure means the points banked by winners represented 94% of the total points moved that week. It weights every trade by its actual size, so small winners cannot paper over large losses. It is the same standard applied across every guide on this site, including the best trading signals pillar — and it is why the headline number and the net-points number always travel together.

A worked example from the record: the week of 8–12 June 2026 logged 33 winning trades against 4 losses and one break-even. By trade count that is a 89% win rate; by points it came out at 89.5%, because the losses were held small relative to the winners. When the two measures agree, risk is being managed; when a provider's win rate is high but they refuse to show net points, something is being hidden.

Month by month: how the +135,081 points accumulated

A single hot streak proves nothing — consistency across months is the real test. Here is the record aggregated by month, computed from the same weekly reports (months with reporting gaps show fewer weeks; gaps are gaps, and we show them rather than backfill them):

Two patterns stand out. First, no reported month closed negative — the leanest full month still added points. Second, the strongest stretches came in bursts: January and February 2026 together contributed more than +43,500 points as gold trended hard through US rate repricing, and June 2026 added +22,575 across four consecutive reported weeks. Trend-rich months flatter any signal service; the December and April figures are the more sober baseline to anchor expectations on.

The standout weeks — real numbers, not highlights reels

Some weeks deserve a closer look, at both ends. The strongest week on record was 2–6 February 2026: +15,960 net points at 97.5% accuracy, driven by gold and indices. The record also holds two perfect weeks — 100% accuracy with zero losing trades — in September 2025 and April 2026. The most recent published week (29 June – 3 July 2026) closed at +5,510 points and 92.9% accuracy: 22 winners, 3 losers, 6 break-even.

June 2026 is worth a note for anyone judging recency: four consecutive reported weeks ran +5,705, +4,385, +5,245 and +7,240 points at accuracies between 89.5% and 97.3% — solid rather than spectacular, which is exactly what a sustainable record looks like up close.

Every one of these is a historical result, not a projection. The point of listing them is verifiability: each row below exists as a published weekly report you can cross-check on the performance page.