[alleyb]

I sense a degree of frustration. Maybe you missed the point

Originally Posted by alleyb »

To answer specifically the questions you pose. No it does not really matter what you use for the pattern will ultimately be the same, the levels will additionally be the same and as volume builds across what used to be the back month then you can start to shift focus more to the new front month as the data builds so long as you don't forget that numbers repeat themselves.

numbers clusters volume nodes whatever you want to refer to will repeat. It is not about adjusting for the gap but just perhaps in case you are a visual person then here are the current charts for the September S&P and the December and you can then draw your own conclusions. I apologise if S&P is not the contract that you ultimately had in mind bit the principal remains the same

[AgeKay]

Thanks for the charts, but I still don't get the point. To me, both market profile and the volume distributions of both contracts look very different. Yes, the general shape looks kinda similar but if you look closely you'll see that there are big differences at the individual prices.

[alleyb]

agekay. In an attampt to show you that the distribution is the same here I have re-stated the September contract to show the same composite but with a different timescale to get rid of the noise to show you that the September and December distributions are in fact the same. The differences at individual prices is accounted for the fact that the December trades at a small premium to the September but you still do not get it because you do not countenance the fact that the MP footprint is like an internal brain for the market and numbers repeat. The same numbers are applicable in September can be used in December and you will find that the volume pattern will replicate