Break-even in trading: the break-even point of a trade and the break-even stop

Break-even, in trading, is the point where a trade or a system neither makes nor loses money once costs are counted. The word also names a move, 'moving your stop to break-even', which means bringing it back to your entry price. This guide covers both meanings, for a single trade and for a trading system, not the break-even point of a business.

• The break-even of a trade is a price: the entry price, adjusted for every cost of the round trip.
• The break-even of a system is a win rate: average loss ÷ (average win + average loss), costs included.
• A break-even stop is still a stop order: it does not guarantee the price, so it does not guarantee a zero loss.
• None of the sources read for this guide measures whether moving a stop to the entry price improves results: you measure it on your own trades.

The word comes from business management, where it names the level of sales at which a company covers its costs. Traders borrowed it for two very different uses, a calculation and a habit. The calculation is not up for debate: it is arithmetic. The habit is, and no source settles it for you.

This guide recommends no setting, no order and no broker. The worked examples are calculations, built to show the mechanics and presented as such; the fee schedules quoted are the ones read on the page named, and your own broker's schedule is what applies to your account.

The break-even of a trade: a price, costs included

With no costs, the break-even of a trade would be its entry price. It never quite is, because getting in and getting out both cost money. Three items move that price: the spread between the bid and the ask, the commission, and the funding when the product has one.

The spread. The SEC's page on types of orders writes that a market order generally executes at or near the current ask for a buy order and the current bid for a sell order. So you buy at the higher of the two prices and sell at the lower: the moment you are in, the position is already worth less than it cost, by the width of that spread.

The commission. It is most often paid twice, on the way in and on the way out. On order-book markets it often depends on the role your order plays. Kraken's fee schedule for derivatives puts it this way: an order that crosses the order book and is immediately matched pays the taker fee, an order that first sits in the order book pays the maker fee. Read in October 2026, its first tier showed 0.02% for makers and 0.05% for takers, calculated on the notional value of the order.

The funding. The same page states that, on perpetual contracts, a funding rate is charged continuously, that it is not a fee charged by the exchange and that it is realised every hour. On a position held for several days, it therefore moves the break-even as time passes. Elsewhere this item may go by another name: look for it in your broker's documentation.

How to calculate your break-even price

The calculation below is an illustration. You buy a contract at 50,000 with a market order and plan to get out the same way, with a 0.05% commission per fill. The exit price S that cancels the trade out satisfies S × (1 − 0.0005) = 50,000 × (1 + 0.0005), so S ≈ 50,050. The price therefore has to rise by about 0.10% before the trade earns anything at all. With two resting orders at 0.02%, the same calculation gives about 50,020.

When the commission is a flat amount, the logic is the same. A constructed example: 100 shares bought at 50.00, with a commission of 5 on the buy and 5 on the sell. The 10 in costs is spread over 100 shares, or 0.10 per share: the break-even is 50.10, and it is the bid, the price you can sell at, that has to reach it. For a short sale everything is reversed: the break-even sits below the entry price.

These costs are not a detail. FINRA's page on frequent intraday trading writes that frequent trading can also come with higher costs that might erode your returns. And the gap has been measured: in the study by Barber, Lee, Liu and Odean of day traders on the Taiwan Stock Exchange, from 1992 to 2006, the 500 most active day traders earned 13.1 basis points per day before costs on their day trading, and lost about 6.8 net of fees. That measurement covers Taiwanese stocks over that period, not forex or crypto; it only shows that a positive gross result can turn negative once costs are counted.

The break-even of a system: the win rate that covers the losses

A trading system is at break-even when what the winning trades bring in exactly covers what the losing trades cost. If p is the share of winning trades, G the average win and L the average loss, break-even is written p × G = (1 − p) × L. From that comes the break-even win rate: p = L ÷ (G + L).

This is a calculation, not a market statistic. With an average win of 150 and an average loss of 100, it takes 100 ÷ 250 = 40% winning trades to lose nothing. Below that the system loses; above it, it wins. Written with the win/loss ratio R = G ÷ L, the same calculation becomes 1 ÷ (1 + R).

Costs enter this calculation on both sides: they shrink every win and add to every loss. If each trade costs c, the break-even rate becomes (L + c) ÷ (G + L). The table applies that formula to a 10-point stop, first with no costs, then with 1 point of costs per round trip.

Two things can be read in this table. Costs raise the threshold on every row, and they weigh more the shorter the target is: that is what makes scalping so sensitive to costs. With 1.5 points of costs on a 5-point target and a 5-point stop, the same calculation gives (5 + 1.5) ÷ 10 = 65% winning trades, against 50% with no costs.

A break-even win rate does not tell you what rate you will get. A more distant target lowers the threshold, but it cannot be reached more often than a nearer one: the two numbers move together. The only pair that matters is the one you measure on your own trades, and the win rate calculator runs this calculation from your average win and your average loss.

Getting back to break-even after a loss

The word is used for a third thing as well: getting back to your starting capital after losses. The arithmetic is asymmetric. After a loss of d, the gain needed to return to the starting point is d ÷ (1 − d): 11.1% after a 10% loss, 100% after a 50% loss. That calculation and what follows from it are covered in the guide to maximum drawdown.

Moving your stop to break-even: what the move really does

Moving your stop to break-even means shifting your stop order to your entry price once the trade has moved the right way. The idea: if price turns around, the trade closes with no loss. It is a traders' practice, not a research finding.

First point, often forgotten: a stop placed exactly at the entry price does not get you out at zero. The round-trip costs are still owed, so the trade ends with a small loss. To really get out flat, the stop has to sit at the break-even price calculated above, slightly beyond the entry price in the direction of the trade.

Second point: a break-even stop is still a stop order. The SEC's investor bulletin on stop, stop-limit and trailing stop orders writes that the stop price is not the guaranteed execution price: it is a trigger that causes the order to become a market order, and the execution price can deviate significantly from the stop price depending on available liquidity. So break-even does not mean zero loss: on a gap or in a fast market, a break-even stop can be filled further away. What each order guarantees is detailed in the guide to order types.

What you gain

The gain is real and simple to describe: once the stop has been moved, the loss planned at the start no longer happens under normal execution conditions. A trade that was in profit does not end on the initial loss, and the risk you were carrying on that idea is taken off.

What you lose

The cost is less visible, because it is displayed nowhere. The same SEC bulletin notes that a stop order may be triggered by a short-term, intraday price move. And a stop brought back to the entry price sits, by construction, at a price the market was trading at a little earlier: a simple return to that level is enough to close the trade, which may then head for the target without you. Every trade closed at zero this way, when it would have won with its original stop, is a win missing from your statistics.

The effect on the system follows from the formulas above. Moving the stop turns some losses into flat trades, which improves the result, and some wins into flat trades, which worsens it. Which of the two prevails depends on your strategy, your market and the moment you move the stop. None of the sources read for this guide measures whether this move improves results, so this guide gives no threshold at which to move a stop.

Why getting back to zero is so appealing

Research says nothing about break-even stops, but it does describe the pull of the zero point. Drawing on real-money experiments, the paper by Thaler and Johnson published in Management Science in 1990 describes an effect the authors themselves call 'break-even': after a prior loss, outcomes which offer a chance to break even are especially attractive. And across 10,000 accounts at a US discount broker followed from 1987 to 1993, Odean's study of the disposition effect shows that investors realize their gains more readily than their losses.

Both studies deal with gambling choices and stock portfolios, not with where a stop goes. They only invite an honest question: do you move your stop because your plan says so, or because giving back a gain hurts? The difference between a planned adjustment and one made under pressure is covered in the take profit and stop loss guide, and the initial placement in the guide on where to place a stop loss.

Measuring it on your own trades

With no study to lean on, the answer is in your own history. Take the trades you closed at break-even and look, on the chart, at what price did next. Two columns are enough.

• Trades saved: those where price then went on to your original stop. Moving the stop spared you a full loss.
• Trades cut short: those where price then reached your target without touching the original stop. Moving the stop cost you a full win.

Add up the losses avoided on one side and the wins missed on the other, over enough trades that chance does not decide on its own. If the second column outweighs the first, the move is costing you money, whatever peace of mind it brings. If it is the other way round, it is working for you. Either way, it is a measurement of your system, not a general rule.

The break-even of an option

In options the word has a precise meaning: the price of the underlying, at expiration, at which the position neither makes nor loses money. For a long call, the Options Industry Council's Long Call page gives the formula: breakeven = strike + premium. At expiration, the strategy breaks even if the stock price is equal to the strike price plus the initial cost of the call option, and any stock price above that point produces a net profit.

A constructed example: a call with a strike of 100 bought for 3 breaks even, at expiration, when the underlying is worth 103, before commissions. Before expiration, the option's value also depends on the time left and on volatility: that is the subject of the guide to the option Greeks. The option profit calculator runs the calculation at expiration for a call or a put.

Break-even and your trading journal

Tradoshi is a trading journal: it places no orders and moves no stop for you. What a journal brings here comes down to two habits. Recording the costs of each trade, so you know your real break-even price rather than your entry price. And recording, for each trade closed at break-even, whether it would have ended on your original stop or on your target. It is a measurement of your own trades, not a promise of results.

Frequently asked questions