Skip to main content

Research · Pattern studies · Falling Wedge

ChartDatabase Research · Chart pattern study

Falling Wedge Pattern

Timeframe

1h timeframe — 11553 snapshots across 662 Binance USDT‑M futures markets — bullish bias. Results are not mixed with other candle intervals.

Abstract

Falling Wedge statistics on the 1h timeframe only (n=11553). Timeframes are analyzed separately and never pooled — 15m, 1h, 4h, and 1d horizons are not interchangeable. Use the timeframe control under the title to switch. Exclusive breakout / breakdown / sideways: 72.31% / 24.69% / 3.0%.

Keywords Falling Wedge patternFalling Wedge breakoutFalling Wedge cryptohow to trade Falling WedgeFalling Wedge success ratefalling wedge bullishcrypto chart patternschart pattern success rate

Key results (1h only)

Key findings
  1. Falling Wedge on 1h: n=11,553 snapshots across 662 coins — breakout 72.31%, breakdown 24.69%, sideways 3.0% (exclusive classes; not pooled with other timeframes).
  2. Expected-direction (bullish) hit rate on 1h: 72.31%.
  3. Mean max-up / max-down on 1h: 4.842% / -4.021% (MFE÷|MAE| ≈ 1.204); median 20-candle close return 0.72%.
Snapshots
11553
Coins
662unique symbols
Hit rate
72.31%expected direction
Breakout
72.31%exclusive
Breakdown
24.69%exclusive
Sideways
3.0%neither
Median ret.
0.72%
MFE ÷ |MAE|
1.204

Scope for this pattern

  • Exchange / market: Binance USD-M Futures (perpetual contracts).
  • Pattern end: For Falling Wedge, pattern end is the last candle still inside the projected trendline channel after formation: closes may not breach support/resistance by more than 0.5× NATR(14). Features and the next-20-candle outcomes are taken from that last in-band candle, and breakout/breakdown is evaluated on confirmed closes.
  • Active timeframe: 1h only — other intervals (15m, 1h, 4h, 1d) are available via the control under the title and are never mixed into these figures.
  • Outcome horizon: next 20 candles on the selected timeframe. Headline KPIs use pattern-end snapshots: mutually exclusive breakout / breakdown / sideways vs 1.0× NATR(14). Fuel and RSI bins on trendline families also report Forming (still inside the lines).

Results (1h)

Return distribution

All figures below are for Falling Wedge on the 1h timeframe only (n=11553). Timeframes are never pooled — a 15m candle horizon is not comparable to 1d. Mean return 0.459%, median 0.72%; exclusive breakout / breakdown / sideways 72.31% / 24.69% / 3.0%. Mean MFE / MAE 4.842% / -4.021%.

Figure 1. 20-candle close return (%) for Falling Wedge on 1h, clipped to ±16%.

Wick max-up / max-down over the same 20-candle window, expressed as NATR multiples. Sideways is not a spike at 0.

Figure 1b. 20-candle wick max-up (×NATR) on 1h.

Figure 1c. 20-candle wick max-down (×NATR).

Distribution statistics

  • Mean return: 0.459%
  • Median: 0.72% (P25 -2.189 · P75 3.241)
  • Std. deviation: 6.181%
  • Win rate (ret > 0): 57.48%
  • Mean MFE / MAE: 4.842% / -4.021%
  • Median max-up / max-down (×NATR): 2.18 / -1.198
  • Sideways rate: 3.0% (pattern-end unresolved; not a zero-move class; see ×NATR histograms)
  • Both-cleared (pre-label): 32.61%

Fuel volume & momentum scores

Fuel volume and momentum scores below use only Falling Wedge snapshots on 1h. Zones match the live Fuel gauge (Dead Water / Organic Flow / The Powder Keg); each zone reports mean max-up / max-down over the next 20 1h candles.

Active timeframe: 1h — switch with the buttons under the pattern title.

Breakout Breakdown Sideways Forming

volume_score (n=23732; forming + terminal snapshots)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 23,732 snapshots with recorded Fuel volume score (closed-candle volume vs SMA20 at the live snapshot) are partitioned into Fuel gauge zones (Dead Water / Organic Flow / The Powder Keg). Exclusive breakout rates run from 63.58% in Dead Water (0.00–0.33) to 49.83% in The Powder Keg (0.67–1.00), a substantial difference of -13.75 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 23.70% to 36.95% (+13.25 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 2.06% to 0.31% (-1.75 percentage points). Forming (still inside the lines) moves from 10.66% to 12.91% (+2.25 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 63.58% in Dead Water to 49.83% in The Powder Keg (-13.75 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in The Powder Keg (5.102%), compared with 4.211% in Dead Water and 5.102% in The Powder Keg. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 16% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on Fuel volume score (closed-candle volume vs SMA20 at the live snapshot) alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Dead Water0.00–0.33
n=11773
BO 63.58% BD 23.7% SW 2.06% FM 10.66%
Organic Flow0.34–0.66
n=8062
BO 57.11% BD 29.83% SW 1.13% FM 11.93%
The Powder Keg0.67–1.00
n=3897
BO 49.83% BD 36.95% SW 0.31% FM 12.91%

Falling Wedge outcomes by Fuel volume score.

Empirical density of volume score for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip).

Distribution of Fuel volume score.

volume_score Fuel-zone stats (max-up / max-down).
Zone Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW % FM %
Dead Water 0.00–0.33 11773 4.211 -4.152 63.58 23.7 2.06 10.66
Organic Flow 0.34–0.66 8062 4.571 -4.289 57.11 29.83 1.13 11.93
The Powder Keg 0.67–1.00 3897 5.102 -4.34 49.83 36.95 0.31 12.91

momentum_score (n=23732; forming + terminal snapshots)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 23,732 snapshots with recorded Fuel momentum score (RSI / ROC energy at the live snapshot, not direction) are partitioned into Fuel gauge zones (Dead Water / Organic Flow / The Powder Keg). Exclusive breakout rates run from 63.74% in Organic Flow (0.34–0.66) to 48.75% in The Powder Keg (0.67–1.00), a substantial difference of -14.99 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 23.66% to 37.63% (+13.97 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 1.86% to 0.55% (-1.31 percentage points). Forming (still inside the lines) moves from 10.74% to 13.07% (+2.33 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 63.74% in Organic Flow to 48.75% in The Powder Keg (-14.99 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in The Powder Keg (5.854%), compared with 3.868% in Organic Flow and 5.854% in The Powder Keg. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 23% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on Fuel momentum score (RSI / ROC energy at the live snapshot, not direction) alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Organic Flow0.34–0.66
n=16427
BO 63.74% BD 23.66% SW 1.86% FM 10.74%
The Powder Keg0.67–1.00
n=7305
BO 48.75% BD 37.63% SW 0.55% FM 13.07%

Falling Wedge outcomes by Fuel momentum score.

Empirical density of momentum score for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip).

Distribution of Fuel momentum score.

momentum_score Fuel-zone stats (max-up / max-down).
Zone Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW % FM %
Organic Flow 0.34–0.66 16427 3.868 -4.251 63.74 23.66 1.86 10.74
The Powder Keg 0.67–1.00 7305 5.854 -4.18 48.75 37.63 0.55 13.07

Feature distributions vs max-up / max-down

Feature bins below use only Falling Wedge snapshots on 1h. Each bin reports mean max-up (MFE) and mean max-down (MAE) over the next 20 1h candles.

Active timeframe: 1h — switch with the buttons under the pattern title.

Breakout Breakdown Sideways Forming

rsi_14 (n=23732; forming + terminal snapshots)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 23,732 snapshots with recorded 14-period Relative Strength Index at the live snapshot are split into feature quartiles. Exclusive breakout rates run from 44.77% in the lowest quartile (10–30; 10–30) to 37.50% in the highest (70–90; 70–90), a substantial difference of -7.27 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 37.48% to 18.75% (-18.73 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 0.43% to 0.00% (-0.43 percentage points). Forming (still inside the lines) moves from 17.32% to 43.75% (+26.43 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 44.77% in 10–30 to 37.50% in 70–90 (-7.27 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in 10–30 (6.579%), compared with 6.579% in 10–30 and 3.816% in 70–90. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 10% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on 14-period Relative Strength Index at the live snapshot alone does not isolate a trading rule.

10–30
n=2113
BO 44.77% BD 37.48% SW 0.43% FM 17.32%
30–50
n=15946
BO 61.39% BD 29.81% SW 1.47% FM 7.33%
50–70
n=5657
BO 58.16% BD 19.2% SW 1.82% FM 20.82%
70–90
n=16
BO 37.5% BD 18.75% SW 0.0% FM 43.75%

Falling Wedge outcomes by rsi 14.

The histogram shows the empirical density of rsi 14 for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of 14-period Relative Strength Index at the live snapshot.

rsi_14 bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW % FM %
10–30 10–30 2113 6.579 -3.18 44.77 37.48 0.43 17.32
30–50 30–50 15946 4.621 -4.081 61.39 29.81 1.47 7.33
50–70 50–70 5657 3.298 -5.032 58.16 19.2 1.82 20.82
70–90 70–90 16 3.816 -6.916 37.5 18.75 0.0 43.75

geom_height (n=11553; last snapshot per formation)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 11,553 snapshots with recorded pattern height (price span of the formation) are partitioned into log-transformed mean ± σ bands (below typical / typical / elevated / extreme). Exclusive breakout rates run from 70.97% in Below typical (1.02 – 5.39) to 74.03% in Extreme (31.4 – 145), a material difference of +3.06 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 27.28% to 18.83% (-8.45 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 1.75% to 7.14% (+5.39 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 70.97% in Below typical to 74.03% in Extreme (+3.06 percentage points; material shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in Extreme (9.673%), compared with 3.122% in Below typical and 9.673% in Extreme. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 19% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on pattern height (price span of the formation) alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Below typical1.02 – 5.39
n=1822
BO 70.97% BD 27.28% SW 1.75%
Typical5.39 – 17.9
n=8023
BO 72.3% BD 24.8% SW 2.9%
Elevated17.9 – 31.4
n=1400
BO 73.71% BD 22.0% SW 4.29%
Extreme31.4 – 145
n=308
BO 74.03% BD 18.83% SW 7.14%

Falling Wedge outcomes by height.

The histogram shows the empirical density of height for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of pattern height.

geom_height bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW %
Below typical 1.02 – 5.39 1822 3.122 -2.956 70.97 27.28 1.75
Typical 5.39 – 17.9 8023 4.701 -4.008 72.3 24.8 2.9
Elevated 17.9 – 31.4 1400 6.821 -4.936 73.71 22.0 4.29
Extreme 31.4 – 145 308 9.673 -6.493 74.03 18.83 7.14

geom_width (n=11553; last snapshot per formation)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 11,553 snapshots with recorded pattern width (duration in candles) are partitioned into mean ± σ bands (below typical / typical / elevated / extreme). Exclusive breakout rates run from 72.40% in Below typical (19 – 60.8) to 62.73% in Extreme (173 – 188), a substantial difference of -9.67 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 24.49% to 30.75% (+6.26 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 3.11% to 6.52% (+3.41 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 72.40% in Below typical to 62.73% in Extreme (-9.67 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in Extreme (5.235%), compared with 4.679% in Below typical and 5.235% in Extreme. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 10% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on pattern width (duration in candles) alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Below typical19 – 60.8
n=2029
BO 72.4% BD 24.49% SW 3.11%
Typical60.8 – 135
n=7375
BO 72.85% BD 24.52% SW 2.63%
Elevated135 – 173
n=1827
BO 71.7% BD 24.58% SW 3.72%
Extreme173 – 188
n=322
BO 62.73% BD 30.75% SW 6.52%

Falling Wedge outcomes by width.

The histogram shows the empirical density of width for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of pattern width.

geom_width bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW %
Below typical 19 – 60.8 2029 4.679 -3.701 72.4 24.49 3.11
Typical 60.8 – 135 7375 4.821 -4.108 72.85 24.52 2.63
Elevated 135 – 173 1827 5.035 -3.995 71.7 24.58 3.72
Extreme 173 – 188 322 5.235 -4.183 62.73 30.75 6.52

extension_progress (n=23732; forming + terminal snapshots)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 23,732 snapshots with recorded extension candles divided by original formation width are partitioned into log-transformed mean ± σ bands (below typical / typical / elevated / extreme). Exclusive breakout rates run from 58.02% in Typical (-0.0154 – 0.104) to 62.34% in Extreme (0.17 – 0.746), a material difference of +4.32 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 27.70% to 32.99% (+5.29 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 1.19% to 3.46% (+2.27 percentage points). Forming (still inside the lines) moves from 13.09% to 1.21% (-11.88 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 58.02% in Typical to 62.34% in Extreme (+4.32 percentage points; material shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in Extreme (4.638%), compared with 4.465% in Typical and 4.638% in Extreme. The value histogram is concentrated toward lower extension candles divided by original formation width readings (peak bin ≈ 51% of mass), with a thinner right-hand tail. Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on extension candles divided by original formation width alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Typical-0.0154 – 0.104
n=20674
BO 58.02% BD 27.7% SW 1.19% FM 13.09%
Elevated0.104 – 0.17
n=1988
BO 68.81% BD 27.97% SW 3.22% FM 0.0%
Extreme0.17 – 0.746
n=1070
BO 62.34% BD 32.99% SW 3.46% FM 1.21%

Falling Wedge outcomes by Formation age.

The histogram shows the empirical density of Formation age for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of extension candles divided by original formation width.

extension_progress bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW % FM %
Typical -0.0154 – 0.104 20674 4.465 -4.233 58.02 27.7 1.19 13.09
Elevated 0.104 – 0.17 1988 4.544 -4.21 68.81 27.97 3.22 0.0
Extreme 0.17 – 0.746 1070 4.638 -4.2 62.34 32.99 3.46 1.21

geom_resistance_slope (n=11553; last snapshot per formation)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 11,553 snapshots with recorded slope of the resistance line bounding the pattern are split into feature quartiles. Exclusive breakout rates run from 79.58% in the lowest quartile (Q1; -0.952 – -0.205) to 64.99% in the highest (Q4; -0.101 – -0.018), a substantial difference of -14.59 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 16.41% to 32.58% (+16.17 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 4.01% to 2.43% (-1.58 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 79.58% in Q1 to 64.99% in Q4 (-14.59 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in Q1 (7.046%), compared with 7.046% in Q1 and 3.280% in Q4. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 17% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on slope of the resistance line bounding the pattern alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Q1-0.952 – -0.205
n=2889
BO 79.58% BD 16.41% SW 4.01%
Q2-0.205 – -0.144
n=2888
BO 74.2% BD 22.75% SW 3.05%
Q3-0.144 – -0.101
n=2888
BO 70.46% BD 27.04% SW 2.5%
Q4-0.101 – -0.018
n=2888
BO 64.99% BD 32.58% SW 2.43%

Falling Wedge outcomes by resistance slope.

The histogram shows the empirical density of resistance slope for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of slope of the resistance line bounding the pattern.

geom_resistance_slope bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW %
Q1 -0.952 – -0.205 2889 7.046 -4.32 79.58 16.41 4.01
Q2 -0.205 – -0.144 2888 4.969 -4.364 74.2 22.75 3.05
Q3 -0.144 – -0.101 2888 4.072 -3.835 70.46 27.04 2.5
Q4 -0.101 – -0.018 2888 3.28 -3.565 64.99 32.58 2.43

geom_support_slope (n=11553; last snapshot per formation)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 11,553 snapshots with recorded slope of the support line bounding the pattern are split into feature quartiles. Exclusive breakout rates run from 80.48% in the lowest quartile (Q1; -0.841 – -0.132) to 64.23% in the highest (Q4; -0.0483 – -0.01), a substantial difference of -16.25 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 15.33% to 33.80% (+18.47 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 4.19% to 1.97% (-2.22 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 80.48% in Q1 to 64.23% in Q4 (-16.25 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in Q1 (6.797%), compared with 6.797% in Q1 and 3.444% in Q4. The value histogram piles up toward higher readings (peak bin ≈ 17% of mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on slope of the support line bounding the pattern alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Q1-0.841 – -0.132
n=2889
BO 80.48% BD 15.33% SW 4.19%
Q2-0.132 – -0.0817
n=2888
BO 75.07% BD 21.78% SW 3.15%
Q3-0.0817 – -0.0483
n=2888
BO 69.46% BD 27.87% SW 2.67%
Q4-0.0483 – -0.01
n=2888
BO 64.23% BD 33.8% SW 1.97%

Falling Wedge outcomes by support slope.

The histogram shows the empirical density of support slope for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of slope of the support line bounding the pattern.

geom_support_slope bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW %
Q1 -0.841 – -0.132 2889 6.797 -4.335 80.48 15.33 4.19
Q2 -0.132 – -0.0817 2888 4.902 -4.057 75.07 21.78 3.15
Q3 -0.0817 – -0.0483 2888 4.223 -3.929 69.46 27.87 2.67
Q4 -0.0483 – -0.01 2888 3.444 -3.762 64.23 33.8 1.97

btc_dist14_mean (n=23732; forming + terminal snapshots)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 23,732 snapshots with recorded BTC last-14 mean distance are split into feature quartiles. Exclusive breakout rates run from 61.57% in the lowest quartile (Q1; -7.34 – -0.402) to 50.15% in the highest (Q4; 0.643 – 11.1), a substantial difference of -11.42 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 20.76% to 38.20% (+17.44 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 1.52% to 0.73% (-0.79 percentage points). Forming (still inside the lines) moves from 16.15% to 10.92% (-5.23 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 61.57% in Q1 to 50.15% in Q4 (-11.42 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in Q4 (5.599%), compared with 4.082% in Q1 and 5.599% in Q4. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 23% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on BTC last-14 mean distance alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Q1-7.34 – -0.402
n=5938
BO 61.57% BD 20.76% SW 1.52% FM 16.15%
Q2-0.402 – 0.0575
n=5928
BO 64.69% BD 22.93% SW 2.14% FM 10.24%
Q30.0575 – 0.643
n=5934
BO 60.08% BD 29.95% SW 1.44% FM 8.53%
Q40.643 – 11.1
n=5932
BO 50.15% BD 38.2% SW 0.73% FM 10.92%

Falling Wedge outcomes by btc mean.

The histogram shows the empirical density of btc mean for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of BTC last-14 mean distance.

btc_dist14_mean bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW % FM %
Q1 -7.34 – -0.402 5938 4.082 -4.372 61.57 20.76 1.52 16.15
Q2 -0.402 – 0.0575 5928 3.894 -4.173 64.69 22.93 2.14 10.24
Q3 0.0575 – 0.643 5934 4.343 -3.872 60.08 29.95 1.44 8.53
Q4 0.643 – 11.1 5932 5.599 -4.501 50.15 38.2 0.73 10.92

current_scale_number (n=23732; forming + terminal snapshots)

Within Falling Wedge (1h), 23,732 snapshots with recorded position in the live channel (0 at support, 1 at resistance, >1 breakout) are split into feature quartiles. Exclusive breakout rates run from 49.82% in the lowest quartile (Q1; -311 – 0) to 90.61% in the highest (Q4; 1.02 – 1.13e+03), a substantial difference of +40.79 percentage points. Breakdown rates shift from 37.52% to 5.11% (-32.41 percentage points), while sideways incidence moves from 0.16% to 4.01% (+3.85 percentage points). Forming (still inside the lines) moves from 12.50% to 0.27% (-12.23 percentage points). Expected-direction hit rate moves from 49.82% in Q1 to 90.61% in Q4 (+40.79 percentage points; substantial shift). Mean maximum favorable excursion is highest in Q1 (5.961%), compared with 5.961% in Q1 and 4.862% in Q4. The value histogram is unimodal around mid-range values (peak bin ≈ 41% of observed mass). Taken together, these contrasts speak to association strength rather than causal effect: conditioning on position in the live channel (0 at support, 1 at resistance, >1 breakout) alone does not isolate a trading rule.

Q1-311 – 0
n=6066
BO 49.82% BD 37.52% SW 0.16% FM 12.5%
Q20 – 1
n=11393
BO 46.79% BD 35.45% SW 0.73% FM 17.03%
Q31 – 1.02
n=340
BO 88.82% BD 5.0% SW 4.42% FM 1.76%
Q41.02 – 1.13e+03
n=5933
BO 90.61% BD 5.11% SW 4.01% FM 0.27%

Falling Wedge outcomes by Pattern scale.

The histogram shows the empirical density of Pattern scale for this timeframe (1st–99th percentile clip where continuous).

Distribution of position in the live channel.

current_scale_number bin stats (max-up / max-down).
Bin Range n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ BO % BD % SW % FM %
Q1 -311 – 0 6066 5.961 -3.014 49.82 37.52 0.16 12.5
Q2 0 – 1 11393 3.465 -5.531 46.79 35.45 0.73 17.03
Q3 1 – 1.02 340 5.349 -2.839 88.82 5.0 4.42 1.76
Q4 1.02 – 1.13e+03 5933 4.862 -3.052 90.61 5.11 4.01 0.27

Timeframe comparison

Side-by-side comparison across timeframes for Falling Wedge. Each column is an independent sample — use it to contrast horizons, not as a pooled average.

Table. Falling Wedge comparative outcomes by timeframe.
TF n Mean ↑ Mean ↓ ↑/|↓| Hit % BO % BD % SW %
15m 4998 2.367 -1.671 1.417 72.85 72.85 24.17 2.98
1h 11553 4.842 -4.021 1.204 72.31 72.31 24.69 3.0
4h 4246 12.675 -7.889 1.607 71.03 71.03 26.35 2.62
1d 705 32.412 -15.612 2.076 75.18 75.18 22.55 2.27

Feature correlations

Within Falling Wedge on 1h, the strongest absolute Spearman correlate of breakout is current_scale_number (ρ = 0.5367***). Ranks use pattern geometry, momentum, and BTC-context features. * p<0.05 · ** p<0.01 · *** p<0.001.

vs Breakout success

Table 1. Top breakout correlates.
Featureρpn
current_scale_number *** 0.5367 0.0 11553
rsi_14 *** 0.4363 0.0 11553
btc_dist14_mean *** -0.2876 0.0 11553
momentum_score *** -0.2783 0.0 11553
volume_score *** -0.1895 0.0 11553
geom_support_slope *** -0.141 0.0 11553
geom_resistance_slope *** -0.1234 0.0 11553
extension_candle_offset *** -0.0639 0.0 11553
extension_progress *** -0.0571 0.0 11553
geom_height 0.0185 0.046832 11553
geom_width -0.0135 0.147099 11553

vs Breakdown success

Table 2. Top breakdown correlates.
Featureρpn
current_scale_number *** -0.5809 0.0 11553
rsi_14 *** -0.4748 0.0 11553
btc_dist14_mean *** 0.3145 0.0 11553
momentum_score *** 0.3062 0.0 11553
volume_score *** 0.2228 0.0 11553
geom_support_slope *** 0.1652 0.0 11553
geom_resistance_slope *** 0.1434 0.0 11553
extension_candle_offset *** 0.0545 0.0 11553
extension_progress *** 0.052 0.0 11553
geom_height -0.0413 0.000009 11553
geom_width 0.0055 0.557802 11553
Table 3. Top correlates of 20-candle close return.
Featureρpn
current_scale_number *** 0.1168 0.0 11553
geom_resistance_slope *** -0.1156 0.0 11553
geom_support_slope *** -0.1145 0.0 11553
btc_dist14_mean *** -0.0892 0.0 11553
rsi_14 *** 0.0788 0.0 11553
geom_height *** 0.0683 0.0 11553
extension_progress *** -0.0604 0.0 11553
volume_score *** -0.0559 0.0 11553
extension_candle_offset *** -0.0509 0.0 11553
momentum_score -0.0319 0.000605 11553
geom_width 0.0119 0.200361 11553
Table 3b. Top correlates of 20-candle max-up (MFE).
Featureρpn
geom_resistance_slope *** -0.3148 0.0 11553
geom_support_slope *** -0.2791 0.0 11553
geom_height *** 0.2543 0.0 11553
current_scale_number *** 0.1521 0.0 11553
rsi_14 *** 0.1253 0.0 11553
btc_dist14_mean *** -0.1071 0.0 11553
extension_progress *** -0.0619 0.0 11553
extension_candle_offset *** -0.0549 0.0 11553
volume_score *** -0.0548 0.0 11553
momentum_score 0.0264 0.004572 11553
geom_width 0.0129 0.165372 11553
Table 3c. Top correlates of 20-candle max-down (MAE).
Featureρpn
current_scale_number *** 0.2236 0.0 11553
rsi_14 *** 0.204 0.0 11553
momentum_score *** -0.1873 0.0 11553
btc_dist14_mean *** -0.1793 0.0 11553
volume_score *** -0.1103 0.0 11553
geom_height *** -0.1103 0.0 11553
geom_resistance_slope *** 0.0689 0.0 11553
extension_progress *** -0.0565 0.0 11553
extension_candle_offset -0.0446 0.000002 11553
geom_support_slope 0.0342 0.000239 11553
geom_width 0.0169 0.069714 11553

Outcome mix by timeframe

Exclusive breakout / breakdown / sideways rates by candle timeframe (hover for exact values).

Figure 2. Stacked exclusive outcome rates by timeframe.

Timeframe breakdown

Table 6. Falling Wedge split by timeframe.
TF n Coins Hit % BO % BD % SW % Med % Mean %
15m 4998 555 72.85 72.85 24.17 2.98 0.335 0.373
1h 11553 662 72.31 72.31 24.69 3.0 0.72 0.459
4h 4246 622 71.03 71.03 26.35 2.62 0.777 0.438
1d 705 368 75.18 75.18 22.55 2.27 1.891 4.257

Methods note

Shared methodology (expand)

Pattern end for this study: For Falling Wedge, pattern end is the last candle still inside the projected trendline channel after formation: closes may not breach support/resistance by more than 0.5× NATR(14). Features and the next-20-candle outcomes are taken from that last in-band candle, and breakout/breakdown is evaluated on confirmed closes.

Outcomes use mutually exclusive classes over the next 20 candles. Headline KPIs and geometry bins are pattern-end: breakout, breakdown, or sideways vs 1.0× NATR(14). On trendline families, Fuel / RSI bins add Forming (still inside the lines). Correlations are Spearman with two-sided p-values. See the research hub methods for universe, how every pattern family defines pattern end, dedupe keys, and limitations.

Exclusive class: upside clears +1× natr_14 within 20 candles before downside.
Exclusive class: downside clears −1× natr_14 within 20 candles before upside.
Pattern-end (terminal) unresolved class: neither +1× nor −1× natr_14 cleared within 20 candles after the breached candle. Headline KPIs, ranks, and geometry bins use this sample; Forming is not in that formula. Sideways is not a zero-move class; typical wick travel inside the bands is reported as ×NATR max-up / max-down.
Trendline families only, and only on non-terminal snapshots still inside the lines: neither side tagged within 20 candles. Age-balanced Fuel / RSI / point-in-time bins add Forming so four exclusive classes sum to 100%. Forming-only trees (live still-inside matches) use breakout + breakdown + forming = 100%.
$$\mathrm{Sideways}\iff\text{terminal and no }\pm 1.0\times\mathrm{NATR}\text{ tag within }20\text{ candles}$$

Labels use ground-truth path outcomes (outcome_label / target_first_hit from full kline OHLC path). Trendline families evaluate confirmed candle closes against projected support/resistance bands. Unresolved non-terminal trendline snapshots are Forming; unresolved terminal snapshots are Sideways. Double/triple bottoms require breaking the bottom support floor for breakdown. Head & shoulders evaluate from neckline confirmation. Same-bar dual clears resolve via open proximity, then candle body polarity, then return sign. Pattern-end headline rates: breakout + breakdown + sideways = 100%. Forming+terminal Fuel/RSI bins: breakout + breakdown + sideways + forming = 100%.

Limitations & disclosures

  1. This is a historical, in-sample statistical study — not a forward-tested trading strategy. It excludes exchange fees, funding rates, slippage, and execution timing, all of which affect real trading outcomes. A fixed temporal holdout split is reported in methodology for transparency; thresholds are not retuned on the holdout window.
  2. The dataset covers Binance USD-M perpetual futures only. Results may not generalize to spot markets, other exchanges, or lower-liquidity assets with different microstructure.
  3. Confidence and recency filters were switched off while building the dataset, so figures reflect the detector’s raw geometric/RSI trigger rate — not the filtered, higher-conviction signals surfaced live to subscribers.
  4. Exclusive breakout / breakdown / sideways labels use the first ±1.0× NATR threshold (or pattern-specific structural boundary) touched in candle order over the 20-candle forward horizon (target_first_hit / outcome_label). Trendline families evaluate confirmed candle closes against projected support/resistance bands. Double/triple bottoms require breaking the bottom support floor for breakdown. Head & shoulders evaluate from neckline confirmation. Same-bar dual clears resolve via open gap / nearer threshold from open, then candle body direction.
  5. Overlapping detections were deduplicated on formation start (longest span kept), but different pattern families can still fire on the same underlying move, so correlated market regimes (e.g. one broad rally) can inflate sample counts across several pattern types simultaneously.
  6. Spearman tables use Benjamini–Hochberg FDR q-values; stars also require |ρ| ≥ 0.05. Large samples can still make tiny associations look noteworthy without being economically meaningful. Primary correlations and lifts are within a single timeframe; multi-TF pooled tables are exploratory only.

Glossary

Bull flag / bullish flag
Common search names for the bullish flag chart pattern: a sharp advance (the pole) followed by a downward-sloping or rectangular consolidation. See the Bullish Flag pattern study for breakout statistics.
Head and shoulders pattern
A three-peak reversal pattern (left shoulder, head, right shoulder) with a neckline. Traders search this as “head and shoulders crypto” as well as the full name. See the Head and Shoulders study for exclusive breakdown rates.
Falling wedge bullish
A common query for the falling wedge: converging down-sloping trendlines often treated as a bullish continuation or reversal. See the Falling Wedge study.
Cup and handle pattern
A rounded-bottom continuation pattern with a shallow handle. Also searched as “cup and handle crypto”. See the Cup and Handle study for breakout rates.
Fuel gauge zones
Fixed partitions of Fuel component scores: Dead Water (0.00–0.33), Organic Flow (0.34–0.66), and The Powder Keg (0.67–1.00). Used for Fuel volume/momentum outcome charts on research pages.
NATR(14) & Formation Avg NATR
Normalized Average True Range over 14 periods — average candle range as a percentage of price. In this research, formation average NATR (natr_pattern_avg) is measured across the full pattern span to size breakout/breakdown thresholds (1.0× NATR) relative to market volatility rather than fixed percentages.
\[\mathrm{ATR}_{14}=\mathrm{AverageTrueRange}(H,L,C,14)\]
\[\mathrm{NATR}_{14}=\dfrac{\mathrm{ATR}_{14}}{C_{t}}\times 100\]
\[\mathrm{NATR}_{\mathrm{avg}}=\dfrac{1}{N}\sum_{i=\mathrm{start}}^{\mathrm{end}}\mathrm{NATR}_{14,i}\]
Breakout / breakdown / sideways
Mutually exclusive outcome classes over the 20-candle forward horizon. Headline KPIs, ranks, and pattern-end geometry bins use breakout, breakdown, and sideways (sum to 100%). Breakout means the +1.0× NATR(14) upside threshold (or resistance trendline/neckline) is touched first; breakdown is the downside class; sideways on those samples means the pattern-end candle already tagged a line but neither ±1.0× NATR printed in the next 20 candles. Sideways is not a zero-move class: typical inside-band wick travel is the sideways ×NATR max-up / max-down. Trendline families evaluate confirmed candle closes.
\[\mathrm{Sideways}\iff\text{terminal and no }\pm 1.0\times\mathrm{NATR}\text{ tag within }20\text{ candles}\]
Forming (trendline still inside)
Fourth exclusive class on trendline families (triangles, wedges, channels, flags, pennants) for snapshots that are not the last candle of the formation: price is still between the lines and neither side tagged in the next 20 candles. Age-balanced Fuel / RSI / point-in-time bins report breakout + breakdown + sideways + forming = 100%. Forming-only trees (live still-inside matches) use breakout + breakdown + forming = 100%. Non-trendline patterns have forming_rate 0.
\[\mathrm{Forming}\iff\text{still inside trendlines and no }\pm 1.0\times\mathrm{NATR}\text{ tag within }20\text{ candles}\]
Both-cleared rate
Share of windows where both +1.0× and −1.0× NATR thresholds were cleared within the 20-candle forward horizon before the exclusive label was assigned. High both-cleared rates indicate volatile two-sided windows.
Expected-direction hit rate
For patterns with a directional bias (e.g. bullish patterns expect a breakout, bearish patterns expect a breakdown), this is the exclusive-class rate for that expected side only. Neutral patterns report breakout and breakdown separately.
Spearman ρ (rho)
A rank correlation coefficient between −1 and 1 that measures monotonic association without assuming a linear relationship or normal distribution — appropriate for skewed, fat-tailed return data. Tables emphasize pattern geometry, momentum, and BTC-context features.
p-value, q-value & significance stars
Two-sided Spearman p-values are adjusted with Benjamini–Hochberg FDR (q-values). Stars require q < 0.05 and |ρ| ≥ 0.05 so large-n micro correlations are not marked significant. Always read stars with effect size.
Wilson 95% CI
Outcome rate fields ending in _ci95 are Wilson score intervals for the binomial point estimate. They quantify sampling uncertainty on rates, not trading risk or costs.
Null baseline / temporal holdout
Null baseline shuffles exclusive outcomes within each timeframe to show a chance expected-direction hit band. Temporal holdout compares rates before vs on/after a fixed cutoff (thresholds not retuned on holdout).
MFE / MAE
Maximum Favorable Excursion and Maximum Adverse Excursion — the best and worst price movement recorded within the forward horizon, expressed as a percentage of the snapshot close. MFE÷|MAE| summarizes average upside versus downside excursion magnitude.
\[\mathrm{MFE}=\mathrm{max\_up}_{20c}=\dfrac{\max(H_{t+1},\ldots,H_{t+20})-C_{t}}{C_{t}}\times 100\]
\[\mathrm{MAE}=\mathrm{max\_down}_{20c}=\dfrac{\min(L_{t+1},\ldots,L_{t+20})-C_{t}}{C_{t}}\times 100\]
Timeframe-specific feature bins
On each pattern study, feature distributions are computed separately for 15m, 1h, 4h, and 1d. Use the timeframe control to switch; never treat pooled multi-TF histograms as interchangeable because candle horizons differ.
Feature quartile bins
Numeric features that are not Fuel, RSI, or σ-banded (e.g. slopes, current_scale_number, btc_dist14_mean) are split into quartiles. Each bin reports exclusive breakout, breakdown, and sideways rates plus mean MFE.
Feature typical / elevated bands
geom_width and head-and-shoulders symmetry use mean ± σ bands computed separately per pattern and timeframe: below typical (< μ−σ), typical (μ±σ), elevated (μ+σ to μ+2σ), and extreme (> μ+2σ). Pattern height and extension age use the same labels after a log1p transform so right-tailed size features are not dominated by outliers. Bins are never pooled across timeframes.
Pattern end (snapshot candle)
The single candle where features (RSI, Fuel, BTC context) and the forward 20-candle outcome window are measured. Trendline families use the last close still inside ±0.5× NATR of the projected channel; doubles/triples use a neckline re-touch within ±0.5× NATR; H&S uses the neckline break; cup & handle uses the rim touch after the handle; RSI divergences use the second price extreme. See Data & methodology for the full family list.
BTC regime (btc_dist14_median)
Terciles of BTC last-14 median distance at the live snapshot (btc_weak / btc_mid / btc_strong). Used as a simple proxy for BTC-relative market regime when slicing outcome rates (not in correlation ranks).
volume_score (Fuel volume)
Closed-candle volume vs a 20-period SMA, mapped to 0–1 with a small trend adjustment. Same Fuel Index volume component as the live gauge; open (forming) candle is not used.
\[\mathrm{volume\_ratio}=\dfrac{V_{t}}{\mathrm{SMA}(V,20)}\]
Piecewise base score from volume_ratio:
\[\mathrm{ratio}<0.8:\ \mathrm{base}=\dfrac{\mathrm{ratio}}{0.8}\times 0.25\]
\[0.8\le\mathrm{ratio}\le 1.5:\ \mathrm{base}=0.3+\dfrac{\mathrm{ratio}-0.8}{0.7}\times 0.3\]
\[\mathrm{ratio}>1.5:\ \mathrm{base}=0.6+\min\!\bigl(1,\tfrac{\mathrm{ratio}-1.5}{1.5}\bigr)\times 0.4\]
\[\mathrm{trend\_adj}=\mathrm{clamp}(s_{V}\times 0.15,-0.05,+0.05)\]
\[\mathrm{volume\_score}=\mathrm{clamp}(\mathrm{base}+\mathrm{trend\_adj},\,0,\,1)\]
momentum_score (Fuel momentum)
Direction-agnostic energy score from RSI(14), 3-bar RSI change, and timeframe-specific ROC. Same Fuel Index momentum component as the live gauge.
\[\mathrm{ROC}=\dfrac{C_{t}-C_{t-N}}{C_{t-N}}\]
\[\Delta\mathrm{RSI}_{3}=\mathrm{RSI}_{t}-\mathrm{RSI}_{t-3}\]
ROC lookback N by timeframe: 15m→8, 1h→5, 4h→3, 1d→2.
\[\mathrm{momentum\_score}\in[0,1]\ \text{(RSI/ROC regime map)}\]
rsi_14
14-period Relative Strength Index on the asset close at the live snapshot (forming + terminal; feature_builder: RSIIndicator(close, window=14)).
\[U_{t}=\max(C_{t}-C_{t-1},0),\quad D_{t}=\max(C_{t-1}-C_{t},0)\]
\[\mathrm{RS}=\dfrac{\mathrm{SMA}(U,14)}{\mathrm{SMA}(D,14)}\]
\[\mathrm{RSI}_{14}=100-\dfrac{100}{1+\mathrm{RS}}\]
geom_height
Pattern height as a percentage of price at detection. Exact definition depends on pattern family (trendline channel vs double/triple vs cup vs H&S).
Trendline patterns (wedges / triangles / channels):
\[h_{\mathrm{start}}=R_{\mathrm{start}}-S_{\mathrm{start}}\]
\[\mathrm{geom\_height}=\dfrac{h_{\mathrm{start}}}{S_{\mathrm{start}}}\times 100\]
Double bottom / double top:
\[\mathrm{geom\_height}^{\mathrm{DB}}=\dfrac{N-\min(B_{1},B_{2})}{N}\times 100\]
\[\mathrm{geom\_height}^{\mathrm{DT}}=\dfrac{\max(T_{1},T_{2})-N}{N}\times 100\]
Head & shoulders: absolute head-to-neckline height on the formation.
\[\mathrm{geom\_height}^{\mathrm{HS}}=\lvert h_{\mathrm{head}}\rvert\]
geom_width
Pattern duration in candles from formation start index to end index.
\[\mathrm{geom\_width}=i_{\mathrm{end}}-i_{\mathrm{start}}\]
extension_progress
Extension candles divided by original formation width
geom_resistance_slope
Slope of the fitted resistance / upper trendline, expressed as percent price change per candle.
Fit through resistance pivots:
\[P\approx a+b\,i\]
\[\mathrm{geom\_resistance\_slope}=b_{\%/c}\]
geom_support_slope
Slope of the fitted support / lower trendline, expressed as percent price change per candle.
Fit through support pivots:
\[P\approx a+b\,i\]
\[\mathrm{geom\_support\_slope}=b_{\%/c}\]
btc_dist14_mean
Mean of BTC last-14 percentage distances (feature_builder dist14_mean on BTC).
\[\delta_{i}=\dfrac{C^{\mathrm{BTC}}_{t-i}-C^{\mathrm{BTC}}_{t}}{C^{\mathrm{BTC}}_{t}}\times 100,\quad i=1,\ldots,14\]
\[\mathrm{btc\_dist14\_mean}=\dfrac{1}{14}\sum_{i=1}^{14}\delta_{i}\]
current_scale_number
Position in the live channel (0 at support, 1 at resistance, >1 breakout)
extension_candle_offset
Extension candles added since first detection

Frequently asked questions

How to trade Falling Wedge using this crypto chart pattern study?

This page reports historical Falling Wedge breakout, breakdown, and sideways rates on Binance USD-M futures. Use the rates, typical travel, and timeframe tables as educational context — not a live trade signal.

Do Falling Wedge chart patterns work?

Falling Wedge was evaluated on 21,502 deduplicated snapshots across 667 Binance USD-M futures symbols. Exclusive outcomes below show how often the pattern broke out, broke down, or stayed sideways — not a guarantee that any single setup will follow the average.

What is the sample size for Falling Wedge?

Falling Wedge was evaluated on 21,502 deduplicated snapshots across 667 Binance USD-M futures symbols.

How is the pattern end candle chosen for Falling Wedge?

For Falling Wedge, pattern end is the last candle still inside the projected trendline channel after formation: closes may not breach support/resistance by more than 0.5× NATR(14). Features and the next-20-candle outcomes are taken from that last in-band candle, and breakout/breakdown is evaluated on confirmed closes.

Falling Wedge breakout rate: how often does Falling Wedge break out, break down, or go sideways?

Under a mutually exclusive ±1× NATR / 20-candle classification, breakout was 72.28%, breakdown 24.83%, and sideways 2.89%; expected-direction hit rate was 72.28%.

Which timeframe works best for Falling Wedge in this study?

Among timeframes present, 1d had the highest expected-direction hit rate at 75.18% (n=705).

What feature correlates most with Falling Wedge breakouts?

Within Falling Wedge only, the strongest Spearman correlate of breakout success was current_scale_number (ρ=0.5367***, n=11,553). Effect sizes remain modest.

Is this financial advice?

No. These are educational historical statistics only. Past pattern outcomes do not guarantee future results.

Watch Falling Wedge live

ChartDatabase scans this pattern across 500+ Binance futures pairs with alerts.

How to cite this study

ChartDatabase Research Team (2026). “Falling Wedge: Breakout & Breakdown Statistics on Binance Futures (n=21,502).” In What Actually Drives Crypto Chart Pattern Breakouts? ChartDatabase. https://chartdatabase.com/research/falling_wedge/