I use MP extensively in my trading, and use the new version of EW for my MP levels. To make EW conform to regular MP, you simply put the PH on a 30min chart. The
POC will be the same when the number of price buckets are odd, and vary from other software when the number of buckets are even. This depends on whether that particular software rounds the half a tick value up or down. The new EW supports two
value area computation methods. One conforms to eSignal, the other CQG. I use the CQG method. It is selectable as a global option. The VA computation matches other software with the same caveat regarding rounding. You will not get a MP with letters like a standard profile, but you can toggle the 30min bars on/off to see which bracket the TPO belongs to.
In the past, the PH tool used screen coordinates for the price buckets. That was a major complaint, and why I used a different program for MP. That has changed in the new version to buckets matching tick size. The EPH is the only softare I use for my MP work. I would like to see a couple more features added, and I have submitted those.
Ensign is in the process of designing a new implementation for higher performance (I don't see any performance issues, btw) and adding new features. I am not affiliated with Ensign, so I have no idea when that is scheduled for release.
I use the PH tool on a 30min chart with TPO (time at price), and export the
poc/vah/val values from that chart to other lower timeframes. EW supports constructing the histogram based on time or volume.
Volume Based Profiles
I know jperl has videos with a volume profile based on one minute bars. In my experience, EW does a reasonable job most of the time in this case, but I have seen occassional large differences between a volume histo based on one minute bars vs. actual ticks. I was running the two profiles on the same system with the same data feed. The comparison software was MarketDelta. The discrepancies occur when the profile takes on a double distribution shape. The occasional differences are large enough to place the volume
POC on the other side of
vwap. To be fair, even two different softwares using the same tick data can arrive at different
POC (and
value areas by extension) in this double distribution case. The reason is volume profile implementations usually incorporate some kind of threshold when comparing the buckets, and those thresholds vary from one vendor to another. So one software using a smaller threshold would dynamically shift its
VPOC sooner as the second distribution began to overtake the first. From a trading perspective, this is a technicality, since a developing dbl dist provides a reasonble expectation of price behavior when transitioning from one to the other.
On a broader MP note, using MP for just
VAH/VAL levels -while useful- is nowhere near the utility of understanding the auction process that a MP uniquely shows. Just my opinion.