eminiman414

53.36% of the time after a break higher than yesterday's high we close above yesterday's high and on breaks lower we close lower than yesterday's low 48.86% of the time. Forgot to add those above. Haven't found anything interesting regarding extents of the breaks and whether it leads more to a continuation vs reversal, at least just by the numbers. I'm sure other context will provide clues as well as how far price has already traveled in the day maybe in relation to the 10ADR or maybe in relation to that average range # of 65. More than likely there's another swing point/level that's more important above/below yesterday's range. We'll see as I dig deeper.

Some quick stats for the NQ. More work to be done. Sample size in days=186 01/05/2015 to 09/22/2015 % / # How often does the market break higher than yesterday's high? 55.38 / 103 How often does the market close higher than yesterday's high? 30.11 / 56 How often does the market break lower than yesterday's low? 47.31 / 88 How often does the market close lower than yesterday's low? 23.12 / 43 How often does the market stay within yesterday's high or low? 9.68 / 18 How often does the market break both yesterday's high or low? 12.37 / 23 How often does the market break either yesterday's high or low? 90.32 / 168 Average range across all days was 65 points. Didn't set a number as to what qualifies a break (yet) so based on excel a break would be 1tick, but 90% of the time the PDH or L was touched. Yesterday's high or low was never matched the following day with it being the current day's highest high or lowest low. Closing higher or lower was general not after a break, however I will be calculating that as I move forward. I did track the extents of the breaks and some other things but still working. Of course there is more work to be done regarding context and all that jazz. Will continue updating.

Keeping on topic of 80. First I'll say every bone in my body wanted to SAR my long as price was choking as we approached and at 80 however I didn't because I don't really have a set plan regarding SAR's. Can a SAR be a "feel" sort of thing? I mean I had reasons why I considered it but to try to backtest something like that I find rather difficult because it hardly ever "looks" the same. Also this was in hindsight but we had that daily swing high at 4380 as well with that range btw 4380 and 4260ish. Often I find price "re-enters" a range and re-tests the limit. That being 80. Price also stalled at roughly the midpoint btw 4380-4260 later on. I am seeing bunnies here? And what's your opinion on the SAR tactic? I didn't notice 80 from the daily until after the fact and had I, I may have been more apt to reverse but again no hard plan. I suppose with better prep I could have said "if price chokes at 80 SAR"??? Is that good enough? The SAR and the scratch are the last pieces of the puzzle for me. I had asked 40d but I apparently missed all the nonsense and see why I did not get a response lol. You guys are saints. I don't quite know how to answer this as there was no reason to be long in the first place. Even if you were trading at 0700, one cannot expect a V-reversal off a 50pt climax. If I were going to go long at all, I'd go long off the test (there wasn't one). As it was, I waited to see how far price got. As it reversed almost to the tick at the halfway level, a short was called for. And that was that. Thanks for the response. As long as the short was justified I'm good with that. I was long the higher low off 67ish.

No worries. Concepts are the same anyways. Actually, you guys ought to be able to reproduce it.

I think he means we can't see the chart. At least I can't. I don't know why it's not visible. It was visible in his reply.

Not sure if anyone else has this issue but it says I don't have permission to view whatever it is you posted???? That's a new one. I wonder how much longer TL has?

Thanks for the earlier responses. Last question is what in your opinion would constitute a large enough sample size regarding testing? Should it be measured in days tested or entries? Either or what's a justifiable sample size? Depends on what you're testing and how afraid you are of trading. What exactly are you trying to determine? Great question. I guess it's if my method has a chance over the long haul and if it's "good enough" given the current sample size to go live with it. Results thus far are positive. I suppose though that the "testing" is really nothing more than gaining confidence in what I am doing. Again, even in writing this the answer is really up to me. If I am not fully confident in the approach keep testing it. If I am confident roll it out. I've only done 30 replays with 137 entries (some scratch/re-entries). In my head it doesn't seem like enough but some trades the plan works great and others it doesn't but that's just the nature of the beast of course If it's a question of your entire method, then I suggest a year, 250 trading days, or at least every other day. You need to know how it works over a complete annual cycle. If you're genuinely interested, test over a bull/bear cycle, one bull year and one bear year. Glad you said that because that's what I was thinking. Thanks for the response.

I sorta meant more in terms for data collection on a strategy. If the average MAE on all trades is 1.39, average MAE on winning trades is 3 ticks, and the average loss is 1.56 points, depending on what's considered a scratch vs a loss would change the "win rate" of the strategy. But if it's profitable and simple to trade does it even matter? If minus a tick is a "loss" then the win rate is about 33% but if +/- 2 points is a "scratch" the win rate climbs closer to 70%. Average win is 7.58 points. Largest loss 2.25 points largest win 40 points. So as long as this strategy is profitable does any of this even really matter? Unless the trader is trying to impress somebody on a message board, a "win" or "loss" of a tick or so may be considered null. The purpose of maintaining these stats for the individual is to keep him on track. How he goes about doing so is entirely up to him.

What would you consider the difference (in points) between a scratch, small win, and a loss? The purpose of the scratch is to immediately get out of a trade that isn't going as expected. There may be a small gain. If there's a loss, it should be inconsequential. The chief purpose of it is to enable a failing trader to regain control of his trading rather than leave it all up to the market. But by itself it's not nearly enough. One must also know exactly what he's doing. For example, I rarely see anyone doing sufficient prep. They therefore trade in a state of perpetual surprise.

Just wanted to let you know I am following along but it's too difficult to type and focus at the same time. Some questions I have might be more related to AMT and just buying/selling a level outright if it "appears" to hold as opposed to waiting for some type of price "pattern" to trigger my entry, let's say a 123 or double top/bottom or even the first RET thereafter on a smaller interval. I find that when I think of myself as a buyer or seller I focus on price movement and less on the trigger required to get me in. In a way the trigger becomes almost irrelevant to what was actually happening with price. To make a short story longer if one was to focus moreso on AMT is that how it should go? Just buying/selling the limits that appear to be holding? Of course one would have to define "holding" but it's seems easier/less stressful to buy/sell the level then waiting for some "setup" around the level bc every time I start getting into that I go back to pattern land and it screws me up. In AMT isn't playing with the limits called responsive (reversal) trades and initiative ( breakout) trades? Is the nature of those types of plays just getting in nearest to the limit? I do use the SLA to track but not the entry trigger. I'm watching a smaller interval for entry around the levels. I'm asking this because every instance is so independent of the last in terms of how price behaves around these limits so essentially I've just been trying to simplify everything. If an upper limit is holding just short it. Don't wait. It doesn't matter if it's only spent a few minutes there. If the level is going to hold it's going to hold and price won't trade much higher than the level if it's good. You may have to sit thru another test but again if the level is good for the reversal it will hold. If not take the loss and re-evaluate. Is this wrong thinking? Also do you have any recommendations on further reading material regarding amt? You're over-thinking it. If you're going to trade a range, you have to trade the reversal. Where you enter will depend on how far away from the limit you have to enter to give a reasonably high probability that traders are showing intent. A point or two away from the limit ought to be enough, and this puts you close to the danger point. You may have to endure a lot of twisting at the limit if you enter too close to it. The SLA is irrelevant. As for further reading on AMT, I haven't found any, which I find puzzling.

I've been observing this more and more. When one end fails the other end is typically tested. Don't have exact stats but it seems to be very common behavior. I've also noticed that on re-entry into the range price often retests the limit again from "inside" before continuing to the opposite end. This didn't happen today but just something I've observed.

Hey Niko, I have obtain similar results, not just for Sept. but for most months where there is generally 8-10 "trending" opportunities per month. About 70% of these moves get going within the first 15 minutes and of the moves that get going within the first 15 minutes 77% of them start from an extreme (whether reversing or breaking etc.) This was in 2013.

I'm doing great. Just about ready to start forward testing.

How's everything going?

First short at 92.75 second at 91? No, first short off 3801, then a long scratch at 3797. No trade ops thereafter.