so by my reckoning, you are using price tpo's through the globex 24 hr session??? i tend to use more of a volume histogram approach to the profiles where i use traded volume at price (rather than price overlap/tpo count - after all, tpo count was used as a proxy for volume before intraday volumes were reported) to define value and poc. also, i start my profiles at the start of rth, followed by the globex session, so my profiles start with the cash open as opposed to the globex session (when globex re-opens after the close) followed by the rth. im not suggesting these are better settings, just ones that seem to make more logical sense to me. my thinking for example is that the prices traded over night are less significant, and volumes a lot less than those during rth. therefore, to let the overnight price overlap be an equal determinate on the poc calculation (ie use price rather than volume), then will the resulting poc really be an area where much trading occurred/a control price? im not a big believer in back testing per se, but i say this as i wonder if you have ever looked into the different settings/ways of generating reference points such as poc's, and noticed any differences in results ? cheers and good luck...
Hmmmm... You must trade the spooz and that is not my normal contract - I should stick to what I know. I trade treasuries 90% of the time. For ZN which is what I normally trade I only use POC's formed during rth's (7:20 - 2:00). Looking back at my settings - I DID USE the 24hr session. Thanks for pointing that out. I will be sticking to ZN while studying ES. I am not even sure if ES provides the same bounce that ZN does. Thanks again for setting me straight! e.b.
I missed yesterday - but there wasn't much there. Today the only virgin is at 117'06 - price just went to 117'05 which is close enough - so it looks like a plan B day.
Back to patiently waiting for a virgin to appear. There is one at 116'285 but looks like there is little chance of it being hit today. So I will be buying the first kiss of the 21EMA (even that seems unlikely today).