ArdenAlgo · Concepts · Inversion FVG (IFVG)

Inversion FVG (IFVG)

Not in the engine · What happens to a gap that fails — in theory, and here

Published 24 Jul 2026 · every rule box checked against mechanization v1 (frozen 16 Jul 2026) · parameter changes land in the changelog first

In three sentences
  • An inversion FVG is a gap that gets filled through and is then treated as a zone in the opposite direction.
  • Mechanization v1 has no inversion logic: a gap is tracked until it is roughly half filled, then dropped.
  • The engine's FVG lifecycle is one-way by design, which is a limitation, not an oversight.
Not in mechanization v1 There is no inversion logic in the engine. Fair value gaps have a one-way lifecycle: tracked, then consumed, then forgotten.

What the concept says

A fair value gap is supposed to attract price back into it. When price instead cuts clean through and closes beyond, the inversion idea says the gap has flipped: the same band should now act as resistance for a market that just rejected it as support, or the reverse.

What the engine does

It drops the gap. The fill fraction is measured on every closed bar, and once roughly half the band is consumed the gap can no longer host an entry. The design treats a violated level the same way whether it was a gap, a zone or a mapped pool — spent is spent.

The honest trade-off

One-way lifecycles make the state machine small enough to reason about and small enough to test. The cost is that genuinely informative reversals get discarded along with the noise. We would rather carry a known, stated limitation than a rule set nobody can hold in their head — and the limitation is listed on the methodology page for exactly that reason.

Common questions

How does the engine treat a filled gap?

Once price fills about half of a fair value gap, the gap stops being eligible to host an entry and leaves the tracked set. There is no second act.

Isn't ignoring inversions leaving edge on the table?

Maybe. It is also leaving a whole category of after-the-fact reinterpretation on the table, and we have not tested whether the first is worth more than the second. Until we have, the honest answer is that the engine does not do it.

Where would it show up if you added it?

In the changelog first, as a new mechanization version, with its results kept separate from v1's — results across versions are never pooled.

No chart example — on purposeThere is no screenshot of this concept anywhere on this site, because the indicator never draws it. Publishing an illustration of something the engine does not compute is exactly the kind of decorative proof this project exists to avoid.

Related

Fair value gap · Breaker block · Full methodology