these are beginning trader abreviations for market terms. DOM is depth of market. T % S stands for Time of Sales OTR is a display where one tick range profile bars are used. Most people use time frame bars. you can also use constant volume bars. OTR's are constant volume bars for liquid markets. Oter's form analytical foundations for doing matheamtical derativatives similar to things like distance, velocity and acceleration in physics.
It is because time perception IS part of psychology and neuroscience that it impacts behavioral finance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_perception Time has a greater influence on the market than price - we trade time but few, like yourself, understand that because of conventional thinking within the linear-time "box". http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1986-98714-000 Our perception of time impacts how we organize and group things, how we visualize them and ultimately how we "see" and trade. So how then do we apply this to volume analysis? There are many studies on volume such as Wyckof's use of Vol + Price or Market Profile's Vol at Price or Footprints Volume in Price etc., but volume is best seen working as a consistent force when it has a structure to push off. Limiting your thinking to 2D linear time is like a high school student who thinks a triangle can only have 180 degrees. If that was the only answer if would be impossible for any ship to circumnavigate the globe. It becomes obvious when the triangle is placed on the globe that the curvature of the earth bends the lines and the triangle must have more than 180 degrees. So also it becomes obvious in trading when we leave the linear time model that the reason for your FTT is the disruption that destroys all linear cycles. The failure in the FTT is begging the question, what caused it to fail and how can it be observed in advance? I'm sure you'll find my answer elsewhere
The level 2 (I think is the DOM or at least uses the same info) would have the following information Number of shares that someone has entered as a limit order and has yet to be filled. to make it easier, we can interchange volume with number of people (this is not fare, but often we see uneven lots of shares that are identical) 50 people want to sell at 7 $ 4 people want to sell at 6 $ 3 people want to sell at 5$ 3 people want to buy at 3 $ 6 people want to buy at 2$ 2 people want to buy at 1$ none of these orders have been filled. they are eneterd order waiting for price to move their way. The 4 shares that were just executed at 4$ cant show up here they are done, so they will show up on the time and sales and will increase the volume on your chart. we can see alot of people what to sell at 7$, when price goes up there is will be like a wall that will eat up people on the other side, we may not be able to penetrate it. be back a bit later to read
Neither. If you use a display, volume bars are comparable. In a trend, there is a first volume bar. The next volume bar is or is not measured. The criteria for doing a measurement or not is determined by price. Two sets of criteria determine whether to measure or not to measure. For instance, you have a gate to measure. Consider the relative size of volume on this second bar as compared to the "assigned" trend beginning volume first bar. One of two choices will be present. For some, three choices are present and they are noting a triviality and making it important. The equal value is actually "assigned" for other reasons. The choices are orthogonal considerations. Most people cannot work in this mental orientation. We know this because of the absence of "orthogonal discussion". Suppose the second bar is taller (more volume), then this is a definite relative characterisitc and bar by bar it can be searched for. The same is true if the bar is shorter. In logic, you now have three classified entities: an assigned first bar and two volume elements with names and mathematical classifications that are differentiated if and only if a measurement is deemed possible. When not possible, then the second bar is not a trending bar and is absent from the logical development. I conclude order flow is not described in volume. They are not comparable to each other. You may have difficulting in processing and then making this part of your beliefs. Most cannot. They cannot be held in any regard as to importance. The whole story on all volume bars, so far is eluding consideration in this thread. The relative measure of volume bars, when possible, establishes events and it can be shown the relative events also stream with certainty. Do not just believe this fact. Prove it and use the proof to create a fully differentiated long term memory by the experience of drills. Try to understand that you have done parallel processes in other intellectual fields such as arithmetic, reading, writing, walking, running, siting, and sleeping. You may have learned to do sports where you play with and against others. With regard to the OP, you can see he cannot open this door. He has to think about one bar and think about its composition of granular sized parts that accumulate in volume as orders flow. Time frames allow bars to define volume accumulation in volume and allow bars to define, crudely, order flow in up to three segments of one residual price bar once it is formed. It is possible to think. Definable elements appear. Civilization has developed many extentions of mankind called tools. They are sufficient to define the market's operating system. The system can be used to take the full offer of the market. There is no way I can tranfer this total package to another person except to give him the ATS. I feel that I can show its operation for a few quarters by some set of quantified results. So far no one has suggested a way to do that which would be acceptable in public.
Thankyou for your detailed response. I would like to expand further on the cyclical nature of the daily auction process at a later date.
Perception is 90% long term memory (inference is the term) plus 10% sensory. Yes. I mentioned preception to you. The three common operators in the mind (O-1, O-2 and O-3) are, respectively, space, shape, and movement. I explain in my dissertations on taking the full offer the market, the intellectual processes in terms of the combination of these three operators. Thus I have constructed a fully diffierentiated spectrum in my mind and others have done the same using the same ingredients. We all have a common fully developed long term memory inference set. Raw data streams and by adding degrees of freedom, monitoring, analysis, decision making and action it is possible to effectively and efficiently take the full offer of the market on a given trading fractal. End Effects happen when trends terminate. By using bout 70 degrees of freedom, it is possible to have the answer of how this can be observed in advance. There are 35 observable diffentiated End Effects in volume. During a price bar on a time frame any one of these individually unique and certain and known in advance trend ends occurs within the formation of the price bar and rarely at a close of a price bar. By using the apporporaite mathematical tooling, the certainty of the defined event comes to pass. There is no time element or dimension involved. Five streams of sub sets of degrees of freedom converge and "lock-in". The beginning of the next trend is opposite and may not be measurable if measuring is killed for a while. Price data is used exclusively to determine this.
My displays are hilighted. (See past illustrations). I highlight all the price sheet cases I asked the OP to sketch out. These serve as gates and kills for being able to make a measurement in volume. these permissions are well known. End Effects (35 in 10 subsets) are annotated when the streaming volume elements of trends (11in number) have been properly exhausted by performing the test procedure of the logging sheet. The specific End Effect is qualified with certainty via the sub sets then the element definition within the subset. As this comes into view, the corresponding price bar is forming. carving and ooptimizing price becomes second nature since the volume result is certain by this moment. Knowing in advance is just done by examining the pathway of the future moving toward Present where all monitoring, analysis decision making DOES NOT EVER HAPPEN. THE ONLY THING DONE IN THE PRESENT IS USING THE REVERSAL KEY ON THE TRADING ACCOUNT(S). monitoring, analysis and decision making is done in a place called the near term future. this is where lock-in occurs. In neuro science of preception, the space operator LOCKS-IN. then 100's of ms later the SHAPE LOCKS-IN then 10's of milliseconds later the MOVEMENT LOCKS-IN. The mind then goes through the behavioral actions of reversing in the time available before the next trend begins through a similar perception later process. By doing trading at fives times the market capacity, the trader has a personal partial fill trading capacity that is very large and does not affect the market's operation. Years ago in a stock trading discussion a thrid party examined a high lited set of 31 T&S pages(in addition to the print for the day) to see how 100,000 shares were traded to have an average net of 17 points per share for the 100,000 shares which were poistion traded (ST). The third party recieved the pages directly from the broker's hand by Federaql Express. This was trading using partial fills at greater than the market's capacity. About 200k was left on the table by not keeping the partial fills at 10% of the cummulative trading. I was hoping to support the OP's learning process and mind building process to get to a fully differentiated mind. Here this post I reply to shows that the poster's mind is not fully differentiated. He proves this to the reader. He lacks the inference to be able to have perception of what I write.