Methodology · TT4
How the TraderTypes assessment turns answers into a practice hypothesis.
TT4 is an educational self-reflection model. It separates personality, self-reported behavior signals, goals and constraints, verifiable process evidence, and product knowledge; it does not determine account eligibility, measure investment skill, or predict returns.
What the assessment observes
Forty questions form five separate layers: sixteen preference scenarios create the four-letter coordinate; seven behavior questions observe FOMO, social influence, loss reactions, stops, sizing, and review; five questions cover sustainable time, goals, holding constraints, review routine, and execution friction; seven questions test process evidence; and five questions check product knowledge. The layers are not averaged together.
How the four-letter result is formed
Each preference answer contributes direction and strength to one of four paired axes. A result is provisional when an axis is close to balanced. TT4 shows clarity instead of pretending that a one-point difference is a permanent identity. The four-letter code is a compact navigation label, not a diagnosis, credential, or statement about intelligence.
Why recommendations can differ within one type
Two people with the same four letters keep the same base profile but can receive different current paths. Capability uses hard gates rather than an average score: personality or years traded cannot compensate for a missing plan, comparable sample, sizing rule, capital separation, or product knowledge. Personality can reorder eligible study topics, but it cannot unlock leverage.
What the ranking means
A higher-ranked style means the routine may be easier to test consistently under the reported constraints. It does not mean the style has an edge, will be profitable, or is suitable for live capital. Every path begins with one liquid, unleveraged practice market and a fixed observation plan.
How to challenge your result
Treat the report as a hypothesis. Compare it with a journal covering at least thirty observations, note where behavior contradicts the report, and retake only after a meaningful change in schedule or experience. A useful result becomes more precise when real records disagree with self-perception.
Start with personality. Finish with a process you can actually test.
Time and experience get the final say. If a method needs attention you cannot reliably give it, the method moves down the list.