Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Guest Muir

Some New Thoughts

Recommended Posts

Guest Muir

1. Steidlmayer has stated (repeatedly) that today the "Market Profile" is concave.

Wow!**

 

----(three additional thoughts)----

 

2. Steidlmayer, has said repeatedly throughout the years that Market Profile was not intended to be a trading methodology; rather, each trader could see the market as it was in present time and devise his own trading approach based on what the market was doing at the time.

(Dalton and others notwithstanding)

 

3. Steidlmayer is not a great trader and has never pretended to be one. (This is an important point in my opinion. Skill and methodology employed are not one in the same. Example: there are probably great traders that use lousy systems and would defend their methodology because they really have no idea of how they actually do trade.)

 

4. Nothing really new under the sun. There is a primitive "Market Profile" in the book "Studies in tape Reading" page 88.

Original publication dates of articles: 1908-1909

 

_______________________

 

** (from #1 above) questions/observations:

 

I've seen this again and again on the day timeframe.

Although, it is true that if I add enough days I see a nice convex Bell curve, but is that just chance that if I happen to add enough arbitrary days I finally see a nice curve?

 

If concavity is fragile, as Nassim Taleb states, then let us assume the ride will be wilder.

 

Any strategy assuming a day convex bell curve is wrong. If this statement is true, does this invalidate a thread like "Trading with Market statistics?"

 

________________________

 

Would like comments, what am I missing?

I'm really curious.

 

p.s. I happen to really like "Markets in Profile." (read twice)

Never met Mr. Dalton (which from certain comments made by MightyMouse was to my benefit.) Steidlmayer seems like an unpretentious old guy who really just likes to trade, never met him either.

I'm more of a "tape reader" like guy, and prefer to see volume horizontally, but I've read dozens and dozens of posts here and watched the "Trading with market statistics" SWFs.

 

_________________________

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Interesting post since I just finished rereading Nassim Taleb’s “Fooled by Randomness,” and boy can I be fooled by randomness. As he sums up in the end of that book’s second edition:

 

“We favor the visible, the embedded, the personal, the narrated, and the tangible; we scorn the abstract.”

 

Well the correct use of Market Profile is about as abstract as they come. So it is no surprise it is misunderstood.

 

The strength of the Profile allows one to differentiate the “concave” from the excess or as Nassim would say: the fat tails. So you can tell if the market in “concave” or in excess (fat tail). The profile is nothing more than flattened out 30-minute bars. But Steidlmayer was very creative in what he did. Too bad he has problems applying his own tool. I guess he scorns the abstract just like so many academics.

 

I went through the “Trading with Market Statistics” threads a year ago. It taught me to pay more attention to the VWAP (Volume Weighted Average Price) and VPOC (Volume Point of Control), but I could not find an edge with it that was better than my current method. The VWAP and VPOC are very important prices though. Intra day market activity definitely takes them into account.

 

Good luck,

dVL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Muir
Hello,

 

Interesting post since I just finished rereading Nassim Taleb’s “Fooled by Randomness,” and boy can I be fooled by randomness. As he sums up in the end of that book’s second edition:

 

....

 

The strength of the Profile allows one to differentiate the “concave” from the excess or as Nassim would say: the fat tails. So you can tell if the market in “concave” or in excess (fat tail). The profile is nothing more than flattened out 30-minute bars.

 

I went through the “Trading with Market Statistics” threads a year ago. It taught me to pay more attention to the VWAP (Volume Weighted Average Price) and VPOC (Volume Point of Control), but I could not find an edge with it that was better than my current method. The VWAP and VPOC are very important prices though. Intra day market activity definitely takes them into account.

 

Good luck,

dVL

 

Davinci,

 

 

 

The point is that the day profiles on commodities are no longer a Bell Curve hardly ever.

see

Volume: The Key to Understanding Today's Market

 

That's J Peter Steidlmayer on CME.

 

I'm not a good poster so I should have used examples but basically most day profiles are now:

 

<

 

rather than

 

>

 

with 2 fat tails.

 

just look at gld or gc for past 30 days, for example.

 

I see absolutely no edge with a lot of the strategies posted (actually, seems like losing propositions,) but when I put together day profiles to make a somewhat truer "Bell curve" multi- day profile, POC and VWAP are nice tools indeed.

 

I'm on "Antifragile"

I enjoyed "Fooled by randomness the most."

 

Likewise, good trading and reading, strongly recommend "Simple Heuristics that make us smart" which Talib likes.

I read the book before he did :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Muir
Hello,

 

Interesting post since I just finished rereading Nassim Taleb’s “Fooled by Randomness,” and boy can I be fooled by randomness.

 

 

The strength of the Profile allows one to differentiate the “concave” from the excess or as Nassim would say: the fat tails. So you can tell if the market in “concave” or in excess (fat tail). The profile is nothing more than flattened out 30-minute bars.

 

Good luck,

dVL

 

DaVinci,

 

Tried to post earlier but guess the links weren't OK with moderator. Anyways, that's the point,

once the specialist and floor traders went way of the dinosaur, you don't see this: >

rather you see this <

Two "fat tails."

If you google Peter Steidlmayer and the word "volume" you should see a link to an exchange were he himself explains this.

On the thread "The evolution of Market profile" I never saw the most obvious changes:

floor traders--->electronic exchanges (no specialist system) therefore the artificial Bell Curve died.

 

I do have charts with VWAP and POC but it's hardly ever a bell curve anymore.

 

Good luck on your trading. Enjoy fooled (I did)

 

p.s. Taleb equates concavity with fragility in Antifragile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Thanks for the book and video link. I enjoyed the video. It is kind of like “trading therapy,” as Nassim puts it. But once the video is over it’s back to the real world. I saw his video on “Volume Strips” in 2011. It was and still is great therapy. It may be even more entertaining and therapeutic than that cab drive Nassim talks about in “Black Swan” because of Steidlmayer’s many twists and turns, or can I say mental gymnastics, that he specializes in.

 

I’ll definitely will read the book since it is right down my ally and will need it in the years to come.

 

I was mistaken in my use of “concave” as it relates to the profile. I assumed you were describing the shape of the profile. Yes, “concave” in the Antifragle context means the more volatility or harm a system has the more it is hurt. Where as an Antifragle system is “convex” thereby getting more benefit from that same volatility or harm.

 

Are you saying that “Trading with Market Statistics” may be concave because it uses statistics?

 

Here are some Nassim links you may enjoy:

 

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33kET2YPWls]04 10 2012Nassim Taleb - YouTube[/ame]

 

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QiiFSOrJhQ]Nassim Taleb Speaks to a Clueless Congress (Part 2 of 2) - YouTube[/ame]

 

 

 

 

After Words with Nassim Taleb - C-SPAN Video Library

 

 

Good Luck,

dVL

Edited by daVinciLite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Muir
Hello,

 

Thanks for the book and video link. I enjoyed the video. It is kind of like “trading therapy,” as Nassim puts it. But once the video is over it’s back to the real world....

 

Are you saying that “Trading with Market Statistics” may be concave because it uses statistics?

 

Here are some Nassim links you may enjoy:

 

 

Good Luck,

dVL

 

Thanks for the links!

Appreciate it.

I saw the first video in 11 also

But this is a follow up he did in Jun 27, 2012 (grueling 1:55:08)

Volume: The Key to Understanding Today's Market

 

 

I'm saying that "Trading with market Statistics" is fundamentally flawed, even ignoring Nassim's market "fat tails," 2010 flash crash, 1987 plunge (and any other time that markets have done what would take "billions and billions" of years to reproduce if the market were a domesticated Bell Curve,) yes, even ignoring all that, the only time it did "work" was when the specialist and floor traders (which we now see nostalgically in "Trading Paces" and "Ferris Bueller's Day off") were there, creating a Bell Curve by selling to the other time frame, and making money in the process, of course.

 

As a visual tool, volume profiles are a handy tool.

But more than that, I'm sure many traders have developed successful methods that utilize Market Profile.

“Trading with Market Statistics” as shown can't be one of them.

Others here have stated similar thoughts that Market Profile was a flawed idea, I disagree, it was a tool that others developed systems around, some good, some flawed.

 

In search of the better ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.