The Capstone — Grading Key

This key grades The Capstone — One Simulated Week. Grade it decision by decision, not by whether the week "made money." The simulated week was built so that a student who follows the written rules finishes ahead — and a student who breaks them can still finish ahead on dollars while failing the Capstone. Process is the score.

Total: 100 points. Pass mark: 80. Partial credit: award half of a Decision Point's points when the method is right but the arithmetic slips, or the choice is right but the stated reason is wrong. Journal gate: any day with no journal entry caps that day's Decision Points at half credit, whatever the answers say.

A note on Decision Point 10: selling 41 of 83 shares is the model answer. Selling 42 and keeping 41 is equally acceptable if the student's math follows their own number — and Decision Point 15 is then graded against the student's carried figures, not the model's. Consistency is what is being tested.

Monday

Decision Point 1 — Size the Swing (10 points)

Model answer. Risk per share = entry − stop = $84 − $80 = $4.00. Shares = $250 ÷ $4.00 = 62.5 → 62 shares (always round DOWN — 63 shares risks $252, over the cap). Cost = 62 × $84 = $5,208. Planned risk = 62 × $4 = $248. Reward to target = 62 × ($96 − $84) = $744, a 3:1 reward-to-risk — acceptable for a swing.

Points: 4 for the share count with correct rounding · 3 for cost and dollar risk · 3 for the 3:1 judgment.

Common wrong answers:

• 63 shares ("62.5 rounds to 63") — reveals rounding toward more risk. The cap is a ceiling, not a target. Re-study: Risk Management A–Z.
• Sizing by cash ("$25,000 account, so buy $5,000 worth") — reveals the student sizes positions by dollars spent instead of dollars risked; the same habit buys 10× too much when the stop is far away. Re-study: Risk Management A–Z, then Examples: Swing Trades.
• Refusing the trade because the target is "too far" — reveals day-trader time horizons applied to a swing. Re-study: The Swing Framework.

Decision Point 2 — The Chase (5 points)

Model answer. Pass. VLTX has no plan, no base, and no definable support — so there is no stop, which means there is no position size, which means there is no trade. An 18% vertical move is also someone else's exit liquidity. The correct sentence in the journal is: "No stop = no size = no trade."

Points: 3 for passing · 2 for naming undefined risk as the reason.

Common wrong answers:

• A small "lottery ticket" position — reveals exception-making: rules that bend for exciting trades are not rules. Re-study: Trading Psychology & Discipline.
• Buying with a "mental stop" — reveals the student thinks a stop exists if they intend it. Intentions do not execute at 9:31 AM. Re-study: Risk Management A–Z and Trading Plan & Journal.

Decision Point 3 — The Stop Question (5 points)

Model answer. The stop stays at $80. Stops move only at pre-written triggers, and no trigger has fired — a +$2 first day is noise inside a $4 risk plan. Breakeven stops on day one mostly manufacture stop-outs on ordinary pullbacks. Journal entry records: 62 shares NWRO, filled $84.00, close $86.00, unrealized +$124.00, rules check: clean.

Points: 3 for leaving the stop · 2 for a complete journal entry.

Common wrong answers:

• Moving to $84 "for a free trade" — reveals outcome-thinking: the student is managing feelings about the entry price instead of the plan. Re-study: The Swing Framework.
• Moving the stop above entry to "lock in profit" — reveals the student doesn't see that a stop inside the noise band is a near-guaranteed exit at the worst moment. Re-study: Risk Management A–Z.

Tuesday

Decision Point 4 — Pick Your Structure (8 points)

Model answer. Structure A: max loss = $6.10 × 100 = $610; max gain = (20 − 6.10) × 100 = $1,390. The $610 loss breaks the $250 cap at the minimum possible size — A is ineligible, full stop. Structure B: max loss = $2.40 × 100 = $240 ✓; max gain = (10 − 2.40) × 100 = $760. Buy exactly 1 × Structure B for $240.

Points: 3 for rejecting A with its dollar math · 3 for B's max loss and max gain · 2 for choosing exactly one spread.

Common wrong answers:

• Choosing A "because it's more likely to win" — reveals probability talk being used to override a hard risk ceiling. Likelihood is not the constraint; survival is. Re-study: 0DTE Structures.
• Buying A and B ($850 total risk) — reveals the student treats each position's cap as separate from the account's. Re-study: 0DTE Risk Commandments.
• Two of Structure B ($480) — reveals the cap being treated as a suggestion once a trade "looks good." Re-study: 0DTE Risk Commandments.

Decision Point 5 — The Exit Rule (7 points)

Model answer. Sell at $4.90. The written plan said exit at 2× debit ($4.80) or 3:30 PM; the trigger fired at 1:15 PM. Profit = ($4.90 − $2.40) × 100 = +$250.00. That SPX closed higher is irrelevant — the exit rule was written before the emotion existed, precisely for this moment.

Points: 4 for exiting per the rule · 3 for the exact profit math.

Common wrong answers:

• Holding to the close "because the trend is strong" — reveals improvised exits: the student has entries planned and exits negotiated live, which is backwards. Re-study: The 0DTE Playbook.
• "Sell half" — of a one-spread position, this is impossible; it reveals the student doesn't track their own size. Re-study: 0DTE Structures.

Decision Point 6 — The Night Before CPI (5 points)

Model answer. Hold NWRO per plan — it was sized at 1% with a working stop, which is exactly the construction that lets you ignore a CPI morning. No new positions before the print, no 0DTE until after the release settles, no additions tonight. The one check: confirm NWRO has no earnings of its own this week (it reports next week — the event this week is its competitor's, Thursday).

Points: 2 for no adds and no pre-print trades · 2 for the position and stop left untouched · 1 for running the earnings-calendar check.

Common wrong answers:

• Selling NWRO "ahead of CPI chaos" — reveals event fear overriding a correctly sized position; the stop already prices the chaos. Re-study: What Moves Markets and Trading Earnings & IV Crush.
• Buying protective puts tonight without computing the cost — reveals hedging as a feeling. A costed hedge inside the risk cap, written into the plan, could earn partial credit; an unexamined one earns none. Re-study: Trading Earnings & IV Crush.

Wednesday

Decision Point 7 — Trading the Print (7 points)

Model answer. Pass — and the trade fails twice independently. (1) Size: $7.50 × 100 = $750 maximum loss, triple the $250 cap. (2) Process: your plan forbids trading the print's first spike — implied volatility is at its peak, spreads are at their widest, and SPX has already fallen 37 points from the close before you can act. Either reason alone kills the trade.

Points: 4 for passing · 3 for the reasons (full credit requires at least the size math; both reasons is the complete answer).

Common wrong answers:

• Buying "because hot CPI means a down day" — reveals headline trading: a narrative substituted for a plan, bought at the most expensive volatility of the week. Re-study: What Moves Markets.
• "Buy a third of a position" — reveals the student doesn't know spreads trade in whole contracts; the minimum size was the disqualifier. Re-study: 0DTE Structures.

Decision Point 8 — The Second Position (10 points)

Model answer. Risk per share = $52 − $49 = $3.00. Shares = $250 ÷ $3.00 = 83.3 → 83 shares. Cost = 83 × $52 = $4,316. Dollar risk = 83 × $3 = $249. The forgotten check — total open risk: NWRO $248 + HELX $249 = $497, well under the $1,250 cap. Reward-to-risk = $9 ÷ $3 = 3:1. Take the trade.

Points: 4 for the share math · 3 for the total-open-risk check · 3 for cost and the 3:1 confirmation.

Common wrong answers:

• Correct shares, no total-risk check — the answer coincides with the model, but the process has a hole that will matter on a fuller book. Half credit for this point's check portion. Re-study: Managing a Book of Swings.
• Sizing by position cost ("5% of the account = $1,250 → 24 shares") — reveals cost-based sizing again: the stop distance, not the budget line, sets size. Re-study: Risk Management A–Z.
• Refusing because "two positions is too many" — reveals an invented rule; the Academy caps risk in dollars, not position count. Re-study: Managing a Book of Swings.

Decision Point 9 — Hold, Sell, or Double? (6 points)

Model answer. (B) Hold per plan. The position was built for exactly this: 1% size, a stop at $80, and a written commitment (made at Decision Point 12's stage of the week) to exit at the open if the gap comes. The protection against Friday's gap was purchased on Monday — it's called position size. Selling tonight at $85.20 abandons a valid, above-entry position for a feeling; adding is event gambling.

Points: 4 for holding · 2 for articulating that size + pre-commitment is the protection.

Common wrong answers:

• (A) Sell "to be safe" — reveals risk-avoidance dressed as prudence. The position was already as safe as a swing position gets; the student is trading anxiety, not risk. Re-study: The Swing Framework and Trading Psychology & Discipline.
• (C) Add after it "survived CPI" — reveals survivorship thinking: one survived event is not evidence about the next one. Re-study: Managing a Book of Swings.

Thursday

Decision Point 10 — Execute the Rule (10 points)

Model answer. The trigger was +2R = $58.00; HELX printed $58.30. Sell half: 41 shares at $58.30 (half of 83, rounded down), proceeds $2,390.30. Realized profit = 41 × ($58.30 − $52.00) = 41 × $6.30 = +$258.30. Keep 42 shares; move their stop to $52.00 (breakeven). Open risk on HELX afterward: $0.

Points: 4 for selling half with the right share count · 3 for the realized-profit math · 3 for the stop move and the $0 remaining risk.

Common wrong answers:

• Selling all 83 — reveals the student treats a partial-profit rule as a full exit; the runner half was the entire point of the rule. Re-study: Position Trading & Trend Following.
• Holding all "because it's running" — the same broken rule in the other direction: the trigger fired and was negotiated away. Re-study: Position Trading & Trend Following.
• Moving the stop but forgetting the sale (or the reverse) — reveals checklist-free execution; the rule was a two-part instruction. Re-study: Trading Plan & Journal.

Decision Point 11 — The Trade That Fits the Cap (5 points)

Model answer. Pass. Yes, $180 fits the risk cap — but the cap is a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. This trade has no written plan, no defined thesis beyond "bounce," and was invented at 2:30 PM by watching a fading tape. It fails the plan test that Decision Points 2 and 7 were graded on.

Points: 3 for passing · 2 for naming "no plan" rather than the size as the deciding rule.

Common wrong answers:

• Taking it "because the risk is only $180" — reveals cap-only thinking: the student believes small size laundered an unplanned trade into a good one. Re-study: Trading Plan & Journal and The 0DTE Playbook.
• Taking the same idea on SPY "to be safe" — reveals wrapper-shopping: a different ticker doesn't convert an unplanned trade into a planned one. Re-study: Trading Psychology & Discipline.

Decision Point 12 — Write Friday's Plan Tonight (5 points)

Model answer. The plan must say, in substance: *Stop stays at $80. If NWRO gaps below $80 on the peer print, I exit all 62 shares at the opening print — whatever it is — with no renegotiation and no averaging down. If it holds above $80 or gaps up, I hold per the original plan. HELX: 42 shares, stop $52, no action needed.* Full credit requires the gap-down branch to be an unconditional exit written before the outcome is known.

Points: 3 for the explicit, unconditional gap-exit commitment · 2 for covering both branches and HELX.

Common wrong answers:

• "I'll decide in the morning based on how it looks" — reveals the student believes a decision deferred is a decision made; Friday's open allows about nine seconds of "looking." Re-study: Trading Plan & Journal.
• Widening the stop to $75 "to give it room" — reveals pre-event stop-widening: planned risk quietly becomes 62 × $9 = $558, more than double the cap, decided the night before a known catalyst. Re-study: Risk Management A–Z.

Friday

Decision Point 13 — The Gap Test (8 points)

Model answer. Exit all 62 shares at the $79.40 opening print, per last night's written plan. Realized = 62 × ($79.40 − $84.00) = 62 × (−$4.60) = −$285.20. That is $37.20 worse than the planned $248 loss: the gap jumped the stop by $0.60 a share, and the stop became a market order at the open. This is the known, priced-in cost of overnight event risk — and the reason the position was 1% in the first place. Note the day's realized loss, $285.20, still sits inside the $500 daily limit: no rule was broken by this loss. The loss was the plan working.

Points: 5 for exiting everything at the open · 3 for the realized math including the gap explanation.

Common wrong answers:

• Holding "because it will bounce" — reveals hope substituted for the exit written twelve hours earlier. This is the single most expensive sentence in trading. Re-study: Examples: Risk Disasters & Saves and Trading Psychology & Discipline.
• Averaging down at $79.40 — reveals the student doubling a broken position into options expiration, converting a planned 1% loss into an unplanned campaign. Re-study: Risk Management A–Z and Examples: Risk Disasters & Saves.
• Selling half — reveals half-measures against a written exit; the plan did not say "exit the shares you feel like." Re-study: The Swing Framework.

Decision Point 14 — Free Money? (4 points)

Model answer. Pass. A naked short call has undefined risk — there is no price at which the loss stops, and Academy rules ban undefined-risk structures at any size. "Pinned" is a tendency options expiration creates, not a law of physics; one headline un-pins it, and the seller of that call owns all of the un-pinning. There was also no plan for this trade — it fails that test too.

Points: 2 for passing · 2 for the undefined-risk reason.

Common wrong answers:

• Selling it "small" — reveals the belief that size fixes structure. Naked is naked at one contract; many brokers will not even permit the position in an account this size. Re-study: Options Part 4: Risk & 0DTE.

• Selling a defined-risk call spread instead — the instinct toward defined risk is right, but inventing a new structure at 1:00 PM on expiration day is still unplanned trading. Maximum half credit. Re-study: The 0DTE Playbook.

Decision Point 15 — Close the Books (5 points)

Model answer (using the model's 41-share sale at Decision Point 10):

• Realized P&L: Tuesday spread +$250.00 · Thursday HELX half +$258.30 · Friday NWRO −$285.20 → total +$223.10
• Cash: $23,039.10
• Still held: 42 shares HELX at the $56.60 close = $2,377.20, unrealized +$193.20, stop at $52.00 → remaining open risk $0
• Ending account value: $23,039.10 + $2,377.20 = $25,416.30 — up +$416.30, +1.67% on the week
• Review: the money was made by two written rules (the 2× exit, the 2R half-off); the only loss came from a known gap risk that had been sized at 1% on Monday; the rule that mattered most was the pre-commitment — every hard decision of the week had been made the night before it was needed.

Points: 2 for the realized total · 2 for the ending account value · 1 for the open-risk statement and review.

Common wrong answers:

• Realized = +$508.30 — Friday's loss quietly dropped from the books; reveals a ledger kept from memory instead of records. Re-study: Trading Journal Pages.
• HELX carried at its $52 cost — reveals the student doesn't mark positions to market; an account statement never asks what you paid. Re-study: How Trading Actually Works.
• Counting the +$193.20 unrealized as realized profit — reveals the two ledgers are blended; money you could lose back tomorrow is not money banked. Re-study: How Trading Actually Works.

The Model Ledger

Cash audit trail: $25,000.00 − $5,208.00 (NWRO) − $240.00 (spread) + $490.00 (spread exit) − $4,316.00 (HELX) + $2,390.30 (HELX half) + $4,922.80 (NWRO exit) = $23,039.10. ✓

Reading the Score

• 90–100 — Board-ready. The rules held under every pressure the week applies. Proceed to live size only at the smallest rung, per the Academy's progression.
• 80–89 — Pass. Re-study the specific module codes flagged beside your misses before trading the pattern live; your errors are local, not structural.
• 60–79 — Not yet. Do not re-attempt immediately. Read the pattern of your misses (below), re-study those modules, and re-run the week in a month.
• Below 60 — Return to the Practice Pack workbooks (Workbook 1: Foundations → Workbook 5: Risk, Psychology & Rules) and Level 2 before re-attempting. The Capstone found a foundation gap, which is what it is for.

Diagnose by pattern, not by total:

• Misses concentrated in sizing (Points 1, 4, 8) → Risk Management A–Z + Workbook 5: Risk, Psychology & Rules, then Examples: Swing Trades.
• Misses concentrated in discipline (Points 3, 5, 9, 10, 12) → Trading Plan & Journal + The 0DTE Playbook + The Weekly Swing Routine.
• Misses concentrated in events (Points 6, 7, 13) → What Moves Markets + Trading Earnings & IV Crush + The Swing Framework.
• Misses concentrated in refusal (Points 2, 11, 14) → Trading Psychology & Discipline + Examples: Risk Disasters & Saves.