people used to manually do it using TT. maybe still do. Its just taking what non electronic traders have done for centuries and applying it to computers. You see a large bid, you buy the offer knowing that you can always get out at the bid if needed. Of course, its not guaranteed.
Yeah, that was the strategy I knew of that guys trading Bunds and EuroStoxx Futures did yrs ago. But that was back in 2003. It stopped working years ago though. I haven't heard of anyone having any success trading the DOM in a long time. If the SEC really does go after HFT firms and eliminates all the quote stuffing and other games they do then maybe that type of trading will come back again....but then again people with large orders could just put in iceberg orders.
Another day of trending in Crude Oil. I had three good trades in CL today and this was final trade as euro was rallying this morning. You can't beat the short term trend following in CL each day.
And how does one find an iceberg? Seems impossible to know when there is one sitting on a bid.....that's the whole purpose of them...to not know they are there. But I'm all ears to hear how one would do that.... I think there is a better chance of finding a winning trade by Marketsurfer.
you used to be able to see last trade size and compare it to what was shown in the dom. so if the bid was 89.29 for 5 and you saw 14@89.29 trade and still 89.29 for 5 theres probably an order there. Of course, this is all automated now
i'd be willing to bet there is some super duper program that can make something of the order book. i'd also be willing to bet there is no chance in hell any human watching it can make anything of it.
I don't want to come across as harsh....but that's an insane way to tell if it's an iceberg order. Maybe it worked 10 years ago, but no way it works now. Even so doing it that way you still have zero idea of how much is on the iceberg order. Do you really want to be buying an offer if that iceberg behind only has 50 lots in it? No way in hell. Sure if it had 500 that might be a decent trade. But doing it the way you mention gives one no idea of what's behind it.
they do studies out there at Stanford that compare how smart the newest computer is compared to the human brain. Maybe at something simple like chess, the computer comes out ok but at something complex, like reading the market, the human brain has already traded it and moved on before the programmers have even understood it if you could teach a computer how to have a girlfriend or a wife, then you may be on to something