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.

mohsinqureshii

Stupid Question

Recommended Posts

I know it is a stupid question but no one had answered me this question in couple of sentences yet about this and this question arises in newbie.

 

How much volume come into the forex market when it moves to one tick - e.g. Let's talk about Euro/USD - If the price of euro moves to 1.2910 to 1.2911 - How much volume of buying has came into the market to move it to one tick.

 

Is there any specific mechanism for that ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was designed to make you think....and there is no such thing as a stupid question. :)

 

Basically it takes whatever minimum volume it requires to record a trade tick.

In futures it would be one contract.

In FX it depends on your broker. They may record a trade when no one else does, and it may be on very small volume...hence my reference to asking have you ever bought a top or sold the bottom as a retail trader. I know I have for various moves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it was designed to make you think....and there is no such thing as a stupid question. :)

 

Basically it takes whatever minimum volume it requires to record a trade tick.

In futures it would be one contract.

In FX it depends on your broker. They may record a trade when no one else does, and it may be on very small volume...hence my reference to asking have you ever bought a top or sold the bottom as a retail trader. I know I have for various moves.

 

 

In spot forex there does not even have to be volume at all to record a tick. All is needed is a new bid/ask price from the bank (or whatever institution) to which your broker is connected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

karoshiman - if that is true then I have learnt a new thing....hence there is never a stupid question :)

 

coming from equities I have always assumed it to be exactly the same thing. It needs a trade to be recorded, and given the volume in FX and my trading style I have never needed to worry about it.

I have also never seen it described as you say, everything I have seen implies that it requires a trade to be recorded. (assuming we are talking about the ECN market and not just swaps with a fx broker who may or may not transact with anyone but themselves and never record trades except in house)

 

In equities you can have someone bidding 1.2910, asking 1.2911, and no trades occurring there, and hence no recorded volume.

If say this was on a high point, and the next trade is 1.2908, then that is what would show as the high trade in historical charts. I have never seen it any other way.

 

If that is true that bids and asks and not trades are recorded, then the answer to the original question is theoretically zero....or is it the same answer - the minimum that is required to be on a bid or offer. Or does it again depend on the broker/data provider and how they recorded it, which is why different brokers charts have different ticks recorded?

 

interesting, can you show this is how its recorded? thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karoshiman - if that is true then I have learnt a new thing....hence there is never a stupid question :)

 

coming from equities I have always assumed it to be exactly the same thing. It needs a trade to be recorded, and given the volume in FX and my trading style I have never needed to worry about it.

I have also never seen it described as you say, everything I have seen implies that it requires a trade to be recorded. (assuming we are talking about the ECN market and not just swaps with a fx broker who may or may not transact with anyone but themselves and never record trades except in house)

 

In equities you can have someone bidding 1.2910, asking 1.2911, and no trades occurring there, and hence no recorded volume.

If say this was on a high point, and the next trade is 1.2908, then that is what would show as the high trade in historical charts. I have never seen it any other way.

 

If that is true that bids and asks and not trades are recorded, then the answer to the original question is theoretically zero....or is it the same answer - the minimum that is required to be on a bid or offer. Or does it again depend on the broker/data provider and how they recorded it, which is why different brokers charts have different ticks recorded?

 

interesting, can you show this is how its recorded? thanks.

 

 

Well, I'm not an expert in this. I've just read about this in several books and on websites and it makes sense to me.

 

In spot forex a "tick" is defined differently than in futures due to its decentralized character.

 

In the futures market a "tick" is defined like you mention it, as a transaction taking place, irrespective of the size of the transaction (with one traded contract being sufficient). So, by definition, there has to be a trade.

 

But in spot forex you have no central exchange, so a "tick" is defined as a change in price. That comes somewhat close to the above but it's not the same. I guess, in most cases there are somewhere in the world transactions in order for price to change, but theoretically there is no need for a trade to take place to change the price. So, the correct answer is indeed "theoretically zero".

 

The way your broker or data provider records it might also be crucial. Retail brokers have a spread on the prices of their data source (that's where they make their money if they have no commissions). So, differently negotiated spreads of different retail brokers lead to slightly different prices for retail clients. I do not know how ECN's record this. But they cannot deviate too much with their prices from what the large banks bid or offer. I guess, there must be some arbitrage mechanism be in place.

 

The surest thing is to ask your broker or data provider on how they do it exactly.

 

By the way, I do not trade forex anymore but only (non-forex) futures, actually only the ES. And my trading style makes use of volume information. So, for me, that is an argument against trading spot forex. But I've heard/read that some guys trade spot forex and use the corresponding futures volume as a substitute for actual volume. Don't know about their results though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...

 

But in spot forex you have no central exchange, so a "tick" is defined as a change in price. That comes somewhat close to the above but it's not the same.

 

...

 

 

 

I'd like to correct my statement above in bold letters. A "tick" in spot forex and the futures market is different. Period.

 

You can have many ticks in the futures market at the same price. So, it's totally a different definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to laugh at myself.....

it is actually a two sided question when you think about it.

 

"How much volume come into the forex market when it moves to one tick - e.g. Let's talk about Euro/USD - If the price of euro moves to 1.2910 to 1.2911 - How much volume of buying has came into the market to move it to one tick."

 

If you are measuring and recording price ticks, then the answer is theoretically zero (or the minimum volume bid required if there is one)

If you are measuring and recording trades, then the answer is what ever trades at a price. If nothing trades it is only a market that has been made and nothing needs be recorded.

 

To actually tell how much volume is required might actually be irrelevant. You just need some one to make a market there to actually move the bids or asks....or is there a minimum required volume necessary....I dont know. Exchange traded market makers normally have minimums, can you supply a bid or an ask in FX without volume - I would think yes - then its up to your customers on how reliable you are to fill volume there. Dont really know now that i think about it. (luckily its been irrelevant to me so far - but a good question)

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

    • How's about other crypto exchanges? Are all they banned in your country or only Binance?
    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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