The Price / Volume Relationship

[StephenR0 10]

Actually, I still have mine up, although the demand has fallen off for some time. It should still work, though.

[Corey 10]

Torrents didn't work out. Will have to get something else going.

too risky to go to a site like that. The name alone suggests some unsavory business going on.

[Ezzy 10]

too risky to go to a site like that. The name alone suggests some unsavory business going on.

 

What is unsavory is the other torrent sites that loop you through their advertisers, lie and tell you they have the files and you can download them at high speed for a fee, or if you register. These sites don't have the files on their servers, they don't host them. After I posted the torrents they were already claiming to have the files, which had not even been uploaded to anyone - except to one of my own computers for testing and seeding. The evil bastids

 

By putting the links at PirateBay you get the link to the files hosted on my computer, no BS runaround or transferring you to another site, and at a trusted virus and spyware fee source - me!

 

Without a good virus program (shameless plug for Avast and Malawarebytes, both free) any site can give you a virus and, some of the advertisements on the sites can infect you without ever clicking on them. Though unsavory types use these sites and give them a bad name, they and other sites like them are the reason P2P software and streaming has come so far, and you are able to DL .99 songs and stream Pay Per View Sports at a reasonable price online. I've gotten more viruses from standard program updates from mainstream companies than from Torrents. - End Rant

 

BTW, have a new link for the files at a hosting site. They work. :thumbs up: PM if you're interested.

 

- EZ

[Ezzy 10]

Actually, I still have mine up, although the demand has fallen off for some time. It should still work, though.

 

Link to StephanR0's post with the torrent: http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/34/price-volume-relationship-6320-50.html#post101538

[MKTr 10]

13 Dec 2010 5ES

 

MK

[patrader 10]

For January Tucson '07 JHM meeting files go to post #2007. http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/34/price-volume-relationship-6320-201.html

[MKTr 10]

14 Dec 2010

 

5' ES

 

MK

[vienna 10]

Thanks, Gucci for the chart. I totally forgot that point 2 must be outside the previous RTL and hence my earlier R2R was invalidated with the traverse ending 1350.

 

Is that ("I totally forgot that point 2 must be outside the previous RTL") always the case?

 

Thanks!

[cnms2 10]

Is that ("I totally forgot that point 2 must be outside the previous RTL") always the case?

 

Thanks!

If the volume's through of the x2x move (pt1 to pt2) happens where the price crosses the previous container's rtl, then the pt2 of the new container must be outside the previous rtl.

[emac 10]

If the volume's through of the x2x move (pt1 to pt2) happens where the price crosses the previous container's rtl, then the pt2 of the new container must be outside the previous rtl.

 

Thanks cnms2, for the clarification.

 

Vienna, if I may add, I had mistaken the blue container sequence completion at 13:25 in the chart referred to in that post . Gucci's precise annotation showed the sequence completion at 13:50. I had also failed to see the VE after the point 3 of the blue container which should have alerted me that the sequence is yet uncompleted. After the final sequence completion, a new R2R would have to have the pt 2 outside the previous blue container.

 

TQ for the question.

[vienna 10]

Many thanks to both of you.

 

Thanks cnms2, for the clarification.

 

Vienna, if I may add, I had mistaken the blue container sequence completion at 13:25 in the chart referred to in that post . Gucci's precise annotation showed the sequence completion at 13:50. I had also failed to see the VE after the point 3 of the blue container which should have alerted me that the sequence is yet uncompleted. After the final sequence completion, a new R2R would have to have the pt 2 outside the previous blue container.

 

TQ for the question.

[emac 10]

My view of the day. The drill follows sequence completion, then SOC and repeat. It appears to me that the medium black traverse ended at bar 42 in my chart and I annotated a R2R based on volume pane gaussians as the previous container RTL had been broken. May I ask if this is correct interpretation since it happened on a lateral movement ?

 

The other tough period was the afternoon's lateral formations and movements. I tried to use the volume to determine the sequence as much as possible and hopefully am moving in the right direction.

Edited December 17, 2010 by emac

[MKTr 10]

emac,

 

Here is my version of yesterday's period in question as well as this AM.

 

MK

[MKTr 10]

My work for the 13-17 Dec 2010. 5ES.

 

My differentiation goals (accurate, thurough, consistent):

Properly annotate and integrate the 10 cases

When visible, annotate fast fractal and sub gaussians

Properly nest fractals

Using the fast fractal gaussian become more accurate regading sequence completion

Correctly "deal with" VEs

Correlate dominant volume peaks fractal to fractal to "see" macro PV relationship

 

I am possitive there are errors but I feel I have made progress. Any feedback or discussion is welcome.

 

Merry Christmas.

 

MK

[patrader 10]

Thanks cnms2, for the clarification.

 

Vienna, if I may add, I had mistaken the blue container sequence completion at 13:25 in the chart referred to in that post . Gucci's precise annotation showed the sequence completion at 13:50. I had also failed to see the VE after the point 3 of the blue container which should have alerted me that the sequence is yet uncompleted. After the final sequence completion, a new R2R would have to have the pt 2 outside the previous blue container.

 

TQ for the question.

 

I keep a copy pasted to one of my monitors of CP4(http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/attachments/34/12221d1247803502-price-volume-relationship-clean_page_4.jpg).Notice the post FTT consideration comment "Region for pt2 of forming channel:1.after FTT and 2.To the right of the RTL".It's amazing how much is contained in this one little document.I believe that a lot could be obtained by further discussion about CP4(in particular post FTT considerations in Regions for pt3 including the Region for revised pt 3 of old channel).hth

[martinkv 10]

First let me thank you for your post on price volume relationship. To put my story short, for the past 11 years I have been developing and fine tuning my own technical indicator, closely related to volume. I had gone through lot of info about indicators and stock market in general and consider myself an amateur trader. Ultimately when my indicator was ready, I found to my utter dismay that it was showing seemingly random patterns.

Recently when I was about to give up my efforts, I chanced upon your statement “If Volume is increasing, then the Price Trend is continuing” hit me as simplistic but then later I realized the truth of the saying “All great truths have a simplicity to them.” I made some changes to my tool (written in c++ and c#) and tried to decipher the indicator based on your rule. To my amazement I found that my indicator was actually predicting the market! Your rule is to free market dynamics what Newton’s law’s of motion is to classical physics. That rule hit me out of the darkness like lightning.

I don’t know much about fractals but if you gave the rule some though you would understand that it defines a fundamental behavior of any free market, driven by supply and demand. If you find a scenario in which the rule is not working I would be bold enough to say that there is something fundamentally flawed within the system. During my detailed analysis of the indicator using your rule I discovered a corollary to your rule. “If the volume is decreasing the trend may reverse.”

Once again thanking you for the tremendous insight your post provided me. It would be a great help if you could post more about fractal basics and maybe give a blueprint on how to make a technical indicator based on fractals.

 

Martin.

[NYCMB 10]

Hi Dear All,

 

I like to share with all of you an unique Christmas gift which I receive dfrom TL member SK0---

 

=================================================================================================================================

When it comes for a Tape to breakout RTL with increasing volume to form Pt 2 of a new Traverse, things can get complicated if one tape could not do the job. That is where a non-dom Tape followed by another dom Tape are needed to do the job of breaking out RTL with increasing volume to represent the first price movement of new Traverse which Spyder called it Fast Fractal Traverse. So, you can expect third price movement would be in Fast Fractal Traverse pattern too. As demonstrated in Gucci's charts, we could anticipate fanning after a FTT if we know the first price movement is a FF Traverse, not Tape.

==================================================================================================================================

[NYCMB 10]

Hi dear All,

 

Here is one more Christmas gift from SKO---

 

========================================================================

This is a graph that I made as a reference when I found myself confused in the nestling.

========================================================================

 

Big thanks to SK0-.

[gucci 10]

...................................Example of a wall.

Edited December 27, 2010 by gucci

[gucci 10]

Follow up. Note how many times one could trade off the wall.

[moosie 10]

Followup questions on 10/13:

 

1. Why the accelerated darker pink traverse? The pt 3 of the traverse must be there, or there aren't legitimate points 2 and 3 on the subsequent non-dom traverse.

 

2. Is the green up channel RTL correct? I have it starting on 10/7 @ 12:40. If not, would someone mind telling me where for the purposes of differentiating the first traverse from the second two?

 

Thanks in advance for any commentary.

Edited December 28, 2010 by moosie
Image messed up

[gucci 10]

Followup questions on 10/13:

 

1. Why the accelerated darker pink traverse? The pt 3 of the traverse must be there, or there aren't legitimate points 2 and 3 on the subsequent non-dom traverse.

 

2. Is the green up channel RTL correct? I have it starting on 10/7 @ 12:40. If not, would someone mind telling me where for the purposes of differentiating the first traverse from the second two?

 

Thanks in advance for any commentary.

 

Moosie, can you post 2 previous days as well? Without annotations. Maybe we can work something out.

[moosie 10]

Moosie, can you post 2 previous days as well? Without annotations. Maybe we can work something out.

 

Thanks. Attached through 10/11.

[gucci 10]

Followup questions on 10/13:

 

1. Why the accelerated darker pink traverse? The pt 3 of the traverse must be there, or there aren't legitimate points 2 and 3 on the subsequent non-dom traverse.

 

2. Is the green up channel RTL correct? I have it starting on 10/7 @ 12:40. If not, would someone mind telling me where for the purposes of differentiating the first traverse from the second two?

 

Thanks in advance for any commentary.

 

Re 1: The accelerated stuff has all of the ingredients of a traverse. Look at the following chart

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2288546

 

and pay attention to how the market finished building the second pink traverse. The nondom tape of this traverse is built on increasing vol creating a faster fractal stuff. This pink creature wouldn't have been a traverse anymore had the market created a complete traverse in the nondom direction instead of a faster fractal stuff.

 

Re2: Can not tell much about your green channel, but looks good to me. Your chart 10/13 lacks the annotations of the up traverses in the green channel. Those would make things clearer, especially with respect to the faster fractal traverses built in the red channel.

[MKTr 10]

5' ES for 28 Dec 2010.

 

MK