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

Volume leads Price. Always. And without exception.

 

...Succinctly, unless and until the components of one fractal reach completion, the next slower fractal cannot begin. It trading terms, unless and until the Volume Cycle Sequences reach completion, the current Price Trend cannot end...

 

QFT... Every Fractal contains the exact same components. Learning to observe them manifest is the process of differentiation.

08212009.thumb.jpg.9018230cc8b1e88efc69aaff8382c0c7.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
08212009.jpg
... somehow or rather, 11:50 (8/21) doesn't seem like a Point 2 of the Traverse to me. Perhaps for the same reason, that 12:35 (7/15) wasn't. In fact, I can't seem to put even the skinny gaussians on the volume pane for the last two trading days. Feels a bit freaky.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... somehow or rather, 11:50 (8/21) doesn't seem like a Point 2 of the Traverse to me. Perhaps for the same reason, that 12:35 (7/15) wasn't. In fact, I can't seem to put even the skinny gaussians on the volume pane for the last two trading days. Feels a bit freaky.:)

 

Hey romanus,

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I can see your view. Perhaps I have annotated sub-fractals. I still find it astonishing that the sequences can be observed within internals. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Attached is gaussian diagram superimposed on one of Spydertrader's annotated charts. I have drawn in two arrows that point out areas where the volume gaussians are labeled differently than the diagram. Am I blind or is this labeling clearly different?

 

I am struggling like many others trying to get the volume annotations down. Is there anything else that can be said that would help us label these volume bars correctly?

Thanks,

-Monkman

03-20-2006-es-5min2.thumb.jpg.999605028c21ece7fbda41428df38efd.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Attached is gaussian diagram superimposed on one of Spydertrader's annotated charts. I have drawn in two arrows that point out areas where the volume gaussians are labeled differently than the diagram. Am I blind or is this labeling clearly different?

 

I am struggling like many others trying to get the volume annotations down. Is there anything else that can be said that would help us label these volume bars correctly?

Thanks,

-Monkman

I was actually curious to understand what you're showing and asking, but I couldn't figure it out ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey romanus,

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I can see your view. Perhaps I have annotated sub-fractals. I still find it astonishing that the sequences can be observed within internals. :cool:

This is the way I've annotated that area:

08212009.jpg.c84e71e38e85d37b0cbe222d9a00336f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

01-17-08 08:16 AM

 

Quote from dkm:

 

Frequently I see increasing volume on the non dom traverse from pt2 to pt3 and then pt3 forms with decreasing volume in the dominant direction. This is not a rare occurence and it continues to confuse me.

 

 

 

Three things create the scenario you describe.

 

1. Formation Break Outs (as you have in your clip)

 

2. 'Missed' (ommitted annotation) channels

 

3. Intra-Bar Gaussian Shift (Price switches from Dominant to Non-Dominant Intra-Bar)

 

If you have any (or a combination) of the three, anticipate seeing increasing Volume on the Non-Dominant Traverse.

 

- Spydertrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Referring to the gaussian diagram, it says, "Increasing Red Gaussian until price will not go any lower within the down channel."

 

And on the first page of this thread it says, "volume leads price always without exception." So how far in advance can you expect for volume to tell you when, "price will not go any lower within the down channel."

 

If there is anyway to give a more specific explanation or another illustration of what "leading" volume means?

gaussianQ.jpg.e5ae748be7867e35f5ae5d15c705fe69.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Attached is gaussian diagram superimposed on one of Spydertrader's annotated charts. I have drawn in two arrows that point out areas where the volume gaussians are labeled differently than the diagram. Am I blind or is this labeling clearly different? ...

 

Please review post #396, third sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Referring to the gaussian diagram, it says, "Increasing Red Gaussian until price will not go any lower within the down channel."

 

And on the first page of this thread it says, "volume leads price always without exception." So how far in advance can you expect for volume to tell you when, "price will not go any lower within the down channel."

 

If there is anyway to give a more specific explanation or another illustration of what "leading" volume means?

Let me try this, although I anticipate that you'll not be satisfied.

5aa70f19139d0_03-20-2006-es-5min2pv.jpg.25b75dcd559ea949d8a44e1b4910ddee.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Morning Trade... Doing the MADA - Gathering Data Sets - Continuation or Change...

 

Thank you so much, that was very helpful!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe the two accelerated RTL's were significant.

 

Thank you so much!! I appreciate your input.

 

Please - what does "accelerated" mean?

Edited by rs5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duplicated reply. Don't know how to delete it ...

 

Okay, Thank you, I see the additional blue up RTL and red down RTL that you show. I appreciate that. When that happens, I guess the market is indicating increased momentum in that direction? Which means I should be alerted to??

It looks like it is forming a wedge which means be on alert for a reversal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay, Thank you, I see the additional blue up RTL and red down RTL that you show. I appreciate that. When that happens, I guess the market is indicating increased momentum in that direction? Which means I should be alerted to??

It looks like it is forming a wedge which means be on alert for a reversal?

I just see it as the new rtl. Don't care for wedges, but a steeper rtl is easier to break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me try this, although I anticipate that you'll not be satisfied.

 

I really appreciate your help. Very few people like yourself have gotten this trading style down, so I can't thank you enough for your comments.

 

I suppose the issue is one of two things: The questions I am asking are not the right ones, or I am not able to see the correct answer at this point.

So I think for the benefit of others, I'll continue to re read the 2009, instructions, and abstain from posting on this thread.

 

- Monkman

Share this post


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

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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/ 
    • 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
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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