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
-
I don't mean to be unkind. I'm sure Mr Ord is a superior person and understands Wyckoff well. But this sort of thing is a pet peeve. When gurus start naming things after themselves, little bells should begin to ring (the "Elder Ray"; set to stun?). I suspect that the user might find his software more useful than TradeGuider, which is for the most part a joke, but it suffers from the same mortal defect: it attempts to code what can't be coded. However, the software is also a lot cheaper. As long as his users remain ignorant of Constant Volume Bars, the market for the software should remain intact. Any book or software program or course or seminar or whatever that promises to shorten the learning curve (that is, provide shortcuts) will do well, particularly if it promises to reveal anything "hidden" or "secret". But there's just no substitute for the screen time, and even the software developer, if he's honest, will acknowledge that fact, albeit grudgingly. But thanks for acquainting me with this gentleman and his work.
-
I'm glad the material has been useful. As for the "Ord Oracle", I've never heard of him, but the "oracle" part is pretty much a turnoff right out of the gate.
-
Thanks to nic and tune for stepping up to the plate. This chart is a good example of the importance of remaining bias-free. Given the parabolic rise through resistance all the way to 1900, a bias toward the short side would seem to be a duh. And the first level of support appeared to be 1880. However, if one looks back at tune's chart, he can see the congestion area between 1880 and 1890 on the 4th and 7th, the midpoint of which was 1885. Even if he focused on the low to the high on the 7th, he'd still end up with a midpoint at 1885. Therefore, dropping below 1890 does not necessarily mean that the long game is over. Note here that when volume comes in at 0948, price is pulled down. But even though price continues its slide, volume breaks off dramatically, then works its way higher until 0952. All this appears to favor the short side. But look at effort and result. As volume rises, the bars get shorter, and when volume peaks at 0952, price closes well off the low, and buyers are able to push price higher in the next bar with much less effort; hence the lower volume. Therefore, throughout this "downmove", buyers are coming into the market, supporting the price, and even pushing price higher. Volume then dries up considerably during the upswing after moving price to 1892. The big volume comes at 1000 and pulls price down almost to 1886. This appears, again, to support the short side, particularly since sellers are able to move price with little resistance from buyers (low volume, except for 1000). Buyers and sellers then go back and forth, and volume does pick up during this exchange. However, the biggest volume is unable to pull price lower, and the end result is a draw. This is not good for the short side. At 1008, buyers are then able to push price higher with very little effort (again, low volume) suggesting that selling pressure is much less than it had been. During the next segment, buyers are able to keep sellers at bay with relatively little effort (again, low volume). Next, buyers are able to push price all the way back above 1891, and though the volume is higher, suggesting that they had to work a little harder, it is not unusually high. During the last segment, price drifts back a bit, but volume practically disappears, suggesting that sellers are done, and it's up to the buyers (note how easily buyers push price higher at 1019). This is only about bars, however, if one can't see them move. If one watches them move in real time or via replay, he can detect the waves easily. Note here how price dips into each trough, then rises back out of it, crests, then repeats the cycle again and again, gathering strength along the way. If sellers had the upper hand, price would not repeatedly recover in this way.
-
My NQ chart is considerably different from yours. It opens at 1898, then drops to 1886 by 10:00. It didn't reach 1905 until 11:00. Perhaps your clock is off.
-
So. Anybody detect the buypoint in the NQ today?
-
Steenbarger addressed the subject of trend days yesterday in his blog. I suspect you will find it of interest: Bandwagon Effects
-
That's not an option in blog comments. The closest thread is probably this one: Real Time Price Action
-
Regarding the above, I hope that those who are playing with these charts are making the connection between the volume and the swing points. Otherwise, there's no point in doing it:
-
I don't know that any comment is necessary, treadstone. A picture's worth etc etc. I should caution those who are new to this, however, that the VAP distribution is current. Before drawing any conclusions regarding trades prior to, say, the 16th, a new chart would have to be drawn that does not include the 16th or 17th or today. In this case, it might not matter. In most cases, however, the VAP distribution will be considerably different. Not that one can trade the past anyway, but if one is backtesting this, he can test only the right edge, and the data must end there (as opposed to just scrolling back).
-
W might call the area encompassed by the red lines a hinge (Schabacker would prefer that it be filled with price, i.e., the 0950 swing high should reach all the way to the top red line). A pattern person might see a rising wedge -- the area encompassed by the blue lines. Either way, the result is the same, a continuation of the move down from 1870.
-
Even though the blood is now flowing to my head, I still can't remember who said this, though it must have been somebody I pay close attention to, and there aren't many: Mamis, Schabacker, Magee, a couple of others. But I do recall now that whoever it was said that corrections end in double tops and bottoms but bull and bear markets don't, rather the latter end in rounded tops and bottoms. Of course, "the exception proves the rule" blah blah. The Nasdaq ended in a peculiar sort of triple top in '00, which to me was classic Wyckoff, though others might disagree.
-
And others say that neither is true, that markets reverse in rounded tops and bottoms. So I guess it depends on what you're looking at and who you're listening to. Which is why it's important, as Schabacker says, to focus on the behavior creating the pattern and not on the pattern itself. You provided a good example of that in the chart you posted. Whether W would be trading this at all is debatable since, technically, we aren't trending at all; we've been consolidating for three months. A hundred years ago, ranges such as these were only a few points wide. Now they're 200pts (or at least this one is), so the trips from top to bottom and back again are actually worth trading.
-
Going back to post 122 above and what I'm looking at on the NQ, I'm posting a chart of what I actually am looking at (which isn't BigCharts). This may be tangential to the discussion, but without real people making real trades in real markets off real charts, it all becomes the usual hypothetical, philosophical discussions that become interesting but irrelevant and push people toward Miracle Software ("Anybody Can Do It!"). Note that after bouncing off long-term support, price consolidated between the bottom and midpoint of the first range. It then stalled and formed a hinge at the bottom of the next range. It then consolidated again at a line which has served as both support and resistance all month. Then to the midpoint of the range created on the 8th and the bottom of the range which preceded the cascade. Overnite, we reached 1870, the top of this range. Whether we reach 1880 or not remains to be seen. If there's no buying climax, I'll be looking at pretty much what Nic posted, though I'll scale out as usual under these circumstances.
-
BigCharts doesn't provide emini data. It's also delayed. I'm sure they're accurate for what they are.
-
Review of TraderFeed with Brett Steenbarger
DbPhoenix replied to brownsfan019's topic in Trading Products and Services
.......... -
To clarify the chart I posted in #102, I said "this is what I'm looking at now on the NQ". However, it should be obvious that I don't trade off BigCharts, nor do I use the QQQQ to give me signals. What I meant was that those were the price and volume clusters I was looking at, and continue to look at. I posted the QQQQ from BigCharts because (a) this is available to everyone and (b) it's close enough, at least for the purpose of illustrating these concepts. Anyone interested in doing this for real, eventually, should get himself a real-time feed and follow his own NQ or ES or whatever charts.
-
I can't speak for Wyckoff, but absent a buying climax, I assume he'd just hold for his stop. Edit: Post RTH, price up to 1865.
-
Personally, no. But waves don't always crest with a bang. They sometimes end with a whimper. Therefore, one has to have something else to look at in addition to climactic volume, which is why I incorporate demand/support lines, trendlines, and swing highs/lows. If price violates all of that, regardless of what's happening with volume, then you're very likely done.
-
If you're not long on the break of the hinge at 1825, I'd say there's not much for you to do except wait for a buying climax.
-
As to absorption, possibly. You'll note that that was the bottom of the range for the 9th. As to looking to the short side, there's no reason to do so as there was no buying climax. As for W, I assume he would have entered off yesterday's selling climax, though he might pyramid off the "stall" that you refer to. You'll notice that it forms a hinge, a type of springboard. Incidentally, W would most likely move his stop up below 1840. Nic?
-
Now approaching what had been support prior to the 65pt plunge on the 11th. Still no buying climax.
-
As a follow-on post, we've weathered the consolidation and have made a higher high into multiple zones of resistance. However, there's still no climactic action.
-
See this post made to the Dailies section of my Blog ("For Mar 25"), first chart: http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/blog.php?b=81 This level also acted as support on 3/31.
-
I also posted that we were approaching support dating back to January, which is where the selling climax occurred (the support level you're using is only one day's worth). Since no one had any questions at the time, I didn't elaborate or follow up on it. The retest then occurred at 1145 and the trendline was broken a few minutes later to the upside. Since then, there's been no reason to sell. I realize that few people who frequent these forums trade in real time. Therefore, there's no point in my posting a lot of real-time information since it will all be hindsight anyway to those who don't read it until after they get off work. Besides, I did two weeks' worth of that in the Dailies section of my Blog. Plus nic and I have posted a lot of information for those who are interested to read. Until they do, it's really just a lot of bits and pieces that are difficult to relate. Incidentally, since you're using a 5m chart, it may be more difficult to determine the continuous relationship between volume and price. I suggest you look at it again using a 1m chart.
-
Depends on what one means by "compromise". Yesterday, for example, one could enter at the selling climax or at the retest. The difference was less than three points. If that's too much of a compromise, one can enter at the climax and see what happens.