Many people have heard this saying: high win rate corresponds to low reward-to-risk ratio, high reward-to-risk ratio corresponds to low frequency, and high-frequency trading damages costs. These three elements seem inherently incompatible; choosing one always comes with constraints.

But I want to say that this "iron triangle" is not necessarily a deadlock. It’s actually more like a system that requires active management rather than a fate that must be passively accepted.

**First Layer: The Truth About Win Rate**

Retail investors are most easily trapped in the mindset of pursuing win rate. 80%, 90%, or even higher sounds very comfortable—every trade makes a profit, providing a huge psychological sense of security. But here’s the problem.

When the win rate exceeds 70%, strange things start to happen. You’ll find that your returns actually shrink. Why? Because a high win rate means you’re playing it safe, and each profit margin is kept very small. This is a mathematical law.

What’s more painful in the market is that the main players with large capital are best at creating a "high win rate illusion." They use ten small wins to attract you to follow, then at some point, they take a big loss, wiping out all your previous gains and even costing you more. This is not conspiracy theory; it’s game theory.

**Second Layer: The Dilemma of Reward-to-Risk Ratio**

Since high win rate doesn’t work, some turn to pursuing a high reward-to-risk ratio—aiming to make big profits in each winning trade. Ratios like 1:3 or 1:5 sound very tempting.

But then you’ll realize another cruel fact: the higher the reward-to-risk ratio, the lower the win rate must be. To earn triple the profit, you need to be psychologically prepared to accept a win rate below 40%. What does this mean? Out of ten trades, you might only win three and lose seven.

The psychological challenge is huge. Frequent stop-losses, repeated failures—this rhythm can wear down your patience. Many people can’t hold up; they either get stopped out repeatedly and get washed out, or they close their eyes and ignore the losses, leading to bigger drawdowns.

Another often overlooked point: the reward-to-risk ratio is actually a function of time. The longer you hold a position, the greater the theoretical reward-to-risk ratio, but at the same time, uncertainty increases. Black swan events, policy changes, technical vulnerabilities—long-term holdings come with many variables.

**Third Layer: The Game of Trading Frequency**

What about high-frequency trading? There are opportunities every day, no shortage of buying and selling, sounds great.

The real issue is costs. Whether it’s transaction fees, slippage, or psychological costs, the wear and tear from high-frequency trading accumulates constantly. Over a year, these micro-costs can eat up a large portion of your gains. Some people work all year and find that their profits aren’t enough to cover transaction fees.

Conversely, if you choose low-frequency trading, aiming to carefully prepare each trade, the problem arises—are opportunities really that scarce? Opening a position once a month or even once a quarter, while the market fluctuates in the meantime, your cash depreciates, and psychologically, it’s easy to become anxious.

**How to Break Through?**

Rather than entangling yourself in this "impossible triangle," it’s better to think from a different perspective: these three dimensions can actually be managed in layers.

By adopting differentiated strategies across different market environments and asset choices. For example, mainstream coins like Bitcoin and Ethereum can be approached with a medium- to long-term mindset, focusing on risk-reward ratios; while some opportunities in the token market may require more flexible frequency adjustments. Through multi-layered risk management and position allocation, these three dimensions can be optimized separately at different times and with different positions.

The key is not to let any one dimension dominate your decision-making absolutely. Win rate isn’t necessarily better the higher it is; reward-to-risk ratio isn’t necessarily better the larger it is; and frequency isn’t necessarily better the faster it is. Managing this system’s core is about flexibly combining strategies based on market cycles and your own capacity radius, rather than sticking rigidly to one extreme.