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 would like to ask if there is a point in this thread where the guys discuss position sizing/risk:reward ratios, or is that all left to each individual's decision making? Are there any sizing/R:R principles you guys use if a sequence is proven wrong and you 'reverse' long/short? Or is it constant size/R:R every trade?

 

Ironically, someone asked me this very same question in an email earlier today. As such, I'll repost my response to them here.

 

I use no money management strategy whatsoever other than to determine each day my anticipated level of focus. IF I have a backlog of emails to return, or if I turn on Skype or MSN (Yahoo, AIM, ICQ, etc.), then I’ll trade fewer contracts – simply because I have a risk of ‘missing’ things because I’m involved with a conversation. However, If I have no distractions, I’ll max out my number of contracts on each trade.

 

In other words, looking at the market through the lens of 'risk vs reward' fails to allow the trader to see that which actually exists - in terms of the market providing information which indicates "the right side of the market." Now, does this mean a beginner, should shove their chips into the center of the table? Of course not. Until you can see (on a consistant basis) that which I have described, then it only makes sense to progress at a pace which does not create stress.

 

Earlier in this thread, ramora described how he does things. Others have made similar posts using one contract at a time - until building up sufficient comfort to progress further.

 

I didn't start trading 10, 20 or even 40 contracts a clip until months after I traded a single contract successfully.

 

Lastly, once you can see (on a consistant basis) that which I have described, you won't even need an answer to the question. :D

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

Edited by Spydertrader
corrected spelling errors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the same fractal, they alternate. You have annotated an entire ES day with only one such correct sequence, and a partial sequence to end the day. What's going on in between?

 

Thanks very much for your reply. I've attached another attempt at Friday. I reviewed and learned from ehorn's chart and then reworked mine.

 

rs5, thank you for your help as well.

 

Should I be applying a particular set of coloration rules for my volume bars?

5aa70fddc5499_ES03-102_26_2010(5Min)-reworked.jpg.3a12bc1f8eaa545b69a049edf60cbc07.jpg

Edited by MomentumMike
Added Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is my gift for all P/V readers:)

 

Mr. Black, I hope you don't mind a question from a newbie.

 

You have what appears to be an R2R2B2B sequence in your diagram. When is it OK to use this sequence? Are there actually R2R2B2R and B2B2R2B sequences here that are not completely visible on a 5M chart?

R2R2B2B.jpg.9a411aeb9ca5b7a11369f718cc185e99.jpg

Edited by MomentumMike
removed original img

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Black, I hope you don't mind a question from a newbie.

 

You have what appears to be an R2R2B2B sequence in your diagram. When is it OK to use this sequence? Are there actually R2R2B2R and B2B2R2B sequences here that are not completely visible on a 5M chart?

I will answer this ? with a pic .....this is from today YM

attachment.php?attachmentid=19729&stc=1&d=1267475572......Interesting why the green fractal ends in frame 1

untitled.thumb.PNG.a316cfb2d593986a83ab872eb6cc6ce6.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

March 1, 2010

 

Today's effort. I was focusing on Gaussian levels. I'll start annotating laterals when I think I have a handle on the Gaussians (unless there is a reason I should not wait?)

 

I feel like I have a fighting chance due to the willingness of people on this forum to help. Thanks, all. It would great if I gained enough knowledge to do the same some day.

5aa70fdebbcec_ES03-103_1_2010(5Min).thumb.jpg.d1e41801d97f35e75ea61a8f320eff58.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LAT1

 

I've seen this type of lateral a number of times, and I believe it can be described like this:

 

- order of events: the lateral starts at pt2

- context: it's a dominant lateral

it has a sym pennant

after creation a non-dominant lateral boundary test follows, that also happens to be pt3

- this lateral contains p2 to pt3, and a part of pt3 to the FTT

- it always exits in the dominant direction

 

For clarity I've attached the drill image and another example of this lateral type.

 

--

innersky

lateraldrill-chart.thumb.jpg.c433616ae4500cb01cd79b0ceb05c572.jpg

lat1snip.jpg.dcb1c0a8199bd3e267e2dcd952c7fd46.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sure there are several fractals going on here, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.

 

--

innersky

 

 

Re-posted to clarify intent of original post to keep on topic.

 

I keep the sequential volume order of events a priority.

Then the lateral boundaries are placed on top of these events. The composition of the lateral, its entry and future exit have a construction built from volume based on this sequential pattern. From this a lateral boundary test is visible from a sequential view.

innersky_01.jpg.b66d14ce65fffd656e0ed07d09a5fb6e.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because there was no incr red?

 

For what's it worth.... At 18:40 I see an R2R form at a relatively slower pace. That R2R is followed by a B2B at the same pace, indicating an upward bias. I'm still pondering this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because there was no incr red?

For what's it worth.... At 18:40 I see an R2R form at a relatively slower pace. That R2R is followed by a B2B at the same pace, indicating an upward bias. I'm still pondering this.

as compare to black vols next to them thru out that green up move

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is 1 more ? for you ....Why the last Green Fractal does not End after B2B2R2B??????????

19730d1267476699-price-volume-relationship-6e030110.png?stc=1

 

Because pt2 is not outside the previous container?

 

--

innersky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently testing two improveements to the Trade Navigator Platform.

 

1. Automated Gap Removal Tool.

 

2. Freeze Slope of Trend Line.

 

Both Tools should be available in the next upgrade of TN.

 

This first version of The Gap Removal Tool does not move the annotations (e.g. Trend Lines / Gaussian Lines), but subsequent improvements to The Automated Gap Removal Tool will slide all previous day(s)' annotations (and not just pennants, laterals, EH and stitches as the current tool does).

 

By Holding Down the CTRL Key and grabbing the end of a Trend Line, the slope of the specific trend line will remain in place - maintaining its current orientation - as the trader lengthens or shortens a specific line (in an effort to 'clean up' one's chart).

 

Those interested in using The Automated Gap Removal Tool will need to contact the friendly folks over at Genesisft.com in order to have their account flagged once The Automated Gap Removal Tools comes out of Beta Testing. Having your account 'flagged' simply provides permission to use the tool and also prevents someone, who does not understand why anyone would want to remove a gap, from accidently triggering the tool. The tools removes all overnight gaps going back to the start of the current contract.

 

Of course, both improvements come free of charge to anyone who wishes to use them.

 

I plan to report my impressions on both tools to Gensisft this Friday, and I'll repost when the tool leaves Beta Testing and heads into the next Software Version.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's Open with Automated Gap Removal Tool functioning. Please note the Laterals, Pennants, Even Harmonics and Stitches all slide with removal of the overnight Gap. Please also note this tool moves previous trading days so as to ensure the current trading day has the correct Price points - allowing the trader to trade directly off the chart.

 

- Spydertrader

gap.jpg.847cef594db9c539cf9c7ccbe81f1b74.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spyder, sorry for disturbing you with questions pertaining the wash trades but they seem to be of utmost importance. So bear with me.

 

Do you consider a reversal trade on FBO after a FTT as being a wash tade or do you deem such trades as something each trader does numerous times during RTH just as a part of a routine? Sorry for the poor formulation, but I somehow couldn't come up with a better one.

Edited by gucci
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you consider a reversal trade on FBO after a FTT as being a wash tade or do you deem such trades as something each trader does numerous times during RTH just as a part of a routine?

 

Wash trades, for the beginner (or learning trader, if you will) represent an entirely different matter, than for the experienced trader. For someone attempting to learn the language of the market, Wash Trades build confidence. Knowing one has the ability to exit (at any time) at break even removes fear and anxiety from the trading decision making process.

 

For the experienced trader, a Wash Trade simply results out of market Geometry. Annotation error (should it come into play) occurs with deminished frequency as one gains experience. For example, yesterday's (03-04-2009) midday Lateral Point Three Container provides a great example of the type of 'Market Geometry' which, even if the trader executed their trades appropriately (reverse long at the container start and reverse back short at the container end), depending on one's fill (and slippage), a trader might end up with a very small profit, a breakeven trade, or even, a small loss. Please note, in this specific example, the trader executed flawlessly, but the 'Market Geometry' (along with the midday drop in Volume) prevented the trader from obtaining any significant profit. Moments later, however, Volume returned, Pace Accelerated and the market provided increased profits per unit time.

 

In this scenario, the experienced trader does not concern themselves over any Wash Trade 'gradient level' result. "Bummer! I lost a tic!" Isn't on the table here. The experienced trader simply knows "these things" (flat or extremely low slope) happen from time to time, and as long as they remain on the "right side" of the market, profits will flow into their account like water flows from a fountain.

 

The beginning trader still needs to build such levels of confidence. As a result, practicing 'The Wash Trade Drill" builds this much needed confidence - over time. The results of practicing The Wash Trade Drill, not only tells the trader he (or she) has the ability to exit at breakeven during all types of markets, but more importantly, the results of The Wash Trade Drill, alert the trader to the fact that more work may need to be done, across a variety of areas. In other words, one does not simply randomly enter when performing The Wash Trade Drill. One enters appropriately, then makes every effort to exit at breakeven. In other words, taking a profit or a loss when performing The Wash Trade Drill is not the goal. Done correctly breaking even on each trade is ver difficult to do.

 

With respect to how I view an FBO, my answer would depend entirely upon the specific context in question. I could view it as A. Screw-up. B. Benefit (additional profit) C. Jumped Fractal D. Unnecessary Vocabulary E. Innaccurate description of market information. or F. Perfectly anticipated result.

 

Personally, I do not see the need to describe such things as an FBO. I believe other (perhaps, phrases which provide additional clarity over the generic FBO ) descriptions exist which more accurately represent the information the market has attempted to convey.

 

HTH.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a second version of my 02/24/2010 chart.

 

Much better.

 

- Spydertrader

 

In his second version of 2/24 (attached), double eagle's line weights and font sizes seem to indicate that the green container from 1405-1520 on 2/23 is equal in fractal weight to the green container from 1600 on 2/23 to 0955 on 2/24. The line weights and font sizes also seem to indicate that the maroon (brown?) container from 1000-1025 is equal in fractal weight to the other two containers.

 

Are these 3 containers actually on the same fractal? Or would it be more accurate to say that the containers 1600-955 and 1000-1025 are smaller fractals which are building P1-2 and P2-3 of the teal container, and the teal container is equal in fractal weight to the 1405-1520 green container?

 

It's probably clear that I'm considering a couple different interpretations of Spydertrader's "Much better" comment. Thanks in advance for any clues.

5aa70fe1ccf7e_2-24-10doubleeagle2ndattempt.thumb.jpg.c4ddc79914ea5c40930cb00bccf11eca.jpg

Edited by treeline
originally typed the wrong color for 1600-0955

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In his second version of 2/24 (attached), double eagle's line weights and font sizes seem to indicate that the green container from 1405-1520 on 2/23 is equal in fractal weight to the green container from 1600 on 2/23 to 0955 on 2/24. The line weights and font sizes also seem to indicate that the maroon (brown?) container from 1000-1025 is equal in fractal weight to the other two containers.

 

Are these 3 containers actually on the same fractal? Or would it be more accurate to say that the containers 1600-955 and 1000-1025 are smaller fractals which are building P1-2 and P2-3 of the teal container, and the teal container is equal in fractal weight to the 1405-1520 green container?

 

It's probably clear that I'm considering a couple different interpretations of Spydertrader's "Much better" comment. Thanks in advance for any clues.

 

Hi Spydertrader and all who are interested in PV relationship

 

I have the same question as treeline had.

 

Besides that, I would like to know how to treat "old trendline A" after we have Accelerated "trendline B" and "trendline C". Shall we -----------

 

1) Discard old trendline A?

 

2) Up grade old trendline A one fractal slower?

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated. TIA

5aa70fe20b7a9_OldTrendline.thumb.gif.ffdc57a205b65ece355797dc060eadb2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Spydertrader and all who are interested in PV relationship I have the same question as treeline had.

 

After reviewing treeline's questions, perhaps, they could best be addressed by the person who created the annotations.

 

Besides that, I would like to know how to treat "old trendline A" after we have Accelerated "trendline B" and "trendline C".

 

Unless you have never accelerated a trend line in all your years of annotating charts, you should already have the answer to this question. If you do not realize that you already know the answer to this question, what does the market do moving forward from the point in time where you feel things become confusing?

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


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

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Date: 7th April 2025.   Asian Markets Plunge as US-China Trade War Escalates; Wall Street Futures Signal Further Turmoil.   Global financial markets extended last week’s massive sell-off as tensions between the US and its major trading partners deepened, rattling investors and prompting sharp declines across equities, commodities, and currencies. The fallout from President Trump’s sweeping new tariff measures continued to spread, raising fears of a full-blown trade war and economic recession.   Asian stock markets plunged on Monday, extending a global market rout fueled by rising tensions between the US and China. The latest wave of aggressive tariffs and retaliatory measures has unnerved investors worldwide, triggering sharp sell-offs across the Asia-Pacific region.   Asian equities led the global rout on Monday, with dramatic losses seen across the region. Japan’s Nikkei 225 index tumbled more than 8% shortly after the open, while the broader Topix fell over 6.5%, recovering only slightly from steeper losses. In mainland China, the Shanghai Composite sank 6.7%, and the blue-chip CSI300 dropped 7.5% as markets reopened following a public holiday. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index opened more than 9% lower, reflecting deep concerns about escalating trade tensions.           South Korea’s Kospi dropped 4.8%, triggering a circuit breaker designed to curb panic selling. Taiwan’s Taiex index collapsed by nearly 10%, with major tech exporters like TSMC and Foxconn hitting circuit breaker limits after each fell close to 10%. Meanwhile, Australia’s ASX 200 shed as much as 6.3%, and New Zealand’s NZX 50 lost over 3.5%.   Despite the escalation, Beijing has adopted a measured tone. Chinese officials urged investors not to panic and assured markets that the country has the tools to mitigate economic shocks. At the same time, they left the door open for renewed trade talks, though no specific timeline has been set.   US Stock Futures Plunge Ahead of Monday Open   US stock futures pointed to another brutal day on Wall Street. Futures tied to the S&P 500 dropped over 3%, Nasdaq futures sank 4%, and Dow Jones futures lost 2.5%—equivalent to nearly 1,000 points. The Nasdaq Composite officially entered a bear market on Friday, down more than 20% from its recent highs, while the S&P 500 is nearing bear territory. The Dow closed last week in correction. Oil prices followed suit, with WTI crude dropping over 4% to $59.49 per barrel—its lowest since April 2021.   Wall Street closed last week in disarray, erasing more than $5 trillion in value amid fears of an all-out trade war. The Nasdaq Composite officially entered a bear market on Friday, sinking more than 20% from its recent peak. The S&P 500 is approaching bear territory, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has slipped firmly into correction territory.   German Banks Hit Hard Amid Escalating Trade Tensions   German banking stocks were among the worst hit in Europe. Shares of Commerzbank and Deutsche Bank plunged between 9.5% and 10.3% during early Frankfurt trading, compounding Friday’s steep losses. Fears over a global trade war and looming recession are severely impacting the financial sector, particularly export-driven economies like Germany.   Eurozone Growth at Risk   Eurozone officials are bracing for economic fallout, with Greek central bank governor Yannis Stournaras warning that Trump’s tariff policy could reduce eurozone GDP by up to 1%. The EU is preparing retaliatory tariffs on $28 billion worth of American goods—ranging from steel and aluminium to consumer products like dental floss and luxury jewellery.   Starting Wednesday, the US is expected to impose 25% tariffs on key EU exports, with Brussels ready to respond with its own 20% levies on nearly all remaining American imports.   UK Faces £22 Billion Economic Blow   In the UK, fresh research from KPMG revealed that the British economy could shrink by £21.6 billion by 2027 due to US-imposed tariffs. The analysis points to a 0.8% dip in economic output over the next two years, undermining Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ growth agenda. The report also warned of additional fiscal pressure that may lead to future tax increases and public spending cuts.   Wall Street Braces for Recession   Goldman Sachs revised its US recession probability to 45% within the next year, citing tighter financial conditions and rising policy uncertainty. This marks a sharp jump from the 35% risk estimated just last month—and more than double January’s 20% projection. J.P. Morgan issued a bleaker outlook, now forecasting a 60% chance of recession both in the US and globally.   Global Leaders Respond as Trade Tensions Deepen   The dramatic market sell-off was triggered by China’s sweeping retaliation to a new round of US tariffs, which included a 34% levy on all American imports. Beijing’s state-run People’s Daily released a defiant statement, asserting that China has the tools and resilience to withstand economic pressure from Washington. ‘We’ve built up experience after years of trade conflict and are prepared with a full arsenal of countermeasures,’ it stated.   Around the world, policymakers are responding to the growing threat of a trade-led economic slowdown. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba announced plans to appeal directly to Washington and push for tariff relief, following the US administration’s decision to impose a blanket 24% tariff on Japanese imports. He aims to visit the US soon to present Japan’s case as a fair trade partner.   In Taiwan, President Lai Ching-te said his administration would work closely with Washington to remove trade barriers and increase purchases of American goods in an effort to reduce the bilateral trade deficit. The island's defence ministry has also submitted a new list of US military procurements to highlight its strategic partnership.   Economists and strategists are warning of deeper economic consequences. Ronald Temple, chief market strategist at Lazard, said the scale and speed of these tariffs could result in far more severe damage than previously anticipated. ‘This isn’t just a bilateral conflict anymore — more countries are likely to respond in the coming weeks,’ he noted.   Analysts at Barclays cautioned that smaller Asian economies, such as Singapore and South Korea, may face challenges in negotiating with Washington and are already adjusting their economic growth forecasts downward in response to the unfolding trade crisis.           Oil Prices Sink on Demand Concerns   Crude oil continued its sharp slide on Monday, driven by recession fears and weakened global demand. Brent fell 3.9% to $63.04 a barrel, while WTI plunged over 4% to $59.49—both benchmarks marking weekly losses exceeding 10%. Analysts say inflationary pressures and slowing economic activity may drag demand down, even though energy imports were excluded from the latest round of tariffs.   Vandana Hari of Vanda Insights noted, ‘The market is struggling to find a bottom. Until there’s a clear signal from Trump that calms recession fears, crude prices will remain under pressure.’   OPEC+ Adds Further Pressure with Output Hike   Bearish sentiment intensified after OPEC+ announced it would boost production by 411,000 barrels per day in May, far surpassing the expected 135,000 bpd. The alliance called on overproducing nations to submit compensation plans by April 15. Analysts fear this surprise move could undo years of supply discipline and weigh further on already fragile oil markets.   Global political risks also flared over the weekend. Iran rejected US proposals for direct nuclear negotiations and warned of potential military action. Meanwhile, Russia claimed fresh territorial gains in Ukraine’s Sumy region and ramped up attacks on surrounding areas—further darkening the outlook for markets.   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.
    • AMZN Amazon stock watch, good buying (+313%) toi hold onto the 173.32 support area at https://stockconsultant.com/?AMZN
    • META stock watch, local support and resistance areas at 507.48, 557.84 at https://stockconsultant.com/?META
    • TMUS T-Mobile stock, watch for a top of range breakout at https://stockconsultant.com/?TMUS
    • KULR KULR Technology stock watch, pullback to 1.25 triple support area with bullish indicators at https://stockconsultant.com/?KULR
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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