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.

jperl

What is DEMAND/SUPPLY volume?

Recommended Posts

This thread is started as a result of a short discussion by Tasuki in the Volume Spread Analysis posts 982 and 991 to quantify the concepts of DEMAND and SUPPLY volume. The problem arises on how to define DEMAND volume and SUPPLY volume. Some traders define trades made at the ask as DEMAND volume, trades made at the bid as SUPPLY volume. Other traders would say volume should be considered DEMAND only if there is an uptick in price and SUPPLY only if there is a down tick in price. If price does not change, then that trade is taken to be DEMAND volume if the last time price changed was an up tick and SUPPLY volume if the last time price changed was a down tick.

 

The former definition is used by Mister Ed in the following quote from the VSA thread

Let’s say there is a sequence thus:

1. Bid = 25

2. Ask = 50

3. Trade at 50 for 75 lots. (This is an aggressive buy – reported as a buy)

4. Bid is now 50

5. Ask = 75

6. Trade at 50 for 30 lots. (This is an aggressive sell – reported as a sell).

 

In that series of trades, trade 3 would be DEMAND volume of 75 lots because it occurred at the ask and trade 6 would be SUPPLY volume of 30 lots because it occurred at the bid.

 

For the alternative definition of DEMAND/SUPPLY (which I prefer) consider the following series of trades

1.Bid =25,Ask=50, trade at 25 for 25 lots

2 Bid=25,Ask=50, trade at 50 for 75 lots

3.Bid changes to 50, Ask changes to 75, trade at 50 for 30 lots

 

In this scenario, trade 2 would be DEMAND volume of 75 lots because there was an uptick from trade 1 from 25 to 50.

Trade 3 would also be DEMAND volume of 30 lots (even though it occurred at the bid at the same price as trade 2) because the last price change was an up tick(trade 2 after trade 1).

This is not a small difference in definition and is crucial for quantifying many of the ideas in VSA.

This thread is now open for discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is started as a result of a short discussion by Tasuki in the Volume Spread Analysis posts 982 and 991 to quantify the concepts of DEMAND and SUPPLY volume. The problem arises on how to define DEMAND volume and SUPPLY volume. Some traders define trades made at the ask as DEMAND volume, trades made at the bid as SUPPLY volume. Other traders would say volume should be considered DEMAND only if there is an uptick in price and SUPPLY only if there is a down tick in price. If price does not change, then that trade is taken to be DEMAND volume if the last time price changed was an up tick and SUPPLY volume if the last time price changed was a down tick.

 

The former definition is used by Mister Ed in the following quote from the VSA thread

 

 

In that series of trades, trade 3 would be DEMAND volume of 75 lots because it occurred at the ask and trade 6 would be SUPPLY volume of 30 lots because it occurred at the bid.

 

For the alternative definition of DEMAND/SUPPLY (which I prefer) consider the following series of trades

1.Bid =25,Ask=50, trade at 25 for 25 lots

2 Bid=25,Ask=50, trade at 50 for 75 lots

3.Bid changes to 50, Ask changes to 75, trade at 50 for 30 lots

 

In this scenario, trade 2 would be DEMAND volume of 75 lots because there was an uptick from trade 1 from 25 to 50.

Trade 3 would also be DEMAND volume of 30 lots (even though it occurred at the bid at the same price as trade 2) because the last price change was an up tick(trade 2 after trade 1).

This is not a small difference in definition and is crucial for quantifying many of the ideas in VSA.

This thread is now open for discussion.

 

New thread! OK.

 

Just to reiterate Jerry - yes we are in complete disagreement about our definitions :haha:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way Jerry, and all, this thread should not be limited to just discussing the definition of bid / ask or Demand / Supply volume - I hope we can find more to discuss than just the definition.

 

But while we are on that subject I think it would be worthwhile finding out what definition is used in TradeStation, it is a popular package and be good to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3. I have an issue with smart = big. Observation of the big-lot trades that go through suggests to me that the big lot traders are not necessarily “smartâ€Â. It is logical that smart = big, but in my experience, not all big = smart. This may be an issue with how the data is presented, and I would love input on this. I am only speaking of the ES, my current understanding is that a 100 lot buy (i.e. a buyer who hits the ask for 100) is reported as a 100 lot buy even if he buys from a split of sellers, say a 5, 10, 15, 10, 30, 20, 10). Another point is the software exists to allow trade size to be split, so instead of executing one lot of 200 near-simultaneous execution of 4 lots of 50 (for arguments sake) can be done instead. My broker even offers a humble trader like me an “iceberg†facility to split up my limit orders.

 

 

Glad you agreed with most of my post :D. This was a bit sloppy on my part. VSA tends to use 'smart money' as a type of catch all for the guys that are privy to stuff we dont know, it is kind of implied that they also have the guys that take massive positions. Really there is just a right side and a wrong side in the timeframe you trade!! As I mention now and then the commitment of traders report would indicate The % winners and losers don't really vary that much amongst the various market participants. In a nutshell I agree the big guys loose too. The way I see it (which maybe a bit different to the pure VSA view) is that there is 'smart money' that knows stuff we don't or simply has there own agenda. They are probably 'large'. Where I agree with you and perhaps stray from the pure VSA view is there are also a whole bunch of 'dumb' participants trading size too. Anyway I digress.

 

The thing you introduce is the other piece of information that we can use as traders. That is the order book. Basically its inventory the participants choose to advertise. Incidentally I think this is another area where people tend to use intuition and get it wrong. If you watch the order book price tends to move towards size not away from it. In fact the old timers say 'size trades to size'.

 

I think probably one of the key thing is how the advertised inventory (order book) reacts to the aggressive sellers. I have noticed a few things but I find it quite tricky sometimes. As yet I have never discovered a tape reader that can really explain it!

 

Anyway I hope we can get some practical application out of this stuff as it is unique market generated data.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you who use Investor R/T software, you have a choice on how you break down volume, the Mister Ed version (bid/ask) or my version (uptick/downtick). Here is a quote from their site:

 

http://www.linnsoft.com/new/index86.html

The Volume Breakdown Indicator (VB) has been enhanced with an option to divide up volume by "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume". In the past, volume was always broken down between Ask Traded and Bid Traded volume. Now, the user has a choice of dividing up Buy and Sell volume as either "Ask Traded vs Bid Traded Volume" or "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume. When "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume" is specified, each trade that occurs on or after an uptick is placed in the buy volume category, while any trade that occurs on or after a downtick is considered in the sell volume category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those of you who use Investor R/T software, you have a choice on how you break down volume, the Mister Ed version (bid/ask) or my version (uptick/downtick). Here is a quote from their site:

 

http://www.linnsoft.com/new/index86.html

The Volume Breakdown Indicator (VB) has been enhanced with an option to divide up volume by "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume". In the past, volume was always broken down between Ask Traded and Bid Traded volume. Now, the user has a choice of dividing up Buy and Sell volume as either "Ask Traded vs Bid Traded Volume" or "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume. When "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume" is specified, each trade that occurs on or after an uptick is placed in the buy volume category, while any trade that occurs on or after a downtick is considered in the sell volume category.

 

 

As I have mentioned on the VSA thread, the most productive way forward is to illustrate these issues via observations on a chart with some realtime trades and get them posted so that all can benefit, who knows Sebastian and Co may decide to incorporate in their analysis and in any charting software they may be developing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, new thread and already I am learning! Jerry - thanks for the tip re option in IR/T - I will compare our two definitions and see the pros & cons for each.

 

BF and Monad - past bedtime here, will go through posts more thoroughly when fully awake...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For those of you who use Investor R/T software, you have a choice on how you break down volume, the Mister Ed version (bid/ask) or my version (uptick/downtick). Here is a quote from their site:

 

http://www.linnsoft.com/new/index86.html

The Volume Breakdown Indicator (VB) has been enhanced with an option to divide up volume by "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume". In the past, volume was always broken down between Ask Traded and Bid Traded volume. Now, the user has a choice of dividing up Buy and Sell volume as either "Ask Traded vs Bid Traded Volume" or "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume. When "Up Tick vs Down Tick Volume" is specified, each trade that occurs on or after an uptick is placed in the buy volume category, while any trade that occurs on or after a downtick is considered in the sell volume category.

 

Hi Jerry,

 

I have looked at both and uptick/downtick looks like a good 'proxy' for volume at bid/ask. While not identical they look very similar.

 

If you think about it price is likely to tick up to the ask and down to the bid. Of course you do get cases where this is not the case but on the whole the two look very similar. Tradestation offers this uptick downtick natively though there are indicators available to do @bid @ask.

 

Cheers.

 

P.S. I cant post charts right now as they only accumulate the volume corectly in real time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And for those of you who use TradeStation, according to epiktetos at post 12637 the following is the info about upticks vs down ticks:

 

"TS uses the following rules when assigning a tick to the reserved word UpTicks:An uptick is a tick whose price is higher than that of the previous tick of a different price. Thus, if tick 1 occurs at a given price, tick 2 occurs at a higher price, and tick 3 occurs at the same price as tick 2, both tick 2 and tick 3 are counted as upticks."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BF – interesting points about the “smart money†you make “that knows stuff we don't or simply has there own agenda†– yes agree with you on both. I also think there is less of it than perhaps we assume. I have heard figures bandied around that 85% of activity is related to smart money, the figures and definitions are vague (at least to my understanding) but I can’t think that number is anywhere near accurate.

 

It is important to differentiate between size and smart – there is plenty of big lots traders bumping up against big lot traders activity, and one, at least, has to be on the wrong side. The point you make about sometimes they just have their own agenda is true, in MP you would refer to it as the other timeframe trader I believe, and a lot of the time their activity in the smaller timeframe is not at all “smart†– “just get me set†would seem to be a better description of their activity sometimes.

 

Now the order book – trade towards size is very accurate. I have heard two good, plausible explanations. One is that if the price is moving up towards large offers it is because there is no point sticking in a limit bid and waiting to get set, the price is moving up so may as well pay the offer and get in, the reason there are large offers sitting there is because in an up move the sellers can afford to sit on the offer and wait, hence the market moves towards size. Sounds plausible. The other explanation I have heard is “herding the sheepâ€Â. Stick in big offers just above market to spoof it while getting filled on the bid with iceberg limit buys. Must be one of the few instances in the business world where stuff is advertised for sale with no intention of actually selling it. This second explanation is my preferred model.

 

It is very interesting when this herding is occurring. I am not much of a watcher of DOM beyond when I am executing my own orders, most of the time I am watching my charts instead. But there are times when the nature of the trade changes, it is hard to explain but the range/volatility contracts while volumes remain reasonably strong. Sure enough I will flick over to DOM and there they are, offers in the thousands just above the market offer. As the market ticks higher so do these large offers, close but tantalizingly out of reach! Call me a cynic, but worth a look.

 

-------

 

I am still pondering on the 2 definitions slugging it out at present. Each definition will give a unique view of the market activity – the two are going to be very similar overall but at times will be distinctly different, and I think these differences will be at key points. I think its all in the way the price reacts to what is going on, as always. I am yet to go through some playback charts and look at these differences but on the brief look I have had I have a sneaking suspicion that my conclusion is going to be that both definitions offer valuable insights and maybe there is a role for using both. Anyone else doing the same thing, be good to hear other input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting document on this subject.

 

Written by Richard Malato of MarketDelta.

 

It was posted on their website a couple of years ago. Don't know if it's still there, but you can at least read it here. :)

 

It gives you a thorough introduction to the microstructure of the auction process in the electronic markets and clearly describes the relationship between aggressive and passive traders.

 

Enjoy.

 

-Skog

MarketDelta_White_Paper.doc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
both definitions offer valuable insights and maybe there is a role for using both.

 

I think it would be interesting to see what it would look like if you only plotted volume that was hit at the ask AND the previous tick was an uptick and vice versa. Or take it even further, 3 upticks then then an ask getting hit. That to me would be a much better way to define an aggressive buyer or seller and then just view everything else as noise. I think the problem though for this is you would need a true tick feed and the way tradestation handles this it wouldn't even make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Ed,

 

Why market moves to size I don't really bother myself too much about any more. Observation shows it does. (Though there are many interesting reasons put forward and I certainly like to hear them).

 

There is a particular type of order that doesn't show on the book but sits there all stealthy like. The good old stop. Guess what, every one who has been trading for a while knows exactly where those are likely to be situated....one obvious place is above/below previous swing highs and lows. This is why we see 'tests' and backing and filling it's the basis of why price moves how it does. It is simply seeking out orders.

 

Actually that bought about a paradigm shift in me (though I forget it often in day to day trading so it is not ingrained yet). Essentially rather than price 'bouncing off support' these areas where orders are bunched or likely to be bunched are actually magnets for price. Put another way on the whole price moves too support or resistance. This is subtle difference but is interesting and I think exploitable.

 

Just some more food for though though I guess we need to start looking for specifics that might help us see what is going on.

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres a couple of ES charts from this morning - the thing that cries out to me is that the price often drifts on a couple of ticks after the volume comes in. Oh and sometimes it comes in late. Any other observations welcome as this is quite experimental really. Edit: I added the arrows so you could see the bars the peaks occurred on.

 

Cheers,

picture13.thumb.png.0b627840fc30e11abb87047a4f750864.png

picture14.thumb.png.a804d3d452112a14ffd88a5ac1297895.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heres a couple of ES charts from this morning - the thing that cries out to me is that the price often drifts on a couple of ticks after the volume comes in. Oh and sometimes it comes in late. Any other observations welcome as this is quite experimental really. Edit: I added the arrows so you could see the bars the peaks occurred on.

 

Cheers,

 

What charting software you using Blowfish.

 

Is this upvolume/downvolume analysis similar to Market Delta. and if so have you found it useful in your trading, in conjunction with VSA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is volume@bid vs volume@ask on multicharts. Because each range bar is 1 tick wide it gives a visualisation of what volume was done at each level and what side. This chart is just a timing chart, currently I am looking at it after a turn to see if it shows something a 5 min and 2 min chart doesn't.

 

I am not using 'pure' VSA, though use price bars volume and channels for trade decisions. I have been observing this particular format of V@bis V@askfor a couple of weeks though have observed various delta configurations for a couple of years on and off.

 

My objective here is to see if this sort of resolution can nail turns a bit better. I think that delta lends itself better to fine resolution. The peaks on the charts would seem to confirm that. Its still quite experimental for me though I did scalp off footprint charts about 18 months (or maybe more) ago fairly successfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my motivations is to see if there is a way to read the tape without looking at the tape!

 

Another chart seem clear that someone decided support the market at the arrow. Is this useful to know? Maybe guess if there was potential support on my 5 min chart it might be. Of course this could still easily break later on.

picture15.thumb.png.ab34731c2b5ee2bb6d0981d16124dac6.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is another thread I cannot keep up with!

 

Been some great points and ideas brought up, I think one of the reasons I cant keep up is there is so much to mull over. Thanks for the charts BlowFish. I too am experimenting with this stuff, there are many combinations and permutations to play with.

 

Can I return back to the opening discussion Jerry and I were having? I have had a few thoughts. In a nutshell. the definition I have been exclusively using (I wont define it again, its in the earlier posts) up until now is, to my mind, just a “pure†bid/ask volume. I don’t mean that in a value-judgement way, what I mean is it is just data without any interpretation placed on it. The bid was hit? That’s an aggressive sell. The ask was hit? That’s an aggressive buy. (Yeah, OK, "aggressive" is an interpretation, just call it a "buy" or "sell" if you prefer).

 

The uptick/downtick definition, on the other hand, places an interpretation on the data before it is presented. The bid was hit? Well, before we classify it, what was the most previous price movement, an up- or down-tick? A downtick? OK, well that bid getting hit is “supply†then. On the other hand, if the tick prior was an uptick and that bid getting hit does not represent a downtick then that bid getting hit is “demandâ€Â.

 

See the difference? I would suggest using the uptick/downtick to classify the buys and sells is one step removed from the data. Is there anything wrong with that? Well, actually, I think no, there isn’t; and in fact I think classifying the hits in this way can be extremely useful. DarthTrader has suggested another alternative way of presenting the data, this too looks interesting.

 

I have attached a chart showing yesterday’s ES (3-minute chart), with the panes below plotting, in order: total volume, straight bid/ask volume, uptick/downtick bid/ask volume. Close examination will show how the two definitions of bid/ask volume show the data differently.

5aa70e2a9de70_3minuteES10Dec2007.thumb.png.95aed5299ed47bfb688823d5699cde1c.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant to post a couple of 'failures' or 'anomalies' I closed my workspace before I did a screen capture <doh>. I'm going to slow up and mull over a few things. I cant remember what I have said already!

 

Did I mention price seems to often pass the level that sees the influx of 'paper' by a few ticks before it actually makes the turn? That's interesting. I wonder if its like some kind of test.

 

Cheers.

 

Edit: absolutely agree with what you said above btw. I think Aggressive is fine to use if we agree to define this as "is prepared to hit the bid/ask" or "is prepared to trade at the market". Doesn't mean she wants to punch the counter party :D:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I mention price seems to often pass the level that sees the influx of 'paper' by a few ticks before it actually makes the turn? That's interesting. I wonder if its like some kind of test.

 

Happens a lot - more to investigate.

 

Doesn't mean she wants to punch the counter party :D:D

 

Well, maybe sometimes....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In TS, for the last week or so have been watching KlingerGoslin() and TickMoneyFlow() indicators plotted in the same subgraph using a TickBar data stream.

Scaling for both indicators is on NoAxis, Date range on screen.

KGI parameters are set fast (c,3,10,16,34,55, 13, 1, Darkgreen, Darkred).

(If you need I can post pictures or the version of the KGI I'm using)

 

Their movement is usually highly correlated but they also show some pretty neat divergences / disagreements, etc.

Is this a ‘squigly lines’ representation of what this topic is exploring?? Thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In TS, for the last week or so have been watching KlingerGoslin() and TickMoneyFlow() indicators plotted in the same subgraph using a TickBar data stream.

Scaling for both indicators is on NoAxis, Date range on screen.

KGI parameters are set fast (c,3,10,16,34,55, 13, 1, Darkgreen, Darkred).

(If you need I can post pictures or the version of the KGI I'm using)

 

Their movement is usually highly correlated but they also show some pretty neat divergences / disagreements, etc.

Is this a ‘squigly lines’ representation of what this topic is exploring?? Thx

 

Most likely though it did not get me where I wanted to go. Maybe cause I just don't like squiggly lines! If you have a search over at ET for posts by 5pillars on delta you will get up to speed pretty quickly on delta divergence. I got the impression he's 'for real' though you never know for sure.

 

Cheers,

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

    • MNST Monster Beverage stock, top of range breakout above 60.45, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?MNST
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • Date: 11th July 2025.   Demand For Gold Rises As Trump Announces Tariffs!   Gold prices rose significantly throughout the week as investors took advantage of the 2.50% lower entry level. Investors also return to the safe-haven asset as the US trade policy continues to escalate. As a result, investors are taking a more dovish tone. The ‘risk-off’ appetite is also something which can be seen within the stock market. The NASDAQ on Thursday took a 0.90% dive within only 30 minutes.   Trade Tensions Escalate President Trump has been teasing with new tariffs throughout the week. However, the tariffs were confirmed on Thursday. A 35% tariff on Canadian imports starting August 1st, along with 50% tariffs on copper and goods from Brazil. Some experts are advising that Brazil has been specifically targeted due to its association with the BRICS.   However, the President has not directly associated the tariffs with BRICS yet. According to President Trump, Brazil is targeting US technology companies and carrying out a ‘witch hunt’against former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, a close ally who is currently facing prosecution for allegedly attempting to overturn the 2022 Brazilian election.   Although Brazil is one of the largest and fastest-growing economies in the Americas, it is not the main concern for investors. Investors are more concerned about Tariffs on Canada. The White House said it will impose a 35% tariff on Canadian imports, effective August 1st, raised from the earlier 25% rate. This covers most goods, with exceptions under USMCA and exemptions for Canadian companies producing within the US.   It is also vital for investors to note that Canada is among the US;’s top 3 trading partners. The increase was justified by Trump citing issues like the trade deficit, Canada’s handling of fentanyl trafficking, and perceived unfair trade practices.   The President is also threatening new measures against the EU. These moves caused US and European stock futures to fall nearly 1%, while the Dollar rose and commodity prices saw small gains. However, the main benefactor was Silver and Gold, which are the two best-performing metals of the day.   How Will The Fed Impact Gold? The FOMC indicated that the number of members warming up to the idea of interest rate cuts is increasing. If the Fed takes a dovish tone, the price of Gold may further rise. In the meantime, the President pushing for a 3% rate cut sparked talk of a more dovish Fed nominee next year and raised worries about future inflation.   Meanwhile, jobless claims dropped for the fourth straight week, coming in better than expected and supporting the view that the labour market remains strong after last week’s solid payroll report. Markets still expect two rate cuts this year, but rate futures show most investors see no change at the next Fed meeting. Gold is expected to finish the week mostly flat.       Gold 15-Minute Chart     If the price of Gold increases above $3,337.50, buy signals are likely to materialise again. However, the price is currently retracing, meaning traders are likely to wait for regained momentum before entering further buy trades. According to HSBC, they expect an average price of $3,215 in 2025 (up from $3,015) and $3,125 in 2026, with projections showing a volatile range between $3,100 and $3,600   Key Takeaway Points: Gold Rises on Safe-Haven Demand. Gold gained as investors reacted to rising trade tensions and market volatility. Canada Tariffs Spark Concern. A 35% tariff on Canadian imports drew attention due to Canada’s key trade role. Fed Dovish Shift Supports Gold. Growing expectations of rate cuts and Trump’s push for a 3% cut boosted the gold outlook. Gold Eyes Breakout Above $3,337.5. Price is consolidating; a move above $3,337.50 could trigger new buy signals. Always trade with strict risk management. Your capital is the single most important aspect of your trading business.   Please note that times displayed based on local time zone and are from time of writing this report.   Click HERE to access the full HFM Economic calendar.   Want to learn to trade and analyse the markets? Join our webinars and get analysis and trading ideas combined with better understanding of how markets work. Click HERE to register for FREE!   Click HERE to READ more Market news.   Michalis Efthymiou HFMarkets   Disclaimer: This material is provided as a general marketing communication for information purposes only and does not constitute an independent investment research. Nothing in this communication contains, or should be considered as containing, an investment advice or an investment recommendation or a solicitation for the purpose of buying or selling of any financial instrument. All information provided is gathered from reputable sources and any information containing an indication of past performance is not a guarantee or reliable indicator of future performance. Users acknowledge that any investment in Leveraged Products is characterized by a certain degree of uncertainty and that any investment of this nature involves a high level of risk for which the users are solely responsible and liable. We assume no liability for any loss arising from any investment made based on the information provided in this communication. This communication must not be reproduced or further distributed without our prior written permission.
    • Back in the early 2000s, Netflix mailed DVDs to subscribers.   It wasn’t sexy—but it was smart. No late fees. No driving to Blockbuster.   People subscribed because they were lazy. Investors bought the stock because they realized everyone else is lazy too.   Those who saw the future in that red envelope? They could’ve caught a 10,000%+ move.   Another story…   Back in the mid-2000s, Amazon launched Prime.   It wasn’t flashy—but it was fast.   Free two-day shipping. No minimums. No hassle.   People subscribed because they were impatient. Investors bought the stock because they realized everyone hates waiting.   Those who saw the future in that speedy little yellow button? They could’ve caught another 10,000%+ move.   Finally…   Back in 2011, Bitcoin was trading under $10.   It wasn’t regulated—but it worked.   No bank. No middleman. Just wallet to wallet.   People used it to send money. Investors bought it because they saw the potential.   Those who saw something glimmering in that strange orange coin? They could’ve caught a 100,000%+ move.   The people who made those calls weren’t fortune tellers. They just noticed something simple before others did.   A better way. A quiet shift. A small edge. An asymmetric bet.   The red envelope fixed late fees. The yellow button fixed waiting. The orange coin gave billions a choice.   Of course, these types of gains are rare. And they happen only once in a blue moon. That’s exactly why it’s important to notice when the conditions start to look familiar.   Not after the move. Not once it's on CNBC. But in the quiet build-up— before the surface breaks.   Enter the Blue Button Please read more here: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/netflix-amazon-bitcoin-blue  Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
    • What These Attacks Look Like There are several ways you could get hacked. And the threats compound by the day.   Here’s a quick rundown:   Phishing: Fake emails from your “bank.” Click the link, give your password—game over.   Ransomware: Malware that locks your files and demands crypto. Pay up, or it’s gone.   DDoS: Overwhelm a website with traffic until it crashes. Like 10,000 bots blocking the door. Often used by nations.   Man-in-the-Middle: Hackers intercept your messages on public WiFi and read or change them.   Social Engineering: Hackers pose as IT or drop infected USB drives labeled “Payroll.”   You don’t need to be “important” to be a target.   You just need to be online.   What You Can Do (Without Buying a Bunker) You don’t have to be tech-savvy.   You just need to stop being low-hanging fruit.   Here’s how:   Use a YubiKey (physical passkey device) or Authenticator app – Ditch text message 2FA. SIM swaps are real. Hackers often have people on the inside at telecom companies.   Use a password manager (with Yubikey) – One unique password per account. Stop using your dog’s name.   Update your devices – Those annoying updates patch real security holes. Use them.   Back up your files – If ransomware hits, you don’t want your important documents held hostage.   Avoid public WiFi for sensitive stuff – Or use a VPN.   Think before you click – Emails that feel “urgent” are often fake. Go to the websites manually for confirmation.   Consider Starlink in case the internet goes down – I think it’s time for me to make the leap. Don’t Panic. Prepare. (Then Invest.)   I spent an hour in that basement bar reading about cyberattacks—and watching real-world systems fall apart like dominos.   The internet going down used to be an inconvenience. Now, it’s a warning.   Cyberwar isn’t coming. It’s here.   And the next time your internet goes out, it might not just be your router.   Don’t panic. Prepare.   And maybe keep a backup plan in your back pocket. Like a local basement bar with good bourbon—and working WiFi.   As usual, we’re on the lookout for more opportunities in cybersecurity. Stay tuned.   Author: Chris Campbell (AltucherConfidential) 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.