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.
DbPhoenix
-
Content Count
3789 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Everything posted by DbPhoenix
-
Not if you're trying to capture multiple twists and turns since, by definition, the smaller the TF, the more twists and turns there'll be. But whether the TF is small or large need not have anything to do with the number of trades taken. One could simply take the first trade, then wait for price to reach the other side of the range. Again, the advantage of a smaller TF is seeing what price is doing in the moment rather than waiting for a summary. What one does with regard to what he sees is another matter. You're making generalizations which are actually a matter of personal choice. Now that I agree with, but it has nothing inherently to do with the TF. It has more to do with whether or not the trader is trading the TF competently.
-
Correct. Yes, though that's not necessarily a reason to cover the entire short and go long. The odds are that price will continue downward.
-
Price behaves differently as the day goes on because there's continuing history. I don't know that it's more or less "technical". As to "meaning", I don't concern myself with that.
-
That's why it's better to place the long ahead of whatever reversal may occur than to go long outright.
-
Very sharp. And a very good question. And, yes, I do believe he might. Given the stability of the channel, he'd consider a drop below your demand line to be an "oversold condition". However, a long would be counter-trend, and he might also just wait for the test of the supply line. The profit potential after all is much less going long in a downward channel than short.
-
That's difficult to answer in a single post. Posts 61-72 in my "boxes" thread should explain. Sometimes the very short-term S/R is just too flimsy to rely on. This week, the S/R from the entire month of May has provided the tipping points.
-
Correct. Lighter volume on a test is hardly a sure thing. Unless one takes support and resistance into account, he can easily be tossed out of what would have been a much more profitable trade had he stayed in, such as today's NQ. For example: http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/39746-post177.html
-
I didn't see any particular support yesterday, and resistance wasn't tested until after lunch. However, by that time, I had already stopped trading for the day. I try to be done in 90m if at all possible. Playing a range is not so much trading as gambling, and it's just not worth my time. The best trades are taken when emotions are high, and this is often within the first five minutes. After that, traders have too much time to think.
-
Or one may be content with the usual lines. It's all support and resistance, regardless of how one chooses to illustrate it. But if one doesn't understand the nature of support and resistance, then no form of illustration is going to make much sense. This is why the software developers clean up.
-
In the event that the origin of 2000 is unclear, I've drawn a box around the entire month. If this seems too discretionary, take the midpoint of the upmove from 1940 to 2060 (the red line). There is also the demand line, which crossed 2000 on Friday. One must then, of course, take the trade.
-
I use Sierra and pay 17.50/mo (14.60/mo if one buys a year). No need for anything expensive. All one has to do is draw a box. He can do that by printing out a free chart from somewhere and drawing the box with a pencil.
-
There aren't "so many". There are only the support and resistance pertinent to where price opens. This morning, there were only two pertinent resistance levels: 2000 (the past month's trading range) and 2010 (the past ten days' trading range). Price opened and found resistance at 2000.
-
For the time being, 1950. And it bounces off 1949.
-
Other than to point out that traders sought equilibrium within these zones, no.
-
Referencing the macro posted Friday (post #60), and my earlier post today (#61), here's how today's low -- so far -- relates to the midpoint of the most recent trading range:
-
Yes to both..........
-
For the time being, 1950. But, as I've posted, I manage the trade according to trendlines and swing points rather than targets. 67-69 has been a consistent S/R level since the beginning of May, but I wouldn't exit simply because price arrived there (which it did at 0952). If there were a reversal signal at an S/R level like 67-69 (i.e., one which occurs just short of a more obvious support level), one could cash in one contract there. In this case, there was such a reversal signal if one incorporates the TICKQ, which bottomed at 0948, then diverged with price, which bottomed at 0952.
-
NQ traders will note that price rejected 2000 (see above) within a tick one minute after the open.
-
The macros provided the better guidance this week. NQ. Support and resistance were determined by the boxes drawn the previous two weeks, support at the top of the previous week's box at 1980 and resistance at the top of the box before that 2030-2040. The only unusual occurrence was the break above 2040 on Thursday, followed by a test and a move upward to 2060. This might have become the beginning of a new trading range, but price dropped below 2040 on Friday, tested it, then sank to 1990. 2000, then, appears to continue to act as the midpoint for May's activity. ES. Nothing out of the ordinary here beyond the upthrust to 1410.
-
Re the NQ, the somewhat lengthy moves beginning on 5/29, with few if any consolidations along the way, appeared to have resolved themselves into a kind of "mega-box" stretching from 1980 to 2040. Whether or not 2040 to 2060 becomes a new value area remains to be seen, but it has to be considered. Since the weekend is only a day away, I'll wait till then to post a chart. I mention this only because several MP charts have been posted here and there showing the same thing, and yesterday's break above 2040 may be important to today's trading.
-
No, it's not the right place, but there is no right place in the forum for this sort of question, at least currently. When it comes to the where-did-I-go-wrong type of question, a thread which deals with specifics, particularly as they relate to a given individual, is necessary. Otherwise, the more general application thread balloons to hundreds of posts and nobody reads it anymore. Since we don't know why you're trading this group, much less this stock, and since we don't know why you entered where you did, there's not much to offer other than the usual boiler-plate advice. Therefore, I suggest you repost the above to a new thread (call it what you like) and explain in more detail why you did what you did when you did it. The comments you receive might then be considerably more pertinent.
-
If by "it" you mean ETFs, here's a link: http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/investmentproducts.asp You can buy an entire market, such as the S&P; a sector, such as financials or industrials; or something more specific, such as semiconductors or biotechnology. Again, these were not available during Wyckoff's time, but I think he would have been enthusiastic about them.
-
I switched from stocks to futures in 2000. However, lest this discussion get too far afield (i.e., the subject of the thread), I'll point out that Wyckoff's chief consideration was minimizing risk. If your work prevents you from trading stocks intraday, you certainly have no business trading futures intraday. In fact, you should avoid futures entirely. If trading stocks EOD also takes too much time (the research and so forth), consider trading ETFs. The last may not seem "Wyckoffian" since ETFs were not traded a hundred years ago. However, Wyckoff's approach found the strongest stocks by first finding the strongest markets, then the strongest groups. With ETFs, you can stop there and trade the group itself (you can even stop earlier and trade the market itself). If you then want to go on from there and trade a basket of selected stocks at some point, that's your choice.
-
Most of it's in the book, so anyone who just has to have it has at least one option (click my name for a preview of the book). But I should point out again that my book is technically not a "VSA" book. If VSA is the focus of one's interest, Mastering the Markets is free.
-
Yes, it does. I suspect most people look for S/R elsewhere.
