Why is smart money concepts (SMC) the best trading strategy?

Is smart money concepts the best trading strategy?

No supplied source shows that smart money concepts is the best trading strategy. The video title asserts it, and the speakers describe a method built on breaks of structure and points of interest, but they offer personal accounts, not audited results or independent comparisons.

The source is Big Work Energy Podcast episode 2, titled 'This is why SMC is the best trading strategy'. The title carries the abbreviation SMC. The supplied transcript never spells the term out, so this article treats the phrase as the video's label for the structure-based routine Rihari describes, and it does not add outside definitions.

Calling any strategy 'best' needs a comparison: the same market, the same period, the same costs and the same risk per trade, measured against alternatives. The transcript contains no such comparison. What it contains is:

• Rihari, the host, who is introduced as the founder of Ambitious Investing, explaining a routine.
• Two guest traders describing their own early struggles and later progress.
• Discussion of practice habits, psychology, instrument choice and one large gold trade.

This article keeps two categories apart. Statements the speakers make are labelled 'Rihari says' or 'the video says'. Facts checked by an independent source are limited to two figures, both cited with links in the statistics section below. Nothing here promises income, returns or safety, and it is general education, not personal financial advice.

What does the video actually say about this strategy?

The video, episode two of the Big Work Energy Podcast, has Rihari and two guest traders describe a beginner journey: learn market structure, mark charts, backtest, build a routine, and manage psychology. The transcript contains no performance record or head-to-head strategy comparison.

The episode is a conversation about the start of a day trader's journey. Its main claims, as the speakers make them:

• The strategy is simple to learn and hard to execute. A speaker says the strategy can be taught in about two hours, and that the harder part is applying it live. The speakers tie that difficulty to psychology and confidence.
• Structure vocabulary drives entries. A guest recalls a mentor session in which their chart marking was corrected: identify the actual high, mark the break of structure, wait for a change of character at a point of interest, then find an entry on a lower time frame. Another passage adds an imbalance and 'confluences' as reasons to enter.
• Practice builds trust. Rihari says backtesting on FX Replay builds confidence and helps psychology, and a guest says that advice came from Rihari.
• Focus beats variety. Rihari says three years of near-daily chart time built a close relationship with gold and NAS, and says forex pairs move too slowly, describing being an impatient person. A speaker adds that mastering one or two instruments beats dabbling in many.
• Risk appetite differs. Rihari describes a very high personal risk tolerance and says gold and NAS suit it. For lower risk tolerance, Rihari points to slower forex pairs, and says beginners should start there and move to gold and NAS as confidence builds.
• Losses are expected. A speaker says that even at a 60% win rate some trades lose, and that a loss caused by FOMO or by trying to predict the market is worth reviewing, while a loss that was simply part of the statistics is not.

None of these statements comes with a dataset. The closest thing to a number on the method itself is a guest's claim that, in their own backtesting on one forex pair the guest calls EU, a 15-minute break of structure was followed by another break of structure 70% of the time. The sample size, dates and costs were not given.

What is the step-by-step routine Rihari describes?

Rihari describes a repeatable routine: mark the chart from higher to lower time frames, wait for a break of structure or change of character, find the previous high or low and points of interest, then set a limit or alert and wait for price to return.

Rihari compares the routine to the fixed pre-kick and free-throw habits of athletes. These are the steps in the order Rihari gives them, with one practice step added from a guest:

1. Mark the higher time frame, then work down. Rihari says the chart is marked from a higher time frame all the way down to a lower one.
2. Mark the trading range. On the lower frames, Rihari marks a five-minute or 15-minute trading range.
3. Wait for structure to break. Rihari says a break of structure or a change of character, whichever arrives, signals that a trade is coming, because the market is pushing and is no longer moving internally.
4. Find the reference high or low. After the break, Rihari locates the previous high or previous low, then the points of interest where price is expected to come back to.
5. Set a limit or an alert. Rihari either places a limit order or sets an alert, then waits for price to return to the point of interest.
6. Look for confirmation. Rihari says confirmation includes candle bodies closing beyond certain areas. If confirmation does not appear, Rihari says the options are to take profit or move the stop loss.
7. Review the result. A guest says a daily hour of study includes reviewing losses to see whether a trade lost because of FOMO or prediction rather than the plan.

Two cautions come from the speakers themselves. First, a guest says FX Replay lets you fast-forward the market, so a real trade takes hours to play out and is slower than a backtest feels. Second, a guest says beginners feel FOMO of the live market and may forward test live instead of backtesting, and calls patience with backtesting the better path.

The video also describes mental habits: visualising a trade playing out, and smiling before an entry, which a speaker links to mood. The sports comparisons, including a famous goal kicker's routine, are analogies. The speaker who raised the kicker's success rate also says they do not know the actual figure, so the analogy is an illustration and not evidence.

How does this approach compare with the other approaches in the video?

The video describes four approaches to trading: intuition, wide-stop signal-channel style trading, Rihari's structure-based routine, and backtest-first practice. Every row in the table below is a speaker's claim, and none is independently verified.

| Approach | What the video says | Whose claim | Independent verification | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Intuition entries | A guest says early trading had no strategy: 'here's a high, here's a low, jump in somewhere and hope for the best'. The guest says a futures account of about 7K USD was over-leveraged and the money later lost. | Guest trader | None supplied; personal account | | Wide-stop signal channels | A speaker says some signal channels post 80-pip stop losses, that this style can work sometimes, and that it suits risking as little as possible to win as little as possible. | Speaker in the video | None supplied | | Structure-based routine (break of structure, change of character, point of interest) | Rihari says to mark higher to lower time frames, wait for a structure break, then wait for price to return to a point of interest with a limit or alert. | Rihari | None supplied beyond speakers' accounts | | Backtest-first practice | A guest describes 30 to 40 minutes of backtesting a day plus about an hour of study. Rihari says backtesting builds confidence and psychology. | Guest and Rihari | None supplied; no results shown | | Following signals | A speaker says some people who took signals over-leveraged and skipped risk-management videos. | Speaker in the video | None supplied |

Read the table as a map of claims, not a ranking. The video gives no outcome data for any row, so it cannot rank them, and this article cannot either. The only outside evidence supplied is the ASIC figure in the next section, which covers retail CFD investors as a group and not any one method.

What do independent statistics say about retail trading outcomes?

ASIC Report 828: Risky business records that 68% of Australian retail CFD investors lost money in the 2024 financial year. That is independent outcome data, unlike the personal accounts in the video, which no supplied record verifies.

The BIS 2025 Triennial Survey reported average daily OTC foreign-exchange turnover of US$9.6 trillion in April 2025. That figure measures how large the market is. It does not measure whether any individual trader, method or strategy earns money.

| Figure | Source | How this article uses it | | --- | --- | --- | | 68% of Australian retail CFD investors lost money in the 2024 financial year | ASIC Report 828: Risky business | Independent context on retail CFD outcomes as a group; not used to grade any strategy | | US$9.6 trillion average daily OTC foreign-exchange turnover in April 2025 | BIS 2025 Triennial Survey | Independent context on market scale; not evidence of profitability |

The video covers futures, forex pairs, gold and NAS. The transcript names a futures account once and does not say which product each speaker trades otherwise, so the ASIC figure is context on retail CFD outcomes and not a measurement of the speakers.

Neither figure confirms or refutes SMC. A 68% loss rate for a group does not show that a particular method fails, and a large market does not show that a method wins. What the two facts do give is a reason for caution and no reason for confidence in a 'best strategy' claim.

Which claims in the video are personal accounts and not verified facts?

Every performance, timing and trade-size claim in the video is a personal account or an illustration, and none is verified here. That covers the 28% day, the gold swing trade, the 14-month learning time and the compounding example. No statements, journals or third-party records were supplied.

• The 28% day. A guest says a single day returned 28%, about four months after starting in January 2024, and that another 15% was available that day but the guest stopped to protect profit. The same guest says they went in heavy from the start, and the speakers say 28% days will become the norm. This article does not repeat that as an expectation. A one-day percentage says nothing about account size, drawdown or losing days.
• The early futures account. A guest says a run of winning days on an account of about 7K USD paid out, that the money was withdrawn and spent on a chair, and that the account was later lost after over-risking. The guest describes three-month breaks after each loss and says four mentors came before Rihari.
• Learning timelines. Rihari says learning without a mentor took 14 months, and says guests took 2 months and 6 months with one. Another guest's account of four mentors, repeated losses and breaks shows that timelines differ widely between speakers.
• The gold swing trade. Rihari says a trade risked about $4,000, was entered on a five-minute chart, and was held for about two weeks after the stop loss was moved into profit. Rihari says the position reached about 40 thousand, that a minimum of 10 thousand was locked in, and that swaps of about $18,000 were received by the close. The video says swaps follow the interest on the pair, so holding can cost money as well as pay it. Rihari calls the trade somewhat lucky as well as rule-following. It is one trade.
• The compounding example. Rihari says that starting with $100 and making 5% a day, or 25% a week, would pass a million dollars in 10 months, and calls it 'purely based on statistics'. It is a hypothetical that assumes the same gain every day. It is not a record of any account, and this article does not present it as achievable.
• The 70% structure claim. A guest's backtest statistic on one forex pair, covered above, has no sample size, dates or costs attached.
• Index descriptions. A speaker describes US30 as the top 30 stocks in the world and NAS as the top 100 technology companies in the world. That is the speaker's shorthand, and this article does not adopt it.
• Business and audience claims. The video makes claims about the brand's offerings, growth, transparency and student success. Rihari says a trading journal and results are shown to students. None was supplied, so this article repeats no numbers or prices from those passages.

What remains after setting the unverified claims aside is a described routine, a set of practice habits, and two outside facts.

Does the video say beginners need a mentor?

Rihari says a mentor is not strictly necessary, that learning alone took 14 months, and that a mentor shortens the learning time. Two guests credit mentoring for their progress, which is a personal account, not a tested result.

The details the speakers give:

• Rihari says the one-on-one calls used FX Replay, with students marking charts and calling trades in front of someone, about three times a week. Rihari says the same approach is what the education platform teaches.
• One guest says correction of their chart marking was what made the routine click. Another guest says a fourth mentor helped them understand the reasons behind entries, after earlier mentors gave information that did not stick.
• A speaker says a community of beginners helps because everyone asks the same questions and can explain things in simple terms.
• Rihari says many people are sceptical and fear being scammed, and says a call answering every question was the way to build trust.

The episode also promotes the brand's mentoring, community, signals and copy trading. Read mentor claims as marketing context. None of the supplied material tests whether mentored traders do better than unmentored traders.

What should a beginner check before trusting a trading strategy claim?

Check for verifiable records, an independent comparison, the risk taken per trade and the costs before trusting any strategy claim. The video itself says over-leveraging, losing streaks and skipped risk lessons happen, so treat any percentage return as a personal claim until an outside record supports it.

• Ask for records. Rihari says a trading journal and results are shown to students and that Rihari has lost a lot as well as won a lot. No such record was supplied for this article, so ask to see one for any source you rely on.
• Learn the basics first. Rihari says pips, lot sizes and how to calculate them are beginner material, and that not knowing them means losing money straight away. Rihari says the advanced material comes later because people who jump ahead would lose money.
• Size risk before entry. A guest says an over-leveraged account of about 7K USD was lost, and a speaker says some people taking signals over-leveraged and skipped the risk-management lessons.
• Match the market to your risk tolerance. Rihari says gold and NAS move fast and suit a very high personal risk tolerance, while slower forex pairs suit lower risk tolerance. Rihari describes the high tolerance as personal.
• Backtest, then remember replay is not live. A guest says a replay can be fast-forwarded, so a live trade takes hours longer than a backtest feels. A guest also warns that live forward testing driven by FOMO is a beginner trap.
• Treat percentages with suspicion. A 28% day and a 5% a day illustration are not records of typical results. Compare them with the ASIC Report 828: Risky business finding that 68% of Australian retail CFD investors lost money in the 2024 financial year.

This article does not tell any reader to trade, and it does not promise income, returns or safety.