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.

madspeculator

Critique of MP. A Theory of Market Action: Part III

Recommended Posts

Having discussed the shortcomings of the existing theory based on supply and demand, we move on to survey and critique the other theory: the theory based on value.

 

Theory based on value

 

In the early to mid 1980s, J. Peter Steidlmayer developed a revolutionary technique to visualize price action. He (and CBOT) named it Market Profile. Based on the observation that the profile had a bulge, he postulated a theory based on value (the term “value investing” – in the likes of Ben Graham and David Dodd – was in vogue during that time), and thus the auction market theory was born. The major tenants of this theory are:

 

1. There are different time-frame traders in the market.

2. Traders seek value; Price is all but an advertising mechanism in search of value.

3. Longer time-frame traders don’t interact directly with each other but through short time-frame traders.

4. Market moves only as a result of convection by a certain group of long time-frame traders.

 

This theory was born from empirical analysis based on the measuring tool – the profile graphic. This theory has five parameters: value, demand and supply of longer time-frame traders, and demand and supply of short time-frame traders.

 

Tools of measurement

 

Since the theory of value was born from the empirical analysis of the results from market profile, market profile became the primary tool of measurement. [Although the validity of construction of market profile might be a point for debate – should all the data points on a timeframe be given equal weight – such discussion is out of the scope of this post.].

 

As more information started decimating from the exchanges, volume profiles are being used to measure value.

 

Unfortunately, the market profile and the volume profile measures only one parameter of the theory – value. There exists no publicly available tool, as far as the author is aware of, that measures the other parameters of the theory, namely, demand and supply due to long time-frame and short time-frame traders. However, traders use tools developed to measure Wyckoffian parameters to predict the presence of the type (buyers vs. sellers) of long time-frame traders based on the location of such activity in relation to the value area of the profile and the resulting movement in price (initiating vs. responsive actions).

 

Side note: Although Steidlmayer advocated that value be measured only in “balanced” distributions, Dalton and others advocated the measurement of value even for skewed distributions. Steidlmayer emphasized that people should “find” the “hidden” value for skewed distributions by assuming that such skewed distributions eventually becomes a balanced distribution (interested readers are referred to his work on minus distribution, and more recent work on supply-based markets, and value-based markets).

 

Critique of the theory based on value

 

Of the two theories discussed in this article, the theory based on value rests on a very week footing.

 

This theory hinges on the concept of value, yet the very definition of value is questionable. Value, according to this theory, is defined as the first standard deviation from the Point of Control (PoC). Why the first standard deviation? No answer is provided.

 

If the definition of value according to this theory is indeed valid, the question arises as to why prices deviate from value. The answer provided is that perception of value amongst market participants change, thus changing value. This further raises another question: why do perceptions of market participants change so often – sometimes within a day or even when no substantial news comes out? No answer is provided to this question. Nor is there any plausible answer available in the larger financial or economic literature.

 

Further, an astute observer will observe that the so-called value changes based on the duration in which the profile is constructed. This points to the possibility that value is duration (time) dependent. The consequence of this observation, according to this theory, is that shorter time-frame traders have a different notion of value, compared to larger-time frame traders. Think about the consequence of the above statement for a moment. If an individual participant decides to change from being a short time-frame trader to being a long time-frame trader sometime during the day, her notion of value changes at that moment of decision. In other words, an individual’s perception of value changes because they change their trading time-frame. This definition of value clearly deviates from the standard economic definition of value (or equilibrium price) or individual’s utility value.

 

The next criticism is on measuring the so-called value using PoC as the starting point. Careful analysis of PoC suggests that PoC in a volume profile is formed around the area where a few large players transact large amount of trades. This would indicate that large players are responsible for defining value. Argument along the lines used above can be used to discount the use of PoC to calculate value. In the case of market profile, time determines PoC. Although Steidlmayer claims to have “removed time from the equation”, it is time that is being show in the horizontal axis of the market profile. Such a dependence of value on time, irrespective of the amount of transactions transacted at value, once again deviates from the standard economic definition of value.

 

So, is “value” in this theory really value in an economic sense? Or is it a misnomer for some other phenomenon?

 

Why is this question important? The only way for one to further or fully understand any concept is when words are not overloaded (using a well understood word to mean a different thing). This means that all phenomena should be properly identified and named. For example, if one calls a house a dog (for which a definition already exists), then the listener’s understanding of that conversation will be markedly different than if a house was called a house. If words are indeed overloaded, proper definition for the word should be provided.

 

Further, an overloaded word prevents us from determining if that word is really a principle component of the system or is a second order component of the system – is value a principle component or a second order component? As indicated earlier, in our field, where accuracy of measurement is a problem, measurement of second order components produces larger errors. The author contends that “value” according to this theory is indeed a misnomer (for a different phenomenon) and is a symptom (second-order component) of the trading operations of market makers (principle components being demand and supply of market makers). The proposed theory of market action identifies this misnamed phenomenon.

 

The lack of publicly available measuring tools to measure long-term and short-term traders’ demand and supply prevents us from validating tenants one, three, and four. Further, it appears to the author that tenant number three might be more applicable in “pit-trading” markets than in the present day electronic markets.

 

A theory or hypothesis should not be rejected solely based on the inability to measure all its parameters – in this case, long time-frame and short time-frame demand and supply schedules. People will invent new techniques to measure those variables at some point in time. However, a theory or hypothesis should be rejected if it is incongruent or its predictions contradict other well-established theories. Such is the case for the theory based on value. We will reject it.

 

It has to be noted that existence of tradable patterns does not support a theory. So, traders should heed caution that such tradable patterns might disappear. However, the local highest volume price (called PoC) has short-term significance as will be discussed in the proposed theory of Markets Action.

 

As a side note for those interested: Steidlmayer’s new work includes volume analysis. Further, he is now championing a new theory based on price-time measurements. I don’t think he considers PoC to be “value” anymore. In fact, he doesn’t use the words PoC or “value area” anymore, but uses the term “zero-line”. This of course is the mark of a true great trader – to understand one’s system and why it works (theory of markets), and when the theory behind one’s system is faulty, the system doesn’t work as expected (although the system might still provide tradable patterns); move on and search for a more applicable theory of markets to conduct your research, while still, may be, trading those tradable patterns until they fade away!

 

In the next – last and final – post, we will discuss the proposed theory of Market Action and present examples of new measuring tools.

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

    • Date: 11th July 2025.   Demand For Gold Rises As Trump Announces Tariffs!   Gold prices rose significantly throughout the week as investors took advantage of the 2.50% lower entry level. Investors also return to the safe-haven asset as the US trade policy continues to escalate. As a result, investors are taking a more dovish tone. The ‘risk-off’ appetite is also something which can be seen within the stock market. The NASDAQ on Thursday took a 0.90% dive within only 30 minutes.   Trade Tensions Escalate President Trump has been teasing with new tariffs throughout the week. However, the tariffs were confirmed on Thursday. A 35% tariff on Canadian imports starting August 1st, along with 50% tariffs on copper and goods from Brazil. Some experts are advising that Brazil has been specifically targeted due to its association with the BRICS.   However, the President has not directly associated the tariffs with BRICS yet. According to President Trump, Brazil is targeting US technology companies and carrying out a ‘witch hunt’against former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, a close ally who is currently facing prosecution for allegedly attempting to overturn the 2022 Brazilian election.   Although Brazil is one of the largest and fastest-growing economies in the Americas, it is not the main concern for investors. Investors are more concerned about Tariffs on Canada. The White House said it will impose a 35% tariff on Canadian imports, effective August 1st, raised from the earlier 25% rate. This covers most goods, with exceptions under USMCA and exemptions for Canadian companies producing within the US.   It is also vital for investors to note that Canada is among the US;’s top 3 trading partners. The increase was justified by Trump citing issues like the trade deficit, Canada’s handling of fentanyl trafficking, and perceived unfair trade practices.   The President is also threatening new measures against the EU. These moves caused US and European stock futures to fall nearly 1%, while the Dollar rose and commodity prices saw small gains. However, the main benefactor was Silver and Gold, which are the two best-performing metals of the day.   How Will The Fed Impact Gold? The FOMC indicated that the number of members warming up to the idea of interest rate cuts is increasing. If the Fed takes a dovish tone, the price of Gold may further rise. In the meantime, the President pushing for a 3% rate cut sparked talk of a more dovish Fed nominee next year and raised worries about future inflation.   Meanwhile, jobless claims dropped for the fourth straight week, coming in better than expected and supporting the view that the labour market remains strong after last week’s solid payroll report. Markets still expect two rate cuts this year, but rate futures show most investors see no change at the next Fed meeting. Gold is expected to finish the week mostly flat.       Gold 15-Minute Chart     If the price of Gold increases above $3,337.50, buy signals are likely to materialise again. However, the price is currently retracing, meaning traders are likely to wait for regained momentum before entering further buy trades. According to HSBC, they expect an average price of $3,215 in 2025 (up from $3,015) and $3,125 in 2026, with projections showing a volatile range between $3,100 and $3,600   Key Takeaway Points: Gold Rises on Safe-Haven Demand. Gold gained as investors reacted to rising trade tensions and market volatility. Canada Tariffs Spark Concern. A 35% tariff on Canadian imports drew attention due to Canada’s key trade role. Fed Dovish Shift Supports Gold. Growing expectations of rate cuts and Trump’s push for a 3% cut boosted the gold outlook. Gold Eyes Breakout Above $3,337.5. Price is consolidating; a move above $3,337.50 could trigger new buy signals. Always trade with strict risk management. Your capital is the single most important aspect of your trading business.   Please note that times displayed based on local time zone and are from time of writing this report.   Click HERE to access the full HFM Economic calendar.   Want to learn to trade and analyse the markets? Join our webinars and get analysis and trading ideas combined with better understanding of how markets work. Click HERE to register for FREE!   Click HERE to READ more Market news.   Michalis Efthymiou HFMarkets   Disclaimer: This material is provided as a general marketing communication for information purposes only and does not constitute an independent investment research. Nothing in this communication contains, or should be considered as containing, an investment advice or an investment recommendation or a solicitation for the purpose of buying or selling of any financial instrument. All information provided is gathered from reputable sources and any information containing an indication of past performance is not a guarantee or reliable indicator of future performance. Users acknowledge that any investment in Leveraged Products is characterized by a certain degree of uncertainty and that any investment of this nature involves a high level of risk for which the users are solely responsible and liable. We assume no liability for any loss arising from any investment made based on the information provided in this communication. This communication must not be reproduced or further distributed without our prior written permission.
    • Back in the early 2000s, Netflix mailed DVDs to subscribers.   It wasn’t sexy—but it was smart. No late fees. No driving to Blockbuster.   People subscribed because they were lazy. Investors bought the stock because they realized everyone else is lazy too.   Those who saw the future in that red envelope? They could’ve caught a 10,000%+ move.   Another story…   Back in the mid-2000s, Amazon launched Prime.   It wasn’t flashy—but it was fast.   Free two-day shipping. No minimums. No hassle.   People subscribed because they were impatient. Investors bought the stock because they realized everyone hates waiting.   Those who saw the future in that speedy little yellow button? They could’ve caught another 10,000%+ move.   Finally…   Back in 2011, Bitcoin was trading under $10.   It wasn’t regulated—but it worked.   No bank. No middleman. Just wallet to wallet.   People used it to send money. Investors bought it because they saw the potential.   Those who saw something glimmering in that strange orange coin? They could’ve caught a 100,000%+ move.   The people who made those calls weren’t fortune tellers. They just noticed something simple before others did.   A better way. A quiet shift. A small edge. An asymmetric bet.   The red envelope fixed late fees. The yellow button fixed waiting. The orange coin gave billions a choice.   Of course, these types of gains are rare. And they happen only once in a blue moon. That’s exactly why it’s important to notice when the conditions start to look familiar.   Not after the move. Not once it's on CNBC. But in the quiet build-up— before the surface breaks.   Enter the Blue Button Please read more here: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/netflix-amazon-bitcoin-blue  Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
    • What These Attacks Look Like There are several ways you could get hacked. And the threats compound by the day.   Here’s a quick rundown:   Phishing: Fake emails from your “bank.” Click the link, give your password—game over.   Ransomware: Malware that locks your files and demands crypto. Pay up, or it’s gone.   DDoS: Overwhelm a website with traffic until it crashes. Like 10,000 bots blocking the door. Often used by nations.   Man-in-the-Middle: Hackers intercept your messages on public WiFi and read or change them.   Social Engineering: Hackers pose as IT or drop infected USB drives labeled “Payroll.”   You don’t need to be “important” to be a target.   You just need to be online.   What You Can Do (Without Buying a Bunker) You don’t have to be tech-savvy.   You just need to stop being low-hanging fruit.   Here’s how:   Use a YubiKey (physical passkey device) or Authenticator app – Ditch text message 2FA. SIM swaps are real. Hackers often have people on the inside at telecom companies.   Use a password manager (with Yubikey) – One unique password per account. Stop using your dog’s name.   Update your devices – Those annoying updates patch real security holes. Use them.   Back up your files – If ransomware hits, you don’t want your important documents held hostage.   Avoid public WiFi for sensitive stuff – Or use a VPN.   Think before you click – Emails that feel “urgent” are often fake. Go to the websites manually for confirmation.   Consider Starlink in case the internet goes down – I think it’s time for me to make the leap. Don’t Panic. Prepare. (Then Invest.)   I spent an hour in that basement bar reading about cyberattacks—and watching real-world systems fall apart like dominos.   The internet going down used to be an inconvenience. Now, it’s a warning.   Cyberwar isn’t coming. It’s here.   And the next time your internet goes out, it might not just be your router.   Don’t panic. Prepare.   And maybe keep a backup plan in your back pocket. Like a local basement bar with good bourbon—and working WiFi.   As usual, we’re on the lookout for more opportunities in cybersecurity. Stay tuned.   Author: Chris Campbell (AltucherConfidential) Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/   
    • DUMBSHELL:  re the automation of corruption ---  200,000 "Science Papers" in academic journal database PubMed may have been AI-generated with errors, hallucinations and false sourcing 
    • Does any crypto exchanges get banned in your country? How's about other as Bybit, Kraken, MEXC, OKX?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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