Sandbox

[Lizard 10]

I've read the Wyckoff's Course but haven't found such things as Ice, Creek, Jump Over Creek, Back to Creek, Last Point of Support/Supply and etc. And where is explanation how to use them on a stock chart?! I thought I would read it in the Course, but it's not there. There are some books on Amazon "Stock Market Technique No. 1 & 2" but according to comments they don't explain the method. So where is it, where can I read about all these terms and how to use them?

[reset.no.regret 10]

...But how can material copyrighted after his death be original?

 

Thanks in advance for your assistance.

I can only answer your last question, it may not be the case in this instance but a possiblility: Material he wrote that was never published may have been uncovered and later implemented by the company that owns the rights to his material.

 

Or they think tanked it to improve or continue their product line.

[IchibomB 10]

Can't thank db enough for his postings of his knowledge.

He definitely helped me become a better trader through

my searching and sifting through the internet.

 

He probably got burnt out from posting and now enjoys a trade

in the morning and day on the beach after.

 

After a while, there's only so much a person can share.

[sharehunter 10]

any brothers experience in finding this EOD data, please give me a helps.

 

I am still looking for this data. it is very important for me

 

Thanks thanks

[Tams 20]

Can't thank db enough for his postings of his knowledge.

He definitely helped me become a better trader through

my searching and sifting through the internet.

 

He probably got burnt out from posting and now enjoys a trade

in the morning and day on the beach after.

 

After a while, there's only so much a person can share.

 

What is the most useful thing you have learned from him?

[TradeRunner 10]

What is the most useful thing you have learned from him?

 

Don't waste your time with VSA.

[MadMarketScientist 11]

DBCooper come out!

 

I still see him lurking around the forums ... DBPhoenix come back!

 

MMS

[Tams 20]

I still see him lurking around the forums ... DBPhoenix come back!

 

MMS

 

traderslaboratory is a drug. ;-)>

[Tams 20]

I still see him lurking around the forums ... DBPhoenix come back!

 

MMS

 

now that his hecklers are gone,

there is no reason why he should not return to continue his discussions.

[suvo1987 10]

Those Wyckoff Course Exhibits which I have is not very clear, it's really hard to read those charts. If any one can provide clear charts of Wyckoff Course Exhibits, that would be much appreciated.

[Enigmatics 10]

Within the last couple of weeks, I've missed pops on stocks I was waiting for creek entries on. Most notably was today (GMCR). I was waiting for a break of that .84 level on my chart, but low and behold it popped much earlier than that on what appears to be a symmetrical triangle.

 

Again, this has routinely happened to me while patiently waiting. Then I just stay away from the trade all together because the stock is already up too much on the day and I don't want to chase .... especially in a situation like GMCR's where there's an immediate "demand test" in the creek area.

 

Edited November 15, 2011 by Enigmatics

[joshdance 10]

I am prompted to write this post because I have read this a couple of times over the last year and have thought about it again today:

 

As I said, and as I've said a great many times before, a "lot of people" can't buy unless "a lot of people" are also willing to sell. Unless someone is willing to sell and also someone willing to buy, there can be no transaction. If there is no transaction, there is no volume.

 

Your "service" has come up with some half-baked half-truth in order to suck beginners into spending $100 a month. Forget about who's doing what and focus on price. If you're long and demand is driving price higher, that's all you need worry about. When demand can no longer drive price higher (lots of volume, no price progress), then you need to start looking for the exit, if not heading for it.

 

(emphasis mine)

 

Basically, dB was responding to someone talking about "selling volume" if I recall. dB says that it doesn't matter who initiated the transaction, what matters is the effect of volume on price. In principle I certainly agree that the effect on price is paramount. And I'm not one to question dB, as so much of what I learned about Wyckoff came from reading his posts. However, look at the attached chart, the last two bars. I have the delta for the bar overlaid on top of the volume. A quick glance reveals very clearly that contrary to what might be assumed if the delta were missing, namely, that there were probably more contracts bought at the market (executed at the offer) than sold, that in fact sellers pushed aggressively for two minutes, yet price rose.

 

Now, if the delta for those bars were green, it may not really change the fact that demand was higher, price rose, and there was more participation. However, as this is market-generated information, and is a piece of information included in the transaction, isn't it worth at least noting? For me, it would have given me super high confidence in a long, as opposed to just a medium level of confidence in a long at that point (I was on another computer with no delta reading available).

 

In other words, at this point it seems that sellers have not only been unable to hold the offer (passively), but they have tried to push (aggressively), and actually gotten pushed back. Meanwhile, the passive buyers are clearly very very strong, and this is before the aggressive buyers have even really stepped up to the plate.

 

What do you think?

Edited November 25, 2011 by joshdance

[Tams 20]

I am prompted to write this post because I have read this a couple of times over the last year and have thought about it again today:

 

 

 

(emphasis mine)

 

Basically, dB was responding to someone talking about "selling volume" if I recall. dB says that it doesn't matter who initiated the transaction, what matters is the effect of volume on price. In principle I certainly agree that the effect on price is paramount. And I'm not one to question dB, as so much of what I learned about Wyckoff came from reading his posts. However, look at the attached chart, the last two bars. I have the delta for the bar overlaid on top of the volume. A quick glance reveals very clearly that contrary to what might be assumed if the delta were missing, namely, that there were probably more contracts bought at the market (executed at the offer) than sold, that in fact sellers pushed aggressively for two minutes, yet price rose.

 

Now, if the delta for those bars were green, it may not really change the fact that demand was higher, price rose, and there was more participation. However, as this is market-generated information, and is a piece of information included in the transaction, isn't it worth at least noting? For me, it would have given me super high confidence in a long, as opposed to just a medium level of confidence in a long at that point (I was on another computer with no delta reading available).

 

In other words, at this point it seems that sellers have not only been unable to hold the offer (passively), but they have tried to push (aggressively), and actually gotten pushed back. Meanwhile, the passive buyers are clearly very very strong, and this is before the aggressive buyers have even really stepped up to the plate.

 

What do you think?

 

..... what is delta ?

[joshdance 10]

..... what is delta ?

 

Sorry if it was not clear by the context.

 

Delta = volume transacted at the offer - volume transacted at the bid

(iow, market buy volume minus market sell volume)

[MightyMouse 12]

It seems like you have a scenario where prices are higher, the price range is about the same or smaller, the volume is higher, the delta range seems wider, and the delta is lower ( more red).

 

I would want to look at different charts to review the different relationship of delta to time, price to time, delta to volume, etc, but, in general, rising prices on high volume with a red delta tells me that prices are being held up by inside buyers, allowing aggressive sellers to sell at decent prices without prices falling. The sellers could be new shorts, inside sellers who sold earlier and are hitting the bid trying to push prices down, or weak buyers losing confidence. It is important to try to get an idea of who it was to discern what may happen next.

 

Usually what follows next is the offer getting whacked as the shorts run for the exits and the longs hit the offer, crowding out the offers that are available. The delta, volume, and price should all rise naturally. There are stops above the high for the day and possibly areas to the let that are not visible. Most traders will have missed the move up and against all rational thought, will attempt to short the high to get a piece of the action. We are supposed to buy low and sell high. They begin to envision weakness to justify a short entry, but ignore the fact that the direction is still up. The only way someone who sells high can lose is if he buys back higher and the market is really good at helping people make mistakes.

 

The bar before the last is the tell tale bar for me. It has a very short range, lots of volume and lots of red delta. The close of it is a small risk entry for a long. Without seeing the last bar, you could have entered on the close (or high) of the second to last bar and used a tick or 2 below the low as a stop. If the sellers were indeed able to push prices down below that bar, it would tell me that all the inside buyers who bought and are holding from that last bar are now underwater and will want to react. If you lost it would be peanuts. As a short term trade, I would stay in this until the delta went from negative for the range to positive an/ or volume dried up. If the delta continued to get greener and volume continued to be strong, I would try to ride this for as long as I could and add if there were opportunities and enough time left.

 

The most important part is knowing what you want to see from price, time, and volume (delta), to stay in the trade. Without delta, on the chart, you might expect there to be some sort of resistance at the high. When price is at the high and cum delta is lower than it was last time it was there, I would see that area as fuel and not resistance. Some of the best opportunities occur where there is supposed to be support or resistance or demand and supply.

 

MM

[marcovth 10]

I am a Wyckoff trader myself through mainly Gary Dayton and Gary Fullet teachings.

 

But I would highly recommend that you take the Fulcrumtrader.com course on top of that.

 

Price alone is 1d trading.

Wyckoff is 2d trading.

Wyckoff + delta is clearly 3d trading.

 

Gary Dayton and Gary Fullet explain well how springs and upthrusts work, but they can not explain why and when they will work out. For that you need to track cumulative delta bars, and Fulcrumtrader is only one of two courses I have found explaining that.

 

The other one is orderflowedge.com if I remember well?

 

Again, highly recommended.

[joshdance 10]

Thanks MM.

 

My point in posting what I did is simply this: a tick/transaction specifies the price traded, time stamp, number of contracts traded, and whether the transaction occurred at the offer or the bid (in other words, who initiated the transaction). So why ignore this last piece of information, if one can find some use of it?

 

While there are two parties to every transaction, it is not a mutual / symmetrical deal: one party actually initiates the trade, while the other accepts the trade. And while the reaction of price to volume is paramount, we may still find some useful information in the delta if there is some divergence between the degree of price movement and the degree of delta.

 

In my read of market movement, I find the frequency of transactions important (time), the price traded (price), the size of the transaction (volume), and who initiated the trade in the first place (delta). All other information for a traded instrument we can construct is derived from those 4 pieces of information.

[Tams 20]

Sorry if it was not clear by the context.

 

Delta = volume transacted at the offer - volume transacted at the bid

(iow, market buy volume minus market sell volume)

 

is this "delta" thing reliable?

 

I am not asking the "signal" you are proposing,

I am asking if the dataprovider can reliably supply data that can be split into your "delta".

if so, what is the maximum resolution they can do this?

have you done a comparison test to ascertain the data correct? and that the dataprovider can perform such a supply in a consistent and dependable manner for real money trading purposes?

[MightyMouse 12]

Thanks MM.

 

My point in posting what I did is simply this: a tick/transaction specifies the price traded, time stamp, number of contracts traded, and whether the transaction occurred at the offer or the bid (in other words, who initiated the transaction). So why ignore this last piece of information, if one can find some use of it?

 

While there are two parties to every transaction, it is not a mutual / symmetrical deal: one party actually initiates the trade, while the other accepts the trade. And while the reaction of price to volume is paramount, we may still find some useful information in the delta if there is some divergence between the degree of price movement and the degree of delta.

 

In my read of market movement, I find the frequency of transactions important (time), the price traded (price), the size of the transaction (volume), and who initiated the trade in the first place (delta). All other information for a traded instrument we can construct is derived from those 4 pieces of information.

 

Couldn't help but see the opportunity. I prefer tick or range based charts to decipher market action.

[FulcrumTrader 10]

Large liquidity commercial participants constantly track order flow and open interest, so I do too. Unfortunately, price action alone will never tell me when a market is completely out of balance from an open interest stand point (Major Inventory Grab - one of my best position trade set ups). Price action alone will also never tell me when accumulation is taking place at realtime tracked price levels (Delta Divergence). Price action alone never lets me see trapped over committed inventory in a localized area of price (Hidden Divergence). Price action alone will never tell me when commercials are just moving price down 2 points quick, so they can buy more at that very temporary lower price level (Commercials are always moving price around to their advantage). There are many things I would never be able to see if I was stuck with price action only trading - no thanks.

[horace 10]

Large liquidity commercial participants constantly track order flow and open interest, so I do too. Unfortunately, price action alone will never tell me when a market is completely out of balance from an open interest stand point (Major Inventory Grab - one of my best position trade set ups). Price action alone will also never tell me when accumulation is taking place at realtime tracked price levels (Delta Divergence). Price action alone never lets me see trapped over committed inventory in a localized area of price (Hidden Divergence). Price action alone will never tell me when commercials are just moving price down 2 points quick, so they can buy more at that very temporary lower price level (Commercials are always moving price around to their advantage). There are many things I would never be able to see if I was stuck with price action only trading - no thanks.

 

 

excellent post FT.

Can you expand this out into what you are looking at and how you are tracking it to help bring us all into the loop.

You are one guy we can rely on to deliver the goods and not just wimp off with the excuse of "secrets or proprietary systems"

[joshdance 10]

Large liquidity commercial participants constantly track order flow and open interest, so I do too. Unfortunately, price action alone will never tell me when a market is completely out of balance from an open interest stand point (Major Inventory Grab - one of my best position trade set ups). Price action alone will also never tell me when accumulation is taking place at realtime tracked price levels (Delta Divergence). Price action alone never lets me see trapped over committed inventory in a localized area of price (Hidden Divergence). Price action alone will never tell me when commercials are just moving price down 2 points quick, so they can buy more at that very temporary lower price level (Commercials are always moving price around to their advantage). There are many things I would never be able to see if I was stuck with price action only trading - no thanks.

 

Fulcrum, I welcome your views, but I will post this which I wrote at another forum which explains why your using delta as a proxy for open interest is flawed in principle. I am not saying that you cannot be effective with it, I'm not saying you don't make money with it. I am simply saying that you are making assumptions about delta which, given its formula for calculation, are not correct, and thus invalidate it in the way you say you are using it. Here is my explanation below. Further, readers should note that Fulcrum is a vendor and thus should have a "C" by his name on this forum. While I do welcome your views, I do not want this thread to become an advertisement for the services and products you sell. You do very well at marketing yourself, but please don't do it in this thread.

 

==========

For every transaction there are two parties. When the two parties are both opening a new position or adding to an existing position (such as when both are flat, or where one is long and buys and the other is short and sells), open interest will increase. The calculation does not take into account whether the orders are at the market, or limits.

 

When the two parties are decreasing their positions, such as when a trader is long and sells and the other is short and buys, the open interest will decrease. Again, the calculation does not care about the type of order.

 

However, when someone who holds an existing long position (A) sells to someone who's flat (B), for example, the open interest does not change. Delta would change, and volume would change. However, it's simply a case where one trader who was "interested" is now flat, and one trader who was "not interested" is now "interested" -- so, while volume will increase as there was activity, the amount of positions taken in the market have not changed--B is now long, whereas A used to be long. It's simply a transfer of ownership of the contract.

 

Compare delta to open interest when A sells to B, and then B sells back to A. Volume will be 2, delta will either be 0 or 2, depending on the types of order used, but open interest will be 0.

 

As open interest declines, the number of open positions in the market are decreasing. When it increases, the number of open positions, or open interest, goes up. At the end of the day, if open interest has increased, then the number of traders who have a position in the market has gone up. If it has declined, then the number of traders with a "horse in the race" has gone down. However, volume will always be positive. And delta will again depend on the type of order used.

 

This is why delta is good IMO for a short term indication of who's trying to move the market, and then a comparison can be made if the price is reflecting that effort to move the market. However, delta will not say whether the number of outstanding contracts is up or down.

 

Thus, I don't think we can say either is "better" as they measure different things. However, we can say for a certainty that delta is calculated in such a way that it is impossible to determine how many positions are being held long or short; and open interest tells us exactly how many traders (contracts actually) are holding positions.

=========

[joshdance 10]

is this "delta" thing reliable?

 

I am asking if the dataprovider can reliably supply data that can be split into your "delta".

if so, what is the maximum resolution they can do this?

have you done a comparison test to ascertain the data correct? and that the dataprovider can perform such a supply in a consistent and dependable manner for real money trading purposes?

 

Several traders have performed reliability tests, including Fulcrum. IQfeed is what I use and is generally regarded as one of the most accurate retail data feeds. My TT broker feed, for example, does not report the ticks accurately.

 

What we want is a data feed which reports what comes from the exchange accurately.

 

But I really don't want to go in this direction on this thread. This is not about data accuracy. It's not about advertising anyone's commercial methods, or any commercial data feed, or anything else. Let's assume we have an accurate data feed.

[Tams 20]

Several traders have performed reliability tests, including Fulcrum. IQfeed is what I use and is generally regarded as one of the most accurate retail data feeds. My TT broker feed, for example, does not report the ticks accurately.

 

What we want is a data feed which reports what comes from the exchange accurately.

 

But I really don't want to go in this direction on this thread. This is not about data accuracy. It's not about advertising anyone's commercial methods, or any commercial data feed, or anything else. Let's assume we have an accurate data feed.

 

if you can assume data accuracy,

there are a lot you can explore.

 

if there is no consistent and reliable data performance,

everything is a concept, a theory, a wishful thinking.

[MightyMouse 12]

if you can assume data accuracy,

there are a lot you can explore.

 

if there is no consistent and reliable data performance,

everything is a concept, a theory, a wishful thinking.

 

This is trading. Not atom splitting. Sometimes in trading mistakes happen and you pay and sometimes they work out in your favor. When you pay, it is your job to make sure you pay with crumbs.

 

I don't know enough about atom splitting to comment, but I am pretty sure a mistake is forever costly.