Yeah I hear ya man. It makes sense of course that you want to be going short when the order flow is selling. I'm observing though, that there are many many many times when the order flow switch just does not follow through with the intended trade direction. That is why I assumed you had more filters in place to help you decide when the order flow has a good chance of being supportive of your trade direction. Do you know what I mean? I'm sure what I'm saying here doesn't only apply to Asian markets. I used to use IRT some 3 years ago when I was trading the ES and remember the same thing. My best, MK
I think it first starts with what constitutes a "delta zone" . . . . no delta zone = no looking for order flow transition . . .
So that we are clear, were you applying the Cumulative Sum of Study study to the "Difference" subgraph of the BidVolume versus AskVolume study? If so, then the way this new cumulative Delta study works is different.
I don't have the cumulative delta tool, but I imagine all of those rejections off of the 924 level this morning created at least a minor delta zone of net shorts? Anyone care to post a chart?
Out of curiosity been watching the difference between the 100 lot trades CDV and the full volume CDV... 100 lot traders much more bearish today... it seems... :eek: Picture taken around 11:50am Eastern time...
I will have to go back and think about this....I may have seen that presentation you made here at ET in the "chat" if I remember (I first started to look at the delta, both cumulative & intrabar information in 2004).
IB feed is "snapshot" data and is TOTALLY unusable for proper delta computations (even with backfill feeds added).