Aljif7's Blog
Friday 7 November, 2025
AREA: Self-Learning
(Self)-Learning about Trading in Quantfury
This time I am retaking the Platform Quantfury to do some trading. I have tried two times before. Around 4 years ago, I tried some Trading, it was like impossible to manage its leverage (it is 10X leverage, which should be less dangerous than 100X). Then I stop it. Last year I tried again. As I saw good results in first week I was confident to progress, but at the end my 200 USD get lost; mainly because I didn't cut loss in time. So I stopped again. Last week I retake it with 100 USD. It was not bad and I withdraw 30 USD from profits. This week I am struggling to maintain my Power. Then I decided to interact with the AI in order to get some insides.
It's already Friday, and I haven’t posted anything about finance this week. I don’t even know how the week slipped away! I barely finished my online certification. Most of my time went into blogging and experimenting with trading on Quantfury.
As I have mentioned, yesterday, feeling a bit worn out after a rough week—marked by a losing trade I let run too long—I decided to interact with AI to better understand trading within Quantfury’s leverage framework, which is definitely not the dangerous 100% I blindly started with about nine years ago, when I lost the unimaginable, painful lesson which made me take respect for the word Leverage.
Interacting with AIs
I input 4 charts to the AIs.
Interestingly, I tested three AI models: Qwen, Perplexity, and Manus—and all three gave me different results.
For a this post, I am comparing Qwen and Manus only. I usually work more with Qwen, it is as a Teacher 24/7; I’d assumed Manus was better suited for programming or highly technical matters. After seeing Qwen’s inconsistent responses, I thought that, given the technical nature of my query, Manus might offer more useful insights.
Inconsistencies of Qwen
For example, Qwen gave me the following mismatched pairs:
- It invented a SHIB/USDT pair—my first screenshot actually showed MANA/USDT.
- For the second trade (Bitcoin/USDT), it referenced a completely different asset. My chart clearly displayed ETC/USD—nothing close.
- The third chart was the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX/VXX), yet Qwen responded with something about the “CEXIO Minig Index”—which doesn’t even exist.
- The fourth pair was ARB/USDT, but Qwen suggested “Alcoint/USDT”—a token I’ve never heard of.
(Note that the screenshots I am sharing are in Spanish, as I interacted in Spanish.)
So right off the bat, none of its responses matched the actual pairs I’d shown.
I only skimmed its suggestions, which were quite generic: risk management, signal confirmation, stop-loss adjustment, diversification, and position sizing—the usual advice.
Manus with more accuarte answers
On the other hand, Manus provided far more accurate information—likely because of its technical orientation. The trading pairs it referenced were correct, with only one minor slip: it confused ETC with ETH. Beyond that, everything was coherent.
Moreover, its trading suggestions felt more logical to me:
- Entry discipline—avoiding entering trades within the “cloud” (referring to Ichimoku),
- Exit discipline, and
- Proper stop-loss to target ratio.
Perhaps the ideal approach is to routinely compare responses across different AI models.
For now, Manus has convinced me it’s a superior tool for technical reasoning. Next, I’ll test it with a philosophical topic and see how it differs!
After these suggestions, I am beginning to use the EMA indicators, mostly in 1 Hour time-frame. Let's see how it works for me.
Remember, this is not an Investment advice. I am sharing my own experiences with educational purposes.
If you are interested in trying Manus here I left my Referral:
https://manus.im/invitation/196NX4E8JUGA