IchimuhanAsk ten services what makes them the best eurusd signal provider and nine will point to a highlight reel of winners. A highlight reel isn't a track record, it's marketing with the losses removed. Every position Ichimuhan has published since March 2023, wins and losses both, stays visible in the same feed, permanently.
What "never edited or removed" actually means
Every forecast and every execution plan is locked and hashed the moment it's published. After that, nothing about it changes. If a correction is genuinely needed, it's posted as a dated addendum attached to the original, not a silent edit to the original numbers. A losing position doesn't get quietly archived or scrolled off the page: it sits in the public history exactly where it happened, alongside every winner from the same week.
Why an unedited record is worth more than a curated one
A track record you can't verify isn't a track record, it's a claim. Anyone can screenshot a handful of winning calls; almost nobody voluntarily leaves the losing ones in view next to them. When losses stay in the same feed as wins, with the same conviction grade and the same write-up format, you can actually check whether the pattern holds: whether low-conviction setups lose more often than high-conviction ones, whether Tokyo session calls behave differently than New York ones, whether a losing streak was a genuine method failure or ordinary variance. None of that is checkable against a highlight reel.
- Every closed position stays in the history tab exactly as published, win or loss.
- A loss gets the same write-up a win gets: what the read was, and whether the read was wrong or the market simply moved first.
- Corrections are posted as dated addenda, never as silent edits to the original numbers.
The stop does its job and the loss is published with the same write up a winner gets, explaining whether the read was wrong or the market simply moved first.
What this doesn't promise
Publishing every loss doesn't mean the desk loses less often, and it's not a claim that the method is flawless. It's a claim that whatever the actual record is, you can go check it yourself, position by position, instead of taking anyone's word for it. That's the same standard covered in more depth in what actually makes a signal provider good, and in how conviction grades are meant to correlate with outcomes over time, covered in how the grading system works. If you have a question the record itself doesn't answer, it's probably already on the FAQ.