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.

Recommended Posts

I have a philosophical questions about laterals... about what is knowable and what isn't.

 

Lats are created by 3 bars. Bar 1 has a directional aspect. (Further - that direction is either dom or non-dom.)

 

Now ...the lateral will eventually and ALWAYS have a BO and that BO will either be the same or the opposite of bar 1's direction.

 

My question is this: is the BO direction ALWAYS knowable as soon as price tells us we have a lat? Or perhaps this is a CERTAIN POINT situation where we only know FOR SURE at a certain point during the formation of the lat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is the BO direction ALWAYS knowable as soon as price tells us we have a lat?

 

Yup, and without exception. Probably why I keep encouraging people to work through the process of Lateral Differentiation.

 

I designed The Lateral Formation Drill (and its follow up) to remind people to learn to differentiate ...

 

1. Context

2. Order of Events.

3. and then the thing (in this case laterals).

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup, and without exception.

If you'd be so kind to clarify: Does it mean that when 11:00 bar (12/21) closes and the Price has formed the lateral (in the attached), one KNOWS that the price will BO that specific lateral in the upward direction and that there's no possibility that the Price may exit that specific lateral downward to finish the non-dominant sequence?

5aa70f9b19f06_lateralBOdirection.thumb.png.6dda322a873788165ee9590762246939.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you'd be so kind to clarify:

 

You already know the answer to this question.

 

Why do you already know?

 

differentiate ...

 

1. Context

2. Order of Events.

3. and then the thing

 

Now. Compare your example (11:00 area) to the examples contained in The Lateral Formation Drill. Your example is missing something present in all other examples (from the Initial Lateral Formation Drill and the Follow-up) which I posted. In other words, your (11:00) example (in its posted form) represents a different thing causing you to compare apples to oranges (instead of apples to apples).

 

In fact, you can compare this (11:00) Lateral to one annotated earlier in your chart snippet in order to easily see what is missing. For now, remain focused on the these specific Laterals shown in this specific drill (and follow up) until you can 'see' these differences in your sleep. Then move onto different types of things.

 

N.B. When I say your example, I am looking at your chart snippet.

 

Always make sure to compare apples to apples when seeking answers.

 

So, while the answer to your question is yes, it is so - not for the reasons you probably believe - but for reasons far more elementary to understanding.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

romanus - so perhaps a way of looking at the process is:

 

1) know you have a lateral and not a formation

2) know your context

3) know what comes next

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Compare your example (11:00 area) to the examples contained in The Lateral Formation Drill. Your example is missing something present in all other examples (from the Initial Lateral Formation Drill and the Follow-up) which I posted.
Upon further reflection, it seems to me that I was somewhat hasty and logically sloppy in formulating my inquiry, to put it mildly - so I can't really blame you for not understanding the answer you provided.:D

 

But, what is even more important, it's quite possible that the picture you're looking at is different from mine due to some differences in data providers. Would you be so kind to post the blank, not-annotated charts containing the laterals you referred to in the Follow-up.

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But, what is even more important, it's quite possible that the picture you're looking at is different from mine due to some differences in data providers. Would you be so kind to post the blank, not-annotated charts containing the laterals you referred to in the Follow-up.

 

Thank you very much for taking the time to reply.

 

Good, I thought they were charts of the same day and the same lateral...

 

I believe the data differences are caused by your bars being formed on the local computer in real time, rather than being preprocessed on a server. If you occasionally "Reload All Historical Data" during the day the bars will be recreated according to the ticks' timestamps.

 

- become

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But, what is even more important, it's quite possible that the picture you're looking at is different from mine due to some differences in data providers. Would you be so kind to post the blank, not-annotated charts containing the laterals you referred to in the Follow-up.

 

Sure thing.

 

- Spydertrader

5aa70f9cee97b_followup.thumb.jpg.b7afbc438be913371cb3cb3f6d2834e0.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a closer look at the daily chart for ES.

Not a great chart but you get the idea.

It is from October until now. I have also re-attached the Monthy ES that I posted the other day for ease in comparing the charts.

5aa70f9dcc378_escloserlookondailyjan82010.thumb.jpg.045340b1b35a335d326d67bc713c9778.jpg

5aa70f9dd34d3_esmonthlyjan62010.thumb.jpg.23ed28ba808dd6695b9aad9f260016af.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a closer look at the daily chart for ES.

Not a great chart but you get the idea.

It is from October until now. I have also re-attached the Monthy ES that I posted the other day for ease in comparing the charts.

 

Interesting how the volume is dropping on this up leg on the monthly. The daily looks the same way. Hmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you'd be so kind to clarify: Does it mean that when 11:00 bar (12/21) closes and the Price has formed the lateral (in the attached), one KNOWS that the price will BO that specific lateral in the upward direction and that there's no possibility that the Price may exit that specific lateral downward to finish the non-dominant sequence?

 

I find it helpful to annotate the traverse. Then, by comparing the results of the sym-lateral which occurs at point 3 confirmation of tape 1, tape 2and tape 3 of the traverse, the difference is apparent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wednesday 13 January 2010

 

Hi rs5

 

Thank you for your persistently posting ES charts. I am wondering why you didn't mark Bar55, 67 and 79 respectively as the first bar of each SYM Lateral. Could you explain it?

 

Everyone is welcome to participate in this SYM Lateral discussion. TIA

5aa70fa355c0a_rs5_SYMLateral.gif.18d22dafde831b1d37947fc3a76edf09.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am wondering why you didn't mark Bar55, 67 and 79 respectively as the first bar of each SYM Lateral. Could you explain it?

 

Each example within The Lateral Formation Drill (as well as the follow up) differs greatly from the examples you have picked from the chart posted by rs5.

 

In other words, you should be able to place all these Laterals into two distinct piles. One pile should contain The Lateral Formation Drill (and follow up) examples, and the other pile, should contain the examples you pointed out in your post.

 

Locate that which makes the two piles different, and you'll have the answer to your question.

 

I'm not trying to stifle discussion with my response to your query. However, I am attempting to get you to see the importance of the process of learning to differentiate that which you believe you see, from that which actually exists.

 

You see all (The Lateral Formation Drill [and Follow Up] along with those you pointed out in your post) examples as the same. I do not. More importantly, the market says they are not all the same.

 

Subtle differences. They really do make all the difference in the world.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, you should be able to place all these Laterals into two distinct piles. One pile should contain The Lateral Formation Drill (and follow up) examples, and the other pile, should contain the examples you pointed out in your post.

 

Locate that which makes the two piles different, and you'll have the answer to your question.

 

 

- Spydertrader

 

 

Spyder, are you suggesting that there are only two piles for all laterals or two piles for laterals under discussion? TIA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spyder, are you suggesting that there are only two piles for all laterals or two piles for laterals under discussion? TIA.

 

Two piles for the laterals currently under discussion. To be absolutely clear, everyone should have the ability to locate two examples from yesterday which conform to the examples of laterals provided in The Lateral Formation Drill (and follow up). These represent the types of Lateral Formations which need differentiation first. Then, and only then, should one move onto other types of laterals.

 

- Spydertrader

Edited by Spydertrader
Clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Two piles for the laterals currently under discussion. To be absolutely clear, everyone should have the ability to locate two examples from yesterday which conform to the examples of laterals provided in The Lateral Formation Drill (and follow up). These represent the types of Lateral Formations which need differentiation first. Then, and only then, should one move onto other types of laterals.

 

- Spydertrader

 

Would the laterals in green be the ones similar to the drill? The orange being the others mentioned.

5aa70fa4efc95_1-13-2010Laterals.thumb.png.459b6ee885060421960b01c8daabd785.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • NFLX Netflix stock watch, local support and resistance areas at 838.12 and 880.5 at https://stockconsultant.com/?NFLX
    • Date: 8th April 2025.   Markets Rebound Cautiously as US-China Tariff Tensions Deepen     Global markets staged a tentative recovery on Tuesday following a wave of volatility sparked by escalating trade tensions between the United States and China. The Asia-Pacific region showed signs of stability after a chaotic start to the week—though some pockets remained under pressure. Taiwan’s Taiex dropped 4.4%, dragged lower by losses in tech heavyweight TSMC. The world’s largest chipmaker fell another 4% on Tuesday and has now slumped 13.5% since April 2, when US President Donald Trump first unveiled what he called ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs.   However, broader sentiment across the region turned more positive, with several markets rebounding sharply after Monday’s dramatic sell-offs. Japan’s Nikkei 225 surged over 6% in early trading, rebounding from an 18-month low. South Korea’s Kospi rose marginally, and Australia’s ASX 200 gained 1.9%, driven by strength in mining stocks. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rose 1.6%, though still far from recovering from Monday’s 13.2% crash—its worst day since the 1997 Asian financial crisis. China’s Shanghai Composite added 0.9%.   In Europe, DAX and FTSE 100 are up more than 1% in opening trade. EU Commission President von der Leyen repeated yesterday that the EU had offered reciprocal zero tariffs on manufactured goods previously and continues to stand by that offer. Others are also trying again to talk to Trump to get some sort of agreement that limits the impact.   Much of the rally appeared to be driven by dip-buying, as well as hopes that the intensifying trade war could still be defused through negotiations.   China Strikes Back: ‘We Will Fight to the End’   Tensions reached a boiling point after Trump threatened to impose an additional 50% tariff on all Chinese imports unless Beijing rolled back its retaliatory measures by April 8. ‘If China does not withdraw its 34% increase above their already long-term trading abuses by tomorrow... the United States will impose additional tariffs on China of 50%,’ Trump declared on social media.   If implemented, the new tariffs would bring total US duties on Chinese goods to a staggering 124%, factoring in the existing 20%, the 34% recently announced, and the proposed 50%.   In response, China’s Ministry of Commerce issued a stern warning, stating: ‘The US threat to escalate tariffs is a mistake on top of a mistake... If the US insists on its own way, China will fight to the end.’ The ministry also called for equal and respectful dialogue, though signs of compromise on either side remain scarce.   Beijing acted quickly to contain a market fallout. State funds intervened to support equities, and the People’s Bank of China set the yuan fixing at its weakest level since September 2023 to boost export competitiveness. Additionally, five-year interest rate swaps in China fell to their lowest levels since 2020, indicating potential for further monetary easing.   Trump Talks Tough on EU Too   Trump’s hardline approach extended beyond China. Speaking at a press conference, he rejected the European Union’s offer to eliminate tariffs on cars and industrial goods, accusing the bloc of ‘being very bad to us.’ He insisted that Europe would need to source its energy from the US, claiming the US could ‘knock off $350 billion in one week.’   The EU, meanwhile, backed away from a proposed 50% retaliatory tariff on American whiskey, opting instead for 25% duties on selected US goods in response to Trump’s steel and aluminium tariffs.     Volatile Wall Street Adds to the Drama   Wall Street experienced wild swings on Monday as investors processed the rapidly evolving trade conflict. The S&P 500 briefly fell 4.7% before rebounding 3.4%, nearly erasing its losses in what could have been its biggest one-day jump in years—if it had held. The Dow Jones Industrial Average sank by as much as 1,700 points early in the day but later climbed nearly 900 points before closing 349 points lower, down 0.9%. The Nasdaq ended up 0.1%.   The brief rally was fueled by a false rumour that Trump was considering a 90-day pause on tariffs—rumours that the White House quickly labelled ‘fake news.’ The market's sharp reaction underscored how desperate investors are for any sign that tensions might ease.   Oil Markets in Focus: Goldman Sachs Revises Forecasts   Crude prices also reflected the uncertainty, with US crude briefly dipping below $60 per barrel for the first time since 2021. As of early Tuesday, Brent crude was trading at $64.72, while WTI hovered around $61.26.   Goldman Sachs, in a note dated April 7, lowered its average price forecasts for Brent and WTI through 2025 and 2026, citing mounting recession risks and the potential for higher-than-expected supply from OPEC+.       Under a base-case scenario where the US avoids a recession and tariffs are reduced significantly before the April 9 implementation date, Goldman sees Brent at $62 per barrel and WTI at $58 by December 2025. These figures fall further to $55 and $51, respectively, by the end of 2026. This outlook also assumes moderate output increases from eight OPEC+ countries, with incremental boosts of 130,000–140,000 barrels per day in June and July.   However, should the US slip into a typical recession and OPEC production aligns with the bank’s baseline assumptions, Brent could retreat to $58 by the end of this year and to $50 by December 2026.   In a more bearish scenario involving a global GDP slowdown and no change to OPEC+ output levels, Brent prices might fall to $54 by year-end and $45 by late 2026. The most extreme projection—based on a simultaneous economic downturn and a full reversal of OPEC+ production cuts—would see Brent plunge to below $40 per barrel by the end of 2026.   Goldman noted that oil prices could outperform forecasts significantly if there was a dramatic shift in tariff policy and a surprise in global demand recovery.   Cautious Optimism, But Warnings Persist   With both Washington and Beijing showing no signs of backing down, markets are likely to remain volatile in the days ahead. Investors now turn their attention to upcoming trade meetings and policy decisions, hoping for clarity in what has become one of the most unpredictable trading environments in recent years.   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.   Andria Pichidi 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.
    • CVNA Carvana stock watch, rebound to 166.56 support area at https://stockconsultant.com/?CVNA
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.