The Price / Volume Relationship

[NYCMB 10]

Hi corey,

 

Could you post a chart sample of Symmetric which you talked about in Paltalk chat room? TIA

Hi corey,

I meant Symmetry. TIA

[Ezzy 10]

Just keep it on topic so the thread doesn't go in another direction.

[Corey 10]

Just keep it on topic so the thread doesn't go in another direction.

it just means for every up seqs there will be a down seqs.

[Corey 10]

summary for paltalk room first week, it could be better but posting real time does reduce my clicking time.

[jbarnby 10]

Trading fractals are green/purple

[jbarnby 10]

Trading fractals green/purple

[cnms2 10]

Based on volume analysis, I believe that on your second chart the new up trend started at 11:00 (pt1), and its pt2 was still to come (so the down trend pt2 and pt3 at the previous flex points).

[Corey 10]

what i have

[emac 10]

Based on volume analysis, I believe that on your second chart the new up trend started at 11:00 (pt1), and its pt2 was still to come (so the down trend pt2 and pt3 at the previous flex points).

 

In other words, based on gaussians being decreasing, the pink retracement sequence completed at 11:00 and it is not a R2R of a higher fractal as earlier indicated by jbb's chart. And the reason it is not a R2R is we have a pt 2 formed at 9:45 that broke the earlier green RTL. Correspondingly, no R2R is possible since there is no higher fractal RTL on the chart (which means what is occuring at that point of time must be still within a yet higher container or fractal).

[Zan-shin 10]

Based on volume analysis, I believe that on your second chart the new up trend started at 11:00 (pt1), and its pt2 was still to come (so the down trend pt2 and pt3 at the previous flex points).

Are you suggesting that because the red peaks in the 2R (11:50 to 12:15) are lower than the black peaks in the 2B (11:10 to 45), then the 2R is not on the same fractal as the R2R?

[cnms2 10]

In other words, based on gaussians being decreasing, the pink retracement sequence completed at 11:00 and it is not a R2R of a higher fractal as earlier indicated by jbb's chart. And the reason it is not a R2R is we have a pt 2 formed at 9:45 that broke the earlier green RTL. Correspondingly, no R2R is possible since there is no higher fractal RTL on the chart (which means what is occurring at that point of time must be still within a yet higher container or fractal).

Are you suggesting that because the red peaks in the 2R (11:50 to 12:15) are lower than the black peaks in the 2B (11:10 to 45), then the 2R is not on the same fractal as the R2R?

The volume highlights make more obvious the expected volume sequences on the same fractal. In my previous post I wanted to present a different view of that decreasing red volume section.

[Zan-shin 10]

The volume highlights make more obvious the expected volume sequences on the same fractal. In my previous post I wanted to present a different view of that decreasing red volume section.

When comparing volume highlights, do you anticipate the volume highlighted in the 3rd leg of x2x2y2x to be higher than the highlighted area for the 2y leg?

[cnms2 10]

When comparing volume highlights, do you anticipate the volume highlighted in the 3rd leg of x2x2y2x to be higher than the highlighted area for the 2y leg?

Yes, I do. When this seems not to happen I'm looking for a faster fractal, pace change, and / or an annotation error. The price context might help.

[Zan-shin 10]

Yes, I do. When this seems not to happen I'm looking for a faster fractal, pace change, and / or an annotation error. The price context might help.

 

That's very helpful thank you.

 

The attached clip, posted within this thread by Spydertrader, seems to be an exception.

i.e vol on the 3rd leg (2r) is lower than the vol on the 2nd leg (2b).

[Zan-shin 10]

And also on this chart, annotated by Spydertrader at the NY meeting.

 

The vol in the 2b leg (from 12:15) is lower than the vol on the 2r leg (from 11:05 to 12:15) in the long blue container from 10:40.

 

Any thoughts?

[emac 10]

And also on this chart, annotated by Spydertrader at the NY meeting.

 

The vol in the 2b leg (from 12:15) is lower than the vol on the 2r leg (from 11:05 to 12:15) in the long blue container from 10:40.

 

Any thoughts?

 

When this seems not to happen I'm looking for a faster fractal, pace change, and / or an annotation error.

 

Perhaps that is what cnms2 meant ?

[Zan-shin 10]

Perhaps that is what cnms2 meant ?

Perhaps cnms2 might elaborate.....

[bomberone1 10]

I read all this long topic, I forgot to see easylanguage file, is there?

[Tams 20]

I read all this long topic, I forgot to see easylanguage file, is there?

 

.......... then I doubt you have "read".

[cnms2 10]

Yes, I do. When this seems not to happen I'm looking for a faster fractal, pace change, and / or an annotation error. The price context might help.

That's very helpful thank you.

 

The attached clip, posted within this thread by Spydertrader, seems to be an exception.

i.e vol on the 3rd leg (2r) is lower than the vol on the 2nd leg (2b).

To illustrate my view, I added a few annotations to the snippet you posted. The last leg is a faster fractal traverse that became observable because of the lower pace. It shows the anticipated volume sequence.

[cnms2 10]

And also on this chart, annotated by Spydertrader at the NY meeting.

 

The vol in the 2b leg (from 12:15) is lower than the vol on the 2r leg (from 11:05 to 12:15) in the long blue container from 10:40.

 

Any thoughts?

When you review older charts you have to be aware of the historical context, and of what the author tried to illustrate using whatever tools available at that time. I've degapped your snippet and added a few notes.

 

During the trends' overlap either the old one or the new one manifest stronger. The price context may be helpful to clarify it.

[Zan-shin 10]

To illustrate my view, I added a few annotations to the snippet you posted. The last leg is a faster fractal traverse that became observable because of the lower pace. It shows the anticipated volume sequence.

Thank you for your reply but I do not understand what you mean by "faster fractal traverse". I do not recall this term being used in this thread. I am trying to get to grips with how to tell what fractal each volume sequence corresponds to, given the 3 fractals as defined at the beginning of the thread. It would seem that if "pace" slows down then I can no longer anticipate greater volume in the 3rd leg of a sequence. So how can I tell if I am looking at the 3rd leg of my sequence or the 2nd leg of a faster sequence that is building my slower leg???

[cnms2 10]

Thank you for your reply but I do not understand what you mean by "faster fractal traverse". ...

Google "faster fractal traverse".

[Ezzy 10]

To illustrate my view, I added a few annotations to the snippet you posted. The last leg is a faster fractal traverse that became observable because of the lower pace. It shows the anticipated volume sequence.

 

FWIW, that chart has received a lot of attention. Both ways of annotating work. At that time the non dom gaussian was drawn in to the end of the lateral, where there was a BO and return to dominance. It was illustrating everything in the lateral being non-dominant on the traverse level. But the new sequence down does start at the point 3. Just though I'd throw that out for anyone wondering.

 

That's very helpful thank you.

 

The attached clip, posted within this thread by Spydertrader, seems to be an exception.

i.e vol on the 3rd leg (2r) is lower than the vol on the 2nd leg (2b).

 

Being a non-dominant 2-3 leg that might be expected. Though not always.

[Corey 10]

paltalk room performance week 2, I plan to run it for 2 more weeks, thanks to all who stop by.