It is the first question anyone asks after an automated trade, and most tools in this category cannot answer it. A model that outputs a score has no explanation to give. A tool that generates one for you afterwards is writing a plausible story about a decision it did not record. The only answer worth anything is the reasoning that existed at the moment the order was placed.
A numerical model outputs a score and acts on it. There is no reasoning to inspect because there never was any, only weights. You can be told which inputs mattered statistically, which is not the same as why.
The tool asks a language model to explain a trade after the fact. It will produce something fluent and confident, and it is a guess. It was not present when the decision was made.
The reasoning is written at the point of entry, stored with the order, and cannot be revised later. This is the only version that can be checked against what actually happened.
blank's advisor is a reasoning model rather than a scoring model, so a written justification is a by-product of how it decides rather than something bolted on. Each cycle it reads the evidence it has gathered, decides, and writes down why. That text is stored with the trade.
Three places you can read it. The agent log shows the reasoning as it happens, cycle by cycle, including the cycles where it decided to do nothing. The journal keeps every closed trade with its original justification, the losses included. The chat panel answers direct questions about live positions, with the evidence cited, so you can ask why are we long this and get an answer rather than a summary.
You are handing an automated system access to a brokerage account. The single most useful protection is being able to tell the difference between a strategy that is working and a strategy that is lucky, and you cannot do that from a profit and loss curve. Two tools with identical returns over a quarter can have completely different reasoning quality, and only one of them will still be working next year.
It is also the fastest way to decide whether a tool suits you at all. Read a week of its reasoning in practice mode. If you find yourself disagreeing with most of it, that is a clear answer, and it cost you nothing to find out.
Only if the tool recorded its reasoning at the time. blank writes a justification at the point of entry and stores it with the trade, visible in the agent log, the trade journal and the chat panel. An explanation generated after the fact is a reconstruction, not a record.
In blank, yes. The chat panel answers questions about current positions with cited evidence, so you can ask why a position is open and get the reasoning rather than a summary.
Yes. Every closed trade appears with its original justification, including the losses. A journal showing only winners is a selection rather than a record.
No. It is recorded with the order at the time of entry, which is what makes it worth reading.
Practice mode, virtual money, full journal. Decide whether you agree with it before it trades for you.
join the beta