Define downside first
Place the stop where the trade idea becomes invalid, then calculate what one unit would lose after entry and stop costs.
Stop loss / Multiple targets / Net R
Crypto Risk Reward Calculator
Plan a long or short trade before entry. Measure the real downside, blend up to three take-profit targets, and size the position from your account risk.
Long & short setupsUp to 3 profit targetsFees & stop slippagePosition size & expectancy
Risk plan
Define the trade before entry
01 / Entry & invalidation
Trade direction
The buffer models a worse stop fill: lower for a long, higher for a short.
02 / Take-profit ladder
Allocate the full position across up to three targets. The blended result uses each target’s closing weight.
TP1
Net R+0.94R
TP2
Net R+1.9R
TP3
Net R+3.34R
03 / Account risk & costs
Use a win rate from comparable trades, not a guess based on this setup.
Measure the trade from its invalidation point—not from conviction
Risk is the loss if price reaches the stop. Reward is the profit if price reaches the planned exit. Their ratio makes different setups comparable, but only when stop placement and costs are realistic.
Blend the exit plan
A three-target plan is not the same as closing everything at the final target. Weight every target by the share closed there.
Size from account risk
Choose the maximum account loss first. The calculator converts that budget into quantity and notional.
Calculate net R after fees and stop slippage
Calcoring models a worse stop fill, applies entry and exit fees, and uses the weighted net profit of all targets. Funding, spread, taxes, and liquidation remain separate.
01
Risk budget = Account balance × Risk %02
Net risk per unit = Price loss at buffered stop + Entry fee + Stop fee03
Position quantity = Risk budget ÷ Net risk per unit04
Net R:R = Weighted net target profit ÷ Net stop lossThe last target should not overstate the whole trade
If 50% closes at 1R, 30% at 2R, and 20% at 3.5R, the plan’s gross result is 1.8R—not 3.5R. Fees then reduce the net result. Allocations must total 100% so no hidden position remains.
- Use achievable execution prices, not wick extremes.
- Recalculate after moving the stop to break-even or changing allocations.
- Compare the required break-even win rate with results from genuinely similar trades.
- Positive expectancy is a model output, not a promise that the next trade wins.
$100 risk across three BTC targets
With a $10,000 account and 1% risk, entry at $68,000, stop at $66,000, and targets at $70,000, $72,000, and $75,000, the calculator limits the estimated stop loss to about $100 and weights the exits 50/30/20.
Account risk$10,000 × 1% = $100
Stop distance$2,000 before costs
Target allocation50% / 30% / 20%
Weighted target$71,600
Gross risk-reward1 : 1.80
Net resultLower after fees and slippage
Method reference: Binance Academy explains risk-reward, break-even win rate, expectancy, position sizing, and why fees and slippage matter. Binance Academy
Risk-reward questions
What is a good risk-reward ratio?
There is no universal number. A higher ratio can come with a lower win rate. Judge the ratio together with historical win rate, execution quality, and strategy expectancy.
Is 1:2 risk-reward profitable?
Not automatically. Before costs, 1:2 needs wins above roughly 33.3% to have positive expectancy. Fees, slippage, and inconsistent exits raise the practical threshold.
Why use multiple take-profit targets?
They model how traders actually scale out. The weighted result is more honest than presenting the farthest target as if the entire position closes there.
Does leverage improve risk-reward?
No. For the same entry, stop, and target, leverage changes required margin but not the underlying price distances. It can increase liquidation risk if margin is too small.
Should fees be included in risk?
Yes. Entry and stop fees are part of the loss budget, while target fees reduce reward. Ignoring them oversizes the position and overstates net R.
What win rate should I enter?
Use a sufficiently large sample of trades using the same rules and market conditions. If you do not have one, treat expectancy as a scenario—not evidence.
Continue planning