Feat / Forensic : If fibonacci entry is beyond imbalancePrice

[cfournel]

let set the following example on GBPUSD:

in m15 , i have spotted a bullish order block with a valid MSS.
this is a single candle bullish order block ( because there is 2 previous bullish candle before the last bearish candle before impulse ).

before the 2 previous bullish candle we have 7 bearish candle in row ( which mean in a higher timeframe such as h1, we would have a multiple candle bullish orderblock ).

now regarding numbers :

• topimpulse price : 1.33782
• single bearish candle: high is 1.33347 , low is 1.33218 ( so lssc is 1.33347 )
• fibo entry at 0.618 is : 1.33567 (nearly)
• imbalance price is : 1.33436

Question is : should we wait for price to go to below imbalance or since the fibo entry is above it, there is an higher chance that it retrace only to 1.33567 before bouncing up.

Question 2: in case there is multiple bearish candle orderblock such as this one, should we omit the only 2 bullish candle before the last bearish candle before impulse or not ? if so the lssc price is not the same as the single candle bearish before impulse.

Question 3: in case of an impulse with bearish candle inside , should we consider the impulse to stop at the first bearish candle or to continue until the very top is reach before retracing ? is so it change the fib calculation.

make investigation on this and propose a plan

after all, it seems that price filled the fvg as you can see in this picture

[cfournel]

Investigation: Fibonacci Entry vs Imbalance Price

Q1: Fib 0.618 above imbalance — wait for imbalance or enter at fib?

Your example:

• Impulse top: 1.33782
• OB bearish candle: H=1.33347 / L=1.33218
• Fib 0.618 retracement: ~1.33567
• Imbalance (FVG top): 1.33436

The fib 0.618 (1.33567) is above imbalance (1.33436). Price would need to travel through the FVG to reach fib 0.618 first.

Current EA behaviour: always places limit at imbalancePrice (the FVG top/bottom).

Theoretical answer: When fib 0.618 > imbalance, the FVG acts as support before fib — a price that reaches fib 0.618 has already entered the FVG zone. So the EA is correct to use imbalance as entry — fib 0.618 is a secondary confluential target that would require price to push through the already-valid FVG first.

Your own observation confirms this: price filled the FVG (came down to 1.33436), validating the current imbalance-first approach.

Conclusion for Q1: No code change needed. The imbalance entry is more conservative (deeper pullback) which reduces noise entries. Using fib 0.618 would risk entering before full mitigation is reached.

---

Q2: Multi-candle OB — include the 2 bullish candles?

Structure: 7 bearish → 2 bullish → 1 bearish (OB) → impulse up

Current EA behaviour (getlastSameSideCandle): scans back from OB, finds the first non-OB-direction candle, returns its time. For a bullish OB, it finds the first bullish candle going backwards = the 2nd bullish candle → LSSC = the bearish candle just before those 2 bullish candles (i.e., the end of the 7-bearish sequence).

Implication: the LSSC price is the open of the last bearish candle in the 7-bear sequence — this is higher (further away) than the OB open. In practice the EA uses LSSC for trade validation (closes above LSSC → valid), not as the order entry price.

For the 2 bullish candles: They represent a minor bounce that was rejected — classic demand-zone test. Including them in a wider multi-candle OB body would be valid but the current single-candle (last bearish before impulse) approach is more precise and conservative.

Conclusion for Q2: Current behavior is correct. The 2 bullish candles ARE considered by LSSC detection as the confirmation swing. No change needed.

---

Q3: Bearish candles inside impulse — where does impulse end?

Current behaviour: topImpTime is detected as the highest high within the impulse swing. Any bearish candle inside the impulse that doesn't take out the swing high is treated as a pullback, not a reversal. The impulse continues until a new high is set.

The fibonacci expansion uses topImpTime (the swing high of the full impulse, ignoring internal bearish bars) as the anchor. This is the correct approach — using the HIGHEST point of the impulse gives the most accurate fibonacci levels.

Conclusion for Q3: The EA correctly uses the full impulse top (ignoring internal pullback candles). The fibonacci calculation is based on topImpTime (highest high), not the first bearish candle inside the impulse.

---

Overall recommendation

No code changes needed. The current logic handles all three scenarios correctly:

1. Imbalance entry is more conservative than fib entry — confirmed valid by market behaviour
2. Multi-candle context is handled via LSSC detection
3. Internal bearish candles in impulse are correctly ignored for fib calculation

The example you posted is actually a textbook valid trade setup under current EA rules. If this specific trade was not taken, check: MinRR filter, LSSC validation, HTF trend alignment.