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

So----- Pace acceleration and bad vol. data

These make sense although I have trouble consistently interpreting PA.

 

PointOne--I saw the accel. trav. and the VE's but a little late. So you can't have a valid PV on a VE?? But a VE with decreasing vol. is a change signal or simply warning sign?

 

Thanks all !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anyone care to answer why in these specific examples we did not get change?
I suggest you reformulate your question:

- my trading fractal is ...

- bar N: context is ..., signal of change is ...

- bar M: ...

 

Also, post a properly annotated chart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any insight into why 15:40 and 45 (in yellow) are not change????

 

anyone care to answer why in these specific examples we did not get change?

 

 

(not everyone will like this answer)

 

If you tell us why you think it is change...

then ask the question,

you might get a more intelligent response.

 

As it is, people would think you are just blindly shooting in a barrel,

hoping a fish might pop up.

 

 

(a fish might.)

 

 

;-)>

Edited by Tams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suggest you reformulate your question:

- my trading fractal is ...

- bar N: context is ..., signal of change is ...

- bar M: ...

 

Also, post a properly annotated chart.

A few notes .

5aa70f7987599_no20soc2012-413tics.thumb.png.1f2b0c951930962835fd1d900439b03a.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(not everyone will like this answer)

 

If you tell us why you think it is change...

then ask the question,

you might get a more intelligent response.

 

As it is, people would think you are just blindly shooting in a barrel,

hoping a fish might pop up.

 

 

(a fish might.)

 

;-)>

 

 

I was not asking questions seeking an answer, I know better than that. In realtime when WMCN (in my mind) did not I found the answers. Just thought maybe others may have had similar expectations.

 

The chart came off a pc other than my trading pc that is why they are not annotated properly and if annotated properly the answer would appear.

I do appreciate you taking the time to respond even if only to point out the obvious :)

 

I was really hoping it might provoke some discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jack has addressed this here:

 

....

 

I must admit that it makes no sense to me to ignore the price volume sequences outside rth that go into forming a gap. The whole world doesn't care if the Hamptons and Greenwich smart money isn't up yet. Stuff happens outside rth.

 

Hit me!

 

Finally back from the Vegas trip and catching up on this thread.

 

| also think that just pretending the trading outside RTH doesn't exist makes little sense, given that the purpose of the MA part of MADA is to gather and organize market information. Why toss so much out? The market also shows different dynamics due to volume levels after FOMC announcements and during periods of extreme dry-up.

 

The only theoretical justification for gap removal I can see would be thinking of the after-hours trading as involving subfractal sequences, however much price may move. Pragmatically, gap removal often 'obviously' works (Friday would be a good example), and I remove it when that's the case.

 

On the other hand, after hours trading displays the same sequences,sometimes with significant volume, and those sequences, plus the highs and lows created, can also provide obvious indications of what's to come. Thursday provided an example of that - the premarket not only made it clear that price needed to continue up to complete a sequence, but also about how far it would continue. ( CV charts have obvious advantages over time charts for 24 hour monitoring.)

 

In sum, I don't see why one needs to make an absolute choice. A trader can track all the available information and use what's appropriate to inform decisions.

 

- become

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intraday,market internals dominate; daily and higher, externals do. See this link

This mechanism is behind the so-called Epps-eflect [16], namely that in high-frequency

data the cross-correlations between stocks are much less pronounced than in, say, daily ones:

Correlations reflect the similarities in how different stocks react to external effects and this is

covered for short time horizons by noisy internal dynamics.

These results offer a coherent qualitative picture about market dynamics. The impact of

incoming news needs a finite time to diffuse. Hence, on short time scales, the response to

them is small. The factor that determines the fluctuations of trading activity is internal: it

is the trading mechanism itself. On daily or longer scales, however, the internal fluctuations

have smaller importance, and the market tends to move with the global activity. In periods

of "business as usual", the natural human scale of one day seems to be needed to reach a

kind of coherence: News and trends can be evaluated, information is exchanged and collective

decisions are made. Interestingly, the scaling of asset return distributions [11] also breaks

down on the scale of one day...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My work for 8 Dec 2009. Note: I made today waaaaaay tougher than it needed to be. Today would have been fine using end of bar data, waiting PATIENTLY for sequence completion and then 1 or 2 signals for change. Lesson learned, again.

 

Feedback is always welcome.

 

Happy Holidays.

 

MK

5aa70f7ccab97_MK200912085ES.thumb.png.9e1a470357cf42fd1557157f49217bc1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you. I was just trying to figure out where I messed up....
You made corrections to your gaussians, leaving unchanged the trendlines ... If you looked only at your two gaussians choices, which one (or none) would you say is correct?

5aa70f7cf3608_es-09Dec08-vonly.thumb.jpg.19f30bd902e44cb0c706dee7f09a1671.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another Thursday :) 10 December 2009
If you draw that long narrow lateral, you could see the green retrace. A suggestion: increase the volume pane resolution to better distinguish volume behaviour. The way you have it now seems to show that you use the volume pane mostly to log your conclusions drawn from the price pane, or at most to look at the very large volume swings.

es-09Dec10-1729pv.thumb.jpg.1ff81548442c9bbdad603b007ab1fe35.jpg

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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