nice, but what does this have to do with EOD trading as the original thread was all about? Please tell me how to use this infomation when all you have is EOD volume? Just as an aside, don't many professional traders mask their intentions on the bid/ask? i.e. they may place a 1000 lot order to sell but actually have no intention to sell but rather buy and just wanted to gauge the demand...doesn't this make watching level II hard to judge what's actually going on?
<b>I ran the - Babakinator Software Translator - on the above and got the following...</b> :eek: ************************************* <b>Don't Worry - Be Happy - Just Trade ************************************* cj... crike you guy's are working me ta death... </b> __________________ HAVE STOP - WILL TRADE If You Have The Vision We Have The Code
Good point Dave. Also there are completely invisible orders as well as iceberg orders. But my intention, as I've said many times was for swing/position trading (eod - one day to several weeks).
Except the framework in which I operate, isn't theoretical. I leave the theoretical discussions to the academics and debating societies. What matters, really matters, stems from what methods put money into your account - what information permits profits to occur with great effectiveness. Volume, and changes associated with it among a certain subset of stocks, provides me that information daily. I trade these methods each day as my sole source of income, and I trade a select Universe of Equities which correlate quite regularly with the Price - Volume relationship. With all due respect to your abilities and intellect, what you ( or I, or anyone else) believe with respect to volume, matters little. When I was four years old and learning to ride a bike for the first time, I did not require an understanding of the Laws of Physics with respect to Force and Acceleration before I attempted my first solo ride (I suspect neither did you). I simply got on the bike one day and began to ride. The attached chart represents another one of the 29 equities I follow each day which do correlate with the Price - Volume relationship. Many other examples exist as well that I do not follow. In addition, examples exist which appear to show failure of such a relationship. None of this matters to me, as I do not trade such equities (nor watermelons, nor art) which do not follow the rule. The methods to obtaining profits from the market remain as numerous as the number of stocks traded each day. However, I fail to understand the reasoning behind continuing to investigate in areas which fail to correlate, and as a result, where obtaining profits might prove more difficult. Nononsense said it best, "if you find a way to make money from [volume], then it does matter." I have, and it does. Good Trading to you. - Spydertrader <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=821230>
Cj, I definitely appreciate your grob translations. Particularly the one that explained bid/ask analysis. I do similar things, I have found use out of it and will continue to explore creative ways of analyzing that data. Babak, I am an advocate of using bid/ask volume analysis, and when I have looked into EOD analysis, I also found volume helpful. I know you disagree on this point, that's fine. But we are together on one thing. What the hell is Grob saying. Sorry if my feeble mind lacks the intellectual capacity to "ride a bicycle" along with other high money velocity traders. Jeez Morpheus, just give me the blue pill then. Really though, I appreciate the help Grob in attempting to give me insight into your views on how the market works and what volume entails. Unfortunately, as I said before, I was confused by most of your explanations, and then you went on to further confuse me by trying to explain/re-explain your explanations, and also point out that me and Babak are clueless and wrong. Thanks, though now I am concerned that Babak was right. It appears you have a muddled mind, muddled explanations, and the tendency to shoot down those who challenge or ask you what the hell you are saying. Sorry bro, most of us aren't on the same wavelength as you. I don't doubt that you are a very successful trader, I also don't doubt that your 750il dusts redneck pickup trucks. But in the end, your posts have only served to confuse me(and others, I imagine) more, and they have not spurred my mind to explore new ideas or see something a different way. Certainly, you shouldn't care, but as for our volume discussion, I will refrain from asking you to further detail your logic. Is vol. really important? Babak, ultimately I think nononsense gave a good explanation. If you can figure out a way to use volume to make you money, then doesn't that make it useful and importantl? If you can't, it doesn't mean that volume is no good, just look around and see how many other traders use volume to their benefit. But then, you'll find many traders who swear that volume doesn't help them one bit. It's just what you make of it. There are so many ways(with or without volume) to make/lose money in the markets for your EOD timeframe.
If this is just a semantics issue, so be it. But you can have prints when price is still far from achieving any sense of equilibrium or balance of demand and supply (which is my concept of what "equilibrium" entails). What does "equilibrium" mean when explosions in London take down the SP 25 points and prices rebound and go higher by the end of the day? Do you really believe each and every print on the way down and up are just little stops along the Equilibrium Express Train? Traders asleep and unaware who left standing limit bids overnight half a point below that day's close -- are their executed prints representative of "equal supply and demand"? Sounds like you are arguing the equivalent of saying eating a slice of pizza is the same as eating a slice of pound cake, given both are made up of the same chemical elements bonded together. If all you can see are carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, how do you expect to become a chef?
I think this thread is drawing to a close (atleast for me). I've learned quite a bit, surprisingly. I do agree that if you've found a way to profit from volume as a variable, then that's great. Just try and understand why it works the way it does. Otherwise, sooner or later, you will be up the creek without a paddle. I still believe what I said about volume, transactions, supply/demand is true. When/if I see reasons that its not i'll change my mind. What practical lesson can one take away from all this? To investigate your own path and do your own thinking. Never substitute someone else's understanding for your own and follow them blindly. In going through the archives I found several threads where people tried to follow Jack's convoluted circuitous method and it all came to naught (nwbprop/laziz). The most recent is spydertrader. Don't get me wrong, I don't wish anyone ill. I'm rooting for spydertrader because it seems that he's actually put in the time to learn and internalize concepts. He is rational, logical and gives examples. What I don't understand is why in the world someone would torture themselves with such a half-assed concept and manner of expression when there are so many great models out there...Tony Oz comes to mind, Brendan, seanote, so does praetorian and also maybe LBR, Mark Cook, Schwartz, Weinstein, Sperando, etc. Each of the above have shared specific, clear and common sense ideas on trading. Some have even done so by giving real live trades (or as close as possible). Meanwhile, all I can find from Jack is, as Hamlet said, "words, words, words" making surprisingly little sense. Thanks everyone, I really appreciated your input ...you make ET uniquely valuable
Except the framework in which I operate, isn't theoretical. I leave the theoretical discussions to the academics and debating societies. What matters, really matters, stems from what methods put money into your account - what information permits profits to occur with great effectiveness... Spytrader ------------------------------------------------------------------- Spydertrader: A couple of years ago I was watching a live T.A. session hosted by Don Worden founder of TC2000 when a viewer asked him for his comments on XYZ stock chart. Don posted that chart and after a half minute replyed in about the same manner you just did. Don added that he gave up long time ago in trying to analyze many of the charts he sees. He further added that he only wanted to be right about those charts that he has put his own money on. He has many decades of experience behind his comments and I respected that view and have tried to employ that in my own investing. Thanks Spytrader for your comments about your use of Volume-Price... Agpilot Ps: And I learned to ride a bike about the same way you did... (grin)
my example was more to the fundamentals of volume analysis which always apply regardless of all the masking of orders you mentioned. one good thing is the level of technology available for traders through new bid/ask & volume analysis tools which can be used for all timeframes. what we do for EOD trading can't be resolved until we all come to a proper consensus as to the basic fundamentals of volume observations in the shortest of time frame --- what we utilize from one minute to the next can then be expanded to what we use for the EOD. should a trader at the EOD know the current pending demand at various price levels, and should that trader know how the total executed supply of daily volume compared to that days start pending demands? is there changing inequalities from the day to day supply of executed volume in relation to the inequalities in the day to day pending supply? these are the analysis that i feel could be of great assistance to a trader basing decisions from EOD data.
Thank you for this post Macro'... could you or anyone else list the new bid/ask & volume analysis tools which are out or coming out... really curious... i use an excel spreadsheet to do my own breakdown that shows bid/ask DOM ratio's for the whole day... but its too manual and tedious... cj... _________________ HAVE STOP - WILL TRADE If You Have The Vision We Have The Code