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.

UrmaBlume

Net Commercial Trade

Recommended Posts

The chart below is our calculation of cumulative net commercial trade.

 

Selling by commercial traders took out the low from November in the middle of January and has increased dramatically since then - foretelling that the November low was in Jeopardy.

 

It is our estimate that these longer term commercial traders do about 20% of the total volume. We KNOW that they go to great lengths to disguise their participation via such means as intense series' of automated orders separated by only a few miliseconds. It is often these bursts of intense trade that form local intra-session highs and lows.

 

See a post on how we detect and trade these spikes in intensity http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/f34/trade-intensity-5277.html

 

netcomm1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread UrmaBlume.

 

With the term "Commercial" do you mean "Liquidity Data Bank CTI2", the "Commitment of Traders Commercials" (not so different, in any case) or something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  mike_ITL said:
Interesting thread UrmaBlume.

 

With the term "Commercial" do you mean "Liquidity Data Bank CTI2", the "Commitment of Traders Commercials" (not so different, in any case) or something else?

 

The CTI2 data is from days of old when Peter Steidlmayer was still very influential at the board of trade and reflects trade by known commercial traders. Our calculation is broader than that and is designed to catch the trade of traders such as hedge fund operators which certainly fit the description of commercial traders but at the same time would not met the criteria of CTI2 trade.

 

Almost 3 decades ago I was an avid follower of Peter's work and spent weeks at his ranch in Butte Meadows forming what has become the base of most everything I do.

 

Along these same lines you might find value in a post I made on "Order Flow - Then and Now" at http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/34/predicting-breakouts-accumulation-distribution-5289-2.html#post60085

 

Thank you for the kind words, I am glad you found some value in my work

 

cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi UrmaBlume,

 

thank you for your kind reply.

 

I am a fan of Steidlmayer's work and I'm trying to update his teachings - with the help on an English gentleman - to the modern electronic markets.

 

Did you follow Steidlmayer's work with Capflow? (my last question on this, since I don't want to transform your thread in a Market Profile oriented one).

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  UrmaBlume said:
Our calculation is broader than that and is designed to catch the trade of traders such as hedge fund operators which certainly fit the description of commercial traders but at the same time would not met the criteria of CTI2 trade.

 

Hi,

 

so I would like to ask you, what in fact, is your definition for the description of commercial traders?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  HAL9000 said:
Hi,

 

so I would like to ask you, what in fact, is your definition for the description of commercial traders?

 

There are several algorithms and methods deployed to spot, ever more elusive, commercial trade. Some do it by transaction size alone, trade intensity is another while still others deploy variations of the motivated buyer/seller themes.

 

As to our definition of commercial trade, we define it as the speculative, not arb, trade done by professional, size traders. Our calculations use some of the methods mentioned above and others designed to pick out or more heavily weight commercial trade that is desinged to span the current session.

 

Knowing where these guys do their spec trade is all you need because it is this trade that sets many local extremes.

 

As I have mentioned before these traders go to great lengths to disguise their entries and exits. The use automated executions sometimes separating orders by only a few miliseconds and sometimes even putting up opposing trades to do as the old timers used to say, "sell a little to buy a lot."

 

While they can hide their methods and whether the trade was an opening or closing transaction they CAN NOT hide the fact of their transactions and that's where the clues begin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Urma,

 

well, maybe you gave me not a definition, but I agree with you in some point.

 

Let me explain; well some people like tape reading.

 

You know, if nothing works, just read the tape. But I am a poor (proud customer) of IB. They sample 300 ms frames and you are not able to see spikes

at all. But they have 5 sec bars, which should be exact.

 

Yes a 5 sec bar is also in addition 1 sec late. Anyway, these 5 sec bars seem to show me the following (I have implemented a 5 sec bar tape reader :crap:):

 

Watching corn and other things, 5 sec -> 130 contracts -> 60 trades and so on. Or in other words: No big volume on a single transaction.

 

Now I am asking myself, what are all these data vendors worth, when they show up 100 or more contracts on a single trade?

 

I wonder.

 

Are they sampling the data as well?

 

Currently I would draw my conclusion this way:

 

Transaction size may be hidden. Volume stays.

Maybe because of many "small" trades tick charts work!?

 

:confused:

 

So now, what's your view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, regarding your definition;

 

for me is a definition, whatsoever defines a calculation that leads to a defined result.

 

So if persons a, b, c would use this definition, they should have the same result.

 

Just to clarify this.

 

I am still interested.

 

:beer:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  HAL9000 said:
Well, regarding your definition;

for me is a definition, whatsoever defines a calculation that leads to a defined result.

So if persons a, b, c would use this definition, they should have the same result.

Just to clarify this.

I am still interested.

:beer:

 

For me there is a difference between the definition and the calculation.

 

I have introduced a concept. I have provded my definition. I have indicated how others make a similar calculation, I have provided hints on how I make the calculation and have even provided clues as where to look for answers. The rest is up to you.

 

Don't forget - We all have access to the same base unit of data, the transaction/tick. What makes all the difference for all of us is how we process those ticks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  UrmaBlume said:
What makes all the difference for all of us is how we process those ticks.

 

Maybe that's the point.

 

One year ago, maybe I would said: "Damn, give me your calculation, if you show me your your charts"!

 

Today: "I accept the given!"

 

You, start a thinking process. I think.

 

Maybe, my conclusion is different (not right, or wrong, just different),

but anyway, its about thinking.

 

Think!

 

OK; P.S. for now:

 

"There are a thousand ways to scalp a cat!"

 

and sometimes I am the

 

cat. :crap:

 

Hopefully, not more often, than not!

 

THINK!

 

Lost contact for now,

 

Hal

 

P.S.: What does Hal stand for, BTW? :offtopic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more,

 

just simple questions:

 

Do you know a data vendor, that sends transaction data real time, as far as possible?

You know, transaction for transaction under real time constraints?

(Or in other words for newbies: Nearly to BOOM!)

 

Another question, which data vendor do you use?

 

Do you use a T1?

If not, what do you use?

 

Hal

 

:question:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  UrmaBlume said:
I want what he smokes.

 

Really? :confused:

 

Message is too short so far. Anyway, just for fun:

 

Hal

 

P.S: Am I so stone old: HAL what does it stand for? :helloooo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  HAL9000 said:
Some more,

just simple questions:

Do you know a data vendor, that sends transaction data real time, as far as possible?

You know, transaction for transaction under real time constraints?

(Or in other words for newbies: Nearly to BOOM!)

Another question, which data vendor do you use?

Do you use a T1?

If not, what do you use?

Hal

:question:

 

 

Zen-Fire is very fast real time data. You can get it for free with Ninja from any of several brokers.

 

My internet connection is a couple of steps higher than t1 and I use Trade Station and one other service I would rather not name.

 

It's getting late in Germany - time to take your meds and go night-night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? :confused:

 

If no one can rebuild your system, why you share it?

 

If a retail trader without a T1 or higher don't gets your data, what should s/he

do with your information (better: data)?

 

What about the things you don't like to name?

 

Once more:

 

Why? :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  UrmaBlume said:

It's getting late in Germany - time to take your meds and go night-night.

 

I don't need meds, I just like answers!

 

Give me some!

 

Well, time; Coffee helps! :coffee:

 

Some say its late!

Some say its early!

 

Hal

 

P.S.: ??? No clue about HAL yet ??? :confused:

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

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   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.