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.

Tasuki

TICK Flat Price Rises How Do They Do This?

Recommended Posts

This is a painfully simple question---price rises, TICK (advancing issues minues declining issues) remains flat. How do they do this? If price is going up, you'd think there would be more buyers than sellers, which you'd thnk (well, I would think) would mean that there were more advancing issues than declining issues, so the $TICK should go up as price goes up. But it doesn't always work that way, strangely. So, how come price is rising but there are no more buyers than sellers? The more general way of stating this question would be---why does the $TICK sometimes give false signals?

Thanks, Tasuki

5aa7112552491_howdotheydothis.thumb.png.b8ef9f4cda6d52d08d95a5ccefd3c0d4.png

Edited by Tasuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

There are various possible answers to your question . . .

 

  1. Firstly, what 'price' are you talking about? You seem to be charting the ES. The ES/S&Ps track 500 stocks, whereas the $TICK symbol tracks, if I remember rightly, over 3000 stocks - pretty much everything that trades on the NYSE in fact. There is no real reason to expect on to perfectly follow the other.
     
  2. Looking at your chart, I'm not sure if your question is more literal? The $TICK is an aggregate of said stocks; therefore it is banded (rather like an oscillator such as the stochastic or RSI). The maximum value that it could possibly assume would be that of all the stocks it contains (so something like 3000). Similarly it has a minimum value. The ES doesn't have a maximum value (though it does have a minimum). Remember, the $TICK is just the number of stocks that are ticking up or down, not how much they're up or down by - the market obviously reflects how much they're up or down by.
     
  3. There are other complications connected to how the $TICK is calculated, but I can't remember them. There was a great Steenbarger blog post on TraderFeed about the $TICK though - try googling for it?

Finally, I'd be very careful about how you use the $TICK in your trading - I've tried to build all sorts of strategies around it and never found anything that showed much of an edge.

 

Hope that helps,

 

BlueHorseshoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Tasuki said:
This is a painfully simple question---price rises, TICK (advancing issues minues declining issues) remains flat. How do they do this? If price is going up, you'd think there would be more buyers than sellers, which you'd thnk (well, I would think) would mean that there were more advancing issues than declining issues, so the $TICK should go up as price goes up. But it doesn't always work that way, strangely. So, how come price is rising but there are no more buyers than sellers? The more general way of stating this question would be---why does the $TICK sometimes give false signals?

Thanks, Tasuki

 

Your chart does not correlate with your question. The $TICK in your chart is not flat. In fact, it moves ABOVE and BELOW (back n forth) to the zero. In fact, I measured, the $TICK had more ticks ABOVE the zero line that correlates to your rising blue trendline you've drawn along the higher price lows on your chart. To be exact, since 1155hr on your chart, the $TICK spent 2.5x more above the zero line than below the zero line.

 

Simply, it seems like you're having problems visually comparing the $TICK subgraph to the price chart that's above it.

 

By the way, I trade the Emini futures too. The $TICK is great to help with price direction analysis. For example, if the $TICK spent most of its time ABOVE the zero line...I would ignore any Short signal I got and instead concentrate on any Long signal that may appear. Yet, I don't use the $TICK for trade signals. I tried and couldn't find any usefulness that way except for using it for price direction analysis as mentioned.

Edited by wrbtrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  BlueHorseshoe said:

Finally, I'd be very careful about how you use the $TICK in your trading - I've tried to build all sorts of strategies around it and never found anything that showed much of an edge.

 

 

So did I. Stopped wasting time after a while. Probably no algorithmic strategy possible with it. It maybe helpful in discretionary, if somebody finds it useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  ns6 said:
So did I. Stopped wasting time after a while. Probably no algorithmic strategy possible with it. It maybe helpful in discretionary, if somebody finds it useful.

 

I treat it like an oscillator and use divergences which are quite reliable to signal the end of a trend and the start of a new one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No sure if this helps at this point but as mentioned above $TICK is based on a different basket of underlying stocks than the ES contract. In Tradestation, the $TIKSP is similar to the $TICK but it is baed on the 500 stocks comprising the S&P 500 (same as the ES contract). I used to only watch the $TICK, now I watch both. Many times they move in unison but many times they do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  bakrob99 said:
I treat it like an oscillator and use divergences which are quite reliable to signal the end of a trend and the start of a new one

 

That's mostly how I use the TICK myself. If I suspect that a new trend is starting but the TICK remains bearish, I won't attempt a long. This is why I was so surprised to see the TICK not rising as price rose (see my chart). However, as wrbtrader pointed out, the TICK did spend most of its time above zero---I was just expecting it to rise along with price (it does, sometimes), and as Bluehorseshoe noted, the correlation between the ES and the TICK is weak at best, so I was expecting too close of a correlation.

 

Thanks to everyone for your fine critiques of my query.

 

Tasuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Quote
why does the $TICK sometimes give false signals?

The implied strategy is trying to exploit something that isn't an edge in it's present formulation.

 

  Quote
correlation between the ES and the TICK is weak at best

The ability to discern strong correlation in weak data is a viable skill well worth the effort it takes to acquire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  BlueHorseshoe said:

 

 

Finally, I'd be very careful about how you use the $TICK in your trading - I've tried to build all sorts of strategies around it and never found anything that showed much of an edge.

 

Hope that helps,

 

BlueHorseshoe

 

Really? how about in a "trendless" or "ranging" or "choppy" day, the ES makes a new high, but the TICK and the NQ fail to make a new high... it's a pretty darn good signal to short the ES. If it's the NQ that makes a new high, but both the ES and the TICK fail to make a new high, then short the NQ. One can often pick the high or low of the day this way (regular trading session of course).

 

It doens't work if you have a very strong move that day, either up or down. But in ranging or otherwise trendless conditions, it works great. I imagine one could use an ATR calculation to determine if it's a range expansion day, as well as maybe wait to trade such strategies until after the first hour establishes market tone, and don't trade if it's been a very obvious bullish or bearish first hour, but...yea, i actually used it just the other day in fact.

 

Oh, combine with the TRIN as well for better signals. Trin above 1.1, Tick fails to make a new high, ES makes a new high, short it. TRIN below 0.9, TICK fails to make a new low, ES makes a new low, go long, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true that the $TICK is not perfectly correlated with price moves. I have not found anything that is perfectly correlated with price moves. Here are some Tradestation ticker symbols:

 

  • $TICK - NYSE all stocks
  • $TCKSP - SP500
  • $TICKC - Composite $TICK across different exchanges
  • $TIKI - DOW stocks

 

  • $ADVI - DOW Advancing Issues
  • $DECLI - DOW Declining Issues
  • $ADV - NYSE Advancing Issues
  • $DECL - NYSE Declining Issues

 

  • $UVOL - NYSE Up Volume
  • $DVOL - NYSE Down Volume
  • $UVOLSP - SP Up Volume
  • $DVOLSP - SP Down Volume
  • $UVOLI - Dow Up Volume
  • $DVOLI - DOW Down Volume
  • $AUVOLI - Dow Alternative Up Volume
  • $ADVOLI - DOW Alternative Down Volume

 

There is also data for AMEX, NASDAQ, Russell, SP400, ARCX, OPRA.

 

As far as using the $TICK, or any of the internals data as indicators, it's not just a matter of simple divergences. There could be a higher $TICK high at a peak, instead of a lower $TICK high, but a lower CLOSE on the $TICK at the peak. There could be a higher $TICK high, but a divergence on the Advance/Decline. There are many possible combinations. There are patterns that are reliable. A decision also needs to be made about what might take priority. If there is a huge divergence on volume, I might use that as the most valid signal.

 

Here is an example of a VOL divergence today. The DOW volume has just gone positive, and had a higher low, the price of the YM went lower. Right at that point, at 11:15am the price of the YM goes into an uptrend.

 

So there is a divergence. Price went lower, DOW volume did not go lower.

5aa711442a108_DOWVolDiverge.thumb.jpg.acd6145e07cb511e358e6542794467cd.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • 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/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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