All you need is... a chart

Look forward to some examples of knowing the direction before a news-event.
In fact, this can be done real-time, cant it? :innocent:

Posts #16 and #18 should help explain that - as Douglas said - you don't need to know what's going to happen next, in order to profit from it. Anyone looking back at this day, without knowing when the ISM report was released can still see the high volume and the rejection of resistance. What matters is what you see in front of you, which is the effect - the net result - of the sum of all buyers and sellers. Knowing who is moving price or why price is moving in a certain direction, is not our concern, unless we want to become financial analysts and write articles for the papers.
 
I think you're talking about another market... in these examples we only focus on the chart at hand. What happens in another market, in another chart doesn't affect our position. There's obviously some sort of correlation between markets, but that's topic for another - perhaps equally interesting - discussion.

both markets agree with each other, as will most any other market --- too busy trading to bring up your chart, but do see they agree in trend and direction, certainly not numbers !

What happens before the news, isn't always easy to understand. Traders will often try to position themselves before a major release, therefore creating spikes that happen before the actual release. The "prior price movement" you're talking about doesn't always give away all the answers. For example, price could be making higher highs and higher lows all day, until it abruptly stops doing so caused by news...

when you look at it as a TREND, most especially on the 10 minute chart, it becomes apparent fairly easily --- to assist, try using the LRC and it will be apparent IMMEDIATELY !

Anyway, the main point that I'm trying to bring over here, is that the fundamentals are all in the chart. Once more, today, the news was good and sucked in the public thinking prices would go higher. All those who bought on the news will now have been stopped out.

You have my complete agreement on this -- i spent literally weeks trying to drive this into some VERY stubborn heads, and while a "few" people accepted it after watching charts for a while, there is a band of the "troops" here, all wearing "veteren" and "legendary" armbands who wish to fight me tooth and nail, for which im fully prepared.

All i become upset about is YOU come along with the same thinking, and YOURE the good guy for saying it, but when i say it im treated like chicken livers !

THAT is why i bring "myself" into the discussion -- although my rep points have gone up astronomically, i get really tired of the "top dogs" trying to place my ideas in the dustbin of crap, and then i see another spitting out the same ideas and being "lauded" for such WONDERFUL observations !

I imagine it would tick you off also, would it not ?

[/QUOTE]


enjoy and trade well

mp
 
I have 13030 and 12930 as resistance and support, the midpoint is 12980, which is often an important area where price returns to, when trying to find value.

Like I said, support was around 12920-12930. We just observed price reacting to support at 12930 (high volume) so there are clearly buyers at this level. How much and how strong they are will determine if we keep above this support level. But it's fair to assume that price will pause here at least for a while. This was also our target from the earlier short from 13020. The results from that trade are +40 and +90. Not too bad for a trade with a 20-point stop. If the trader wants, he doesn't have to close out his trade completely: he could scale out some more here and move his stop to 12960. That way, he'll still be in, if price should decide to break support and go lower.

The posts in this thread will continue on focusing on the chart alone, i.e. the reality, instead of news, gossip or anything related to fundamentals which might or might not affect the stock market.
 
Like I said, support was around 12920-12930. We just observed price reacting to support at 12930 (high volume) so there are clearly buyers at this level. How much and how strong they are will determine if we keep above this support level. But it's fair to assume that price will pause here at least for a while. This was also our target from the earlier short from 13020. The results from that trade are +40 and +90. Not too bad for a trade with a 20-point stop. If the trader wants, he doesn't have to close out his trade completely: he could scale out some more here and move his stop to 12960. That way, he'll still be in, if price should decide to break support and go lower.

The posts in this thread will continue on focusing on the chart alone, i.e. the reality, instead of news, gossip or anything related to fundamentals which might or might not affect the stock market.

THIS i like --- got mine up also firewalker (feels good also !) and so lets see whats happening.

ah, she hit the top LRC on thursday (with one of trader dante's really pretty long legged hammers, and kept heading for the bottom LRC for to either bounce or break.

top was 13132 and bottom will test 12921 (presently what forward looking software is predicting, although it will keep calling out support till we actually reach it) and a possible 12907 -- below that, smiling greatly, lies 12809 and thats not really an impossibility, all things considered

so anyway, we had a few days of heading down, and since indicis, like forex, like to play pingpong with the LRC lines, bottom should be hit by midnite EDT if all reads my script !
 
At the risk of cherry picking (Andy, you're never going to live that down...) I would like to post a chart of a trade that I took on Friday. Pelzar saw it - he can back me up :)

An hour and a half before Non-Farms I got a short setup on GBP/USD which I took with 4 lots.

People often ask me if I hold my positions through the news and I can honestly say I have found that over many trades, the news rarely affects my positions negatively. However, it does often affect them positively!

Think for a minute about what that means.

If I can take a setup with a predefined stop (I do use stops unlike MP) and can hold it through such volatility as most of the news causes and still make a profit, then it must mean that the market has gone where I anticipated it would go regardless of the "number" and others reactions to it.

GBP/USD was a perfect example. About ten minutes before Non-Farms when I was well in profit, our firm was having a talk about how to position for the Payrolls. Someone shouted something about a Fed announcement regarding an injection of liquidity and there was literally a stampede. People were getting pushed out of the way to see who could get to their desks first and get in on the action.

I was the last back to my desk because I calmly considered that what will happen, will happen and what is likely is that the market will continue going lower until it hits my major support level (lower orange line).

When the Non Farms came out, I watched the intial movement and then I actually got up and walked off from my desk not wanting to be emotionally forced into doing something.

Next thing I know is I am being shouted at: "WTF are you doing - get back to your desk - market volatility!"

Which was exactly why I was away from my desk.

Let the market participants jostle for position. Some will make money. Some will lose it. Some will make it and then lose it again.

But as is so often the case, the market went my way all the way to my next level :)
 

Attachments

  • gbp.gif
    gbp.gif
    23.7 KB · Views: 235
Last edited:
I suspect that you will show that in many cases the information is in the chart before the news even comes out. What may also be shown is some cases where the information was not in the chart before the news was available.

In those cases, to me, the question that tests your argument would be: without being an insider, was it possible to have fundamental information that would guide a better trade before the chart showed the impact of the news?

Firewalker, you misinterpreted my second paragraph. My intent was to exclude insiders from the question. This is a Popperian type question where you prove a scientific theory by trying to disprove it (never read Popper but read Taleb twice now).

Your theory: you don't need fundamentals, charts are enough.

That's how I trade and I think you'll find plenty of examples where chart action preceded known fundamentals.

The disproof would occur if: you can find (non-insider) examples where fundamental information available would guide a better trade before the chart showed the impact of the news or fundamentals?

I think one example might be the Eur.Usd back when it turned up from the downtrend. I remember my non-trader father telling me that USD was overvalued and sending me a report months before price started to turn. I'm not sure if it would have given a better trade because I didn't try to trade the fundamentals. But this is the type of information that would give question to the "charts only" interpretation.


(I like dante's example above which is an example of MP6140s repeated assertion that the big boys will position the price at the opposite end of support & resistance from their expected destination before the news comes out - and then enjoy the swing while the speedsters try to milk mice and catch the buzzing bees).
 
Your theory: you don't need fundamentals, charts are enough.

That's how I trade and I think you'll find plenty of examples where chart action preceded known fundamentals.

(I like dante's example above which is an example of MP6140s repeated assertion that the big boys will position the price at the opposite end of support & resistance from their expected destination before the news comes out - and then enjoy the swing while the speedsters try to milk mice and catch the buzzing bees).[/QUOTE]
==================================================
while i appreciate the credit nine, I LOVES your last sentence and will hold it close forever !

TD --- it is what it is and your knowledge is highly respected --- let the bees buzz and the mice go unmilked, but bet you get noticed at the "firm" rather quickly ! (sounds so much like the story of the young bull and older bull up on the hillside)

mp
 
It's late and I've only skimmed this thread but:

I think ALL moves can be predicted to a large degree by solid technical analysis.

Fundamentals are unnecessary.

Good news can make the market go UP or DOWN.
Bad news can make the market go UP or DOWN.

IMHO THEY ALREADY KNOW which way they want to move the market at news.

THEY simply use NEWS as an EXCUSE to move it to the desired price level.

Look at last week's FOMC. US cuts interest rates and the market falls!!!!!

Today, I had a safe, conservative buy signal on my DAX chart at 14:56, four minutes BEFORE news. If anyone is interested I can post my chart. At 3pm the market rallied. I played safe and went long on a pull back. I like to trade with the trend. I never try to pick tops or bottoms. I also don't trade before news, even if I get a signal like today. I simply make a mental note of it.

In my opinion the best (and safest) way to trade news is to take the first solid signal AFTER news, with the trend.

My software always brings up a window with the actual news release, and all the detailed info etc. I always just close it without reading it, because the news to me is utterly irrelevant. All I care about is the EFFECT that has transpired after the news. The news itself is meaningless. The news is just a string of words with no meaning. Just trade the charts.
 
I buy Company X as at Y date on the close. The next day the stock goes X dividend and price drops by the requisite amount. The information was not in the chart that it would do that ,it was in knowing that the company was going ex div the next day and you could expect the price to drop.Ergo ,all you needed was not in the chart.

A lot of posters do not trade shares, so they would not realise the value of what you just said. I trade shares a lot and you have to keep your eye on company news. However, these areas are announced in advance. If a company sells off a part of its group, my experience is that the news comes out too late to be much good,( often, after the exchange has closed) so the chart following theory is the only one that one can follow.

A current example is Microsoft/Yahoo. A lot of the action seems to have taken place on the weekend, although I am not following the charts. Yahoo is 15% lower, this morning, although the Dow was open yesterday.

Split
 
Last edited:
Fundamentals are unnecessary.

Good news can make the market go UP or DOWN.
Bad news can make the market go UP or DOWN.

IMHO THEY ALREADY KNOW which way they want to move the market at news.

THEY simply use NEWS as an EXCUSE to move it to the desired price level.

Who is THEY?? :confused:

The market consist of many participants, with many agendas. "THEY KNOW" conjures images of conspiracy. :cheesy:
If a person believes that a weekly chart has been going long for a number of years because of chart technical analysis, then that is a delusion.
 
Who is THEY?? :confused:

The market consist of many participants, with many agendas. "THEY KNOW" conjures images of conspiracy. :cheesy:
If a person believes that a weekly chart has been going long for a number of years because of chart technical analysis, then that is a delusion.
===============================================================

like so many others westernforce, gotta disagree

THEY are the combined force of the smart money, which in this case is the banks, brokers, mm's and smarter retail traders ---

now i had a nice old trend line that smacked the top of the EURUSD LRC a little while back, and while you may certainly hold your opinion, AMAZINGLY that ole currency did a rather close imitation of a dive bomber going after a carrier !

equities, working on different principles than forex, futures, commodities and indicis, does not always work on tech, but rather earnings, storys, rumors and phases of the moon, while the above more resemble the darling of the stock industry, "channeling stocks" which are stocks that move up and down in a trending channel.

unfortunately, those stocks dont stick with the program for very long, but forex, for one, is VERY MUCH a channeler, has always been a channeler and appears to continue being a channeler.

in other words, its pretty predictable as it moves up and down, holding its trend for years ! even 9/11 only moved it for a while, but it came right back to where it was before that situation, and continued almost as if nothing had happened.

as i said, i have to disagree with you as these vehicles are VERY responsive to tech analysis, and tech analysis has become THE popular method of tracking even stocks and the DOW --- years ago it was not true for stocks, but things change as computers get smarter and programmers get wiser

IT AINT YOUR FATHERS MARKET NO MORE !!

mp
 
Who is THEY?? :confused:

The market consist of many participants, with many agendas. "THEY KNOW" conjures images of conspiracy. :cheesy:
If a person believes that a weekly chart has been going long for a number of years because of chart technical analysis, then that is a delusion.

Of course. The "THEY" who push prices up are the "professionals" who are deemed to be out to fool the "public". This paradigm may or may not have been true in the 1920s, but today the huge proliferation of hedge funds, pension funds, mutual funds and such like could not possibly exist in the markets if they were dependent upon liquidity provided by the "public". The truth of the matter is that they have to trade with each other - there is nobody else to play the game with.

The fact is that mutual funds, unit trusts, investment trusts and pension funds are primarily managed by fundamentalists. Those who will tell you that for example fibs work because "lots of traders look at them", will then say fundamentals don't count ignoring the fact that fund managers swinging a bigger stick primarily make their decisions on based fundamentals.
 
While the market does indeed channel with the highs and lows, the underlying force extending the strength of the euro to where it is now, compared to the us dollar, is not the strength of channels, rather the fundemental strength of the euro compared to the usd.

Many institutions, banks, funds etc, lose money on the market at times, so my dig at "THEY KNOW" implied that they can no more tell the future than you or I. While they are considered the smart money, that smartness can vary :cheesy:
 
Who is THEY?? :confused:

The market consist of many participants, with many agendas. "THEY KNOW" conjures images of conspiracy. :cheesy:
If a person believes that a weekly chart has been going long for a number of years because of chart technical analysis, then that is a delusion.

Westernforce, I agree that "they" has many possible meanings and its actually more helpful to think of groups of market participants with common need and perhaps, as a result, behaviours. For example "big boys" used to describe people who need to move large volumes have to behave in particular ways to be successful. The conspiracy occurs because 1) they need the same things to happen to get filled, and 2) they all watch how the market behaves and learn to perceive how the game is being played today. But its a passive conspiracy just like Australian mid-week petrol price falls and pre holiday price rises. It's also complicated because not only is group A competing with you but also with all other members of group A - so the competition conflicts with the cooperation.

On the second part, the argument of this thread is NOT that "that a weekly chart has been going long for a number of years because of chart technical analysis." The argument is that you can trade it successfully without knowledge of the fundamentals. I am 100% convinced that this is true.

My own question about the argument is whether it is true that in some circumstances you could do better with the assistance of the fundamentals. I suspect that it comes out in the wash for actual trading - the times where the fundamentals might improve your performance would be balanced (or more?) by the times where you would have been better off following the charts (ie, fundamentalists stayed out of the last rise of the 1990s bull market because it was clearly too far ...).

I totally agree on your "smart" money. I've been told more than once by people in the banking side that most banks lose money if you don't include the skim they get from their customer's transactions. However it is interesting to watch how often some tradables set up before news to the detriment of many (most?) participants.
 
The fact is that mutual funds, unit trusts, investment trusts and pension funds are primarily managed by fundamentalists. Those who will tell you that for example fibs work because "lots of traders look at them", will then say fundamentals don't count ignoring the fact that fund managers swinging a bigger stick primarily make their decisions on based fundamentals.

A lot of big fund managers trade based on fundamentals. After all, it's big money that creates a pattern on the chart in the first place. This is why a fundamental shift in the economy comes out in the stock market (a chart) first, before it's translated into an economic indicator or a company report. Technicians look for these signals, perhaps through indicators or through price/volume movement, but they aren't responsible for initiating the moves themselves. This doesn't change the fact that fundamentals come out in the chart first.

Those who look for 'fundamentals' are usually looking at either - depending on whether they trade an ETF/index or a stock - statistics about the economy as a whole (GDP, CPI, interest rate, trade balance,...) or statistics about the company (P/E, dividends, earnings, projections,...). They forget that these numbers are nothing but translations of something which has happened before, these are by definition lagging indicators. Therefore, by following the fundamentals you are always two steps behind.

The market turns upwards or downwards because those with the big bucks have determined that the current prices are not correctly related to, what they perceive to be as, their fundamental value. But 'fundamental value' isn't translated into an indicator that comes out two or three months later. Which is why all those who think they study fundamentals, are only studying the effects of a fundamental shift that already took place.

A stock that is basing, is exhibiting patterns of accumulation because a select number of people (with "a bigger stick") perceive it to be lower then the real value. They believe the 'fundamentals' of that corporation are fine. But at this moment, the news is usually bad, earnings are worse than expected and jobs are being cut. The accumulation pattern however, comes out in the chart before - usually couple of months later - a rise in earnings or a increase in sales becomes public knowledge.

Yes, fundamentals have a casual relationship with price, technical analysts don't move price. It's not because a trendline breaks or an MA crosses over (or a Fib line is drawn somewhere on a chart) that price will move lower. Fundamentals are the driver behind the markets, but technicals are what helps you determine in which direction the market is moving, before the fundamentals become common knowledge.

Whether or not mutual/pension funds are managed by fundamentalists or technicians, I couldn't care. Fact is that a lot of hedge funds lost loads of money in the last year, pension funds continue to stumble and 'the professional money' has to fight with other professional money as well. It's not because it's big or professional money, that's it's per definition smart money all of the time.
 
In keeping with the original starting point of the thread, I myself am a pure technical trader and as such agree that everything we need, as spot traders, is already in the charts.
 
as i said, i have to disagree with you as these vehicles are VERY responsive to tech analysis, and tech analysis has become THE popular method of tracking even stocks and the DOW --- years ago it was not true for stocks, but things change as computers get smarter and programmers get wiser

IT AINT YOUR FATHERS MARKET NO MORE !!

mp

Although technical analysis has indeed acquired quite a following, there's still a common misconception about what TA offers. Price doesn't follow because an indicator crosses over. TA is only a representation of what lies underneath.

And, although I wasn't around to trade 50 or 100 years ago, the principles I studied seem to work perfectly fine in today's market, despite all the talk about quants, mathematical models, etc, etc...
 
Top