Do SMC structure breaks and liquidity sweeps stay profitable when traded without repainting?
Is SMC Profitable? 144 Backtests on USD/JPY
Finding
Structure breaks held up and liquidity sweeps did not. Traded on swings that are never used before their right-hand bars have closed, 11 of 12 hourly structure-break settings were profitable in both 2024 and 2025, and 8 of 12 on the 15-minute chart. No liquidity-sweep setting on the 15-minute or hourly chart was profitable in both years; three four-hour settings were. Win rate did not decide it: the default liquidity-sweep rule won 57.88% of M15 trades and 56.97% of H1 trades in 2025, yet lost 1,410.5 and 2,086.4 pips, because its average loss was larger than its average win.
Key results
- Structure breaks profitable in both years
- 11 of 12 on H1, 8 of 12 on M15
- Liquidity sweeps profitable in both years
- none on M15 or H1, 3 on H4
- The default liquidity sweep in 2025
- 57.88% and 56.97% win rates, −1,410.5 and −2,086.4 pips
Scope
- USDJPY, 2024 and 2025, with 2025 also split into halves
- M15, H1 and H4
- 2 rules x 4 swing widths (2, 3, 5, 8 bars each side) x 3 validity windows (50, 100, 200 bars) x 3 timeframes x 2 years = 144 conditions
- Fixed 0.3 pip spread, 0.1 lots, no slippage
Method
Measured with Formiq's backtester. A structure break is the first close beyond the latest confirmed swing high or low; a swing becomes available only after its right-hand bars have closed, so trades are never backdated to the plotted pivot. Entries fill at the signal-bar close and exit on the opposite signal. SMC has no standard formula, so two observable parts are fixed as OHLC rules.
Limitations
- The sample covers USDJPY from January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2025.
- Trades use the signal-bar close, a fixed 0.3 pip spread and 0.1 lots.
- A swing is never used before its right-hand confirmation bars have closed.
- OHLC cannot recover the intrabar path or trader identity, so the test does not claim to observe institutional orders.