Price, (Volume), Support, Resistance, Demand, Supply . . . (Abridged)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is it because $ never really gets down low enough to properly test support, but finds support at a higher level, thereby making a higher low (compared to the low in October)? Thats the only thing I can think of.

Almost.

If S/R is an essential -- or at least important -- component of the tactics, then trading it in real time can present certain challenges. One of the more important advantages of trading S/R is that most of the planning can be done in advance. However, S/R can sometimes present itself in unexpected places, sometimes because one just didn't see it, and sometimes because no one did.

In this case, one could reasonably expect a test of 27. But S was found at the body lows of the last swing low instead, and holding stubbornly to a conviction that $ would reach 27 despite the unfolding reality of the situation would mean missing the best opportunity to enter. Trading in real time means being alert to what to you are unexpected reversals and incorporating them into one's contingency plans rather than be intimidated by them.
 
1. and 2. What may be a familiar pattern by now: potentially (at the time) climactic volume on the downside, lighter activity on the test resulting in a HrL.

3. Another HrL, but no test of anything in particular (characteristic of a retracement). If one is relaxed, a small bell might ring when higher volume (an increase in trading activity) is unable to drive $ lower than 26.5. Even though some might consider the so-called "candle pattern" to be bearish, this inability of sellers to drive $ lower is just the opposite, what I call The Dog That Didn't Bark (Brits will know why ). The rebound is aggressive, and, by now, the fact that trading activity is substantially less should not discombobulate anyone who is viewing this as a movie rather than as a slideshow.

4. and 5. The angle of ascent tapers dramatically, and if you've been through the whole indicator thing, you know without looking at them that the slosto will be "overbought", the MACD histogram will show a "divergence", and the MACD itself is crossing or is about to. But you don't have to look at them to know this. The dog wags the tail after all. Trading activity is higher on the test that results in the DT, but it's no higher than the activity on the dip, which is not good, not because the activity is weak per se, but because the result of the effort is unsatisfactory, i.e., price fails to make a higher high.

6., 7., 8 . . . ?

14221d1117797398-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-xli.gif


In March $ shows weakness after the double top closing at or near the lows on every bar. Particularly the first & third weeks of March where the volume is noticeably higher than average, and buyers clearly tried to take $ up, they were easily beaten back to close well down.

The first week of April volume is nothing special, but sellers have more intent here, and they take the price down easily, to test potential support formed at approx 28.5 - the fact that price does not get there could be significant..

7&8 - Volume picks up considerably, and the result of the increased volume is positive, with sellers unable to take price down further, the first tentative supply line that could have been drawn in would also now be broken to the upside.

In the bigger picture, although the uptrend/demand line may have been broken, signifying a potential trend change, and we have a lower low, a trend reversal would only take place when that whole basing area (bottom at 26) has been broken through to the downside
 
1. and 4. Good examples of how price can move substantially with relatively little trading activity if there's not much counter-pressure being applied.

Anyone care to tackle the other notations?

14226d1117845241-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-xlk.gif


2 - After the angle of ascent has increased considerably in Dec/Jan, sellers come in size - profit taking, whatever, after they see that it looks like buyers are running out of ammo on the high bar which closed on the low on very little volume. For all that effort, one may have expected a little more result, however price closed off the lows, and only the follow through would be able to tell us which the dominant size would turn out to be.

3 - Selling pressure takes price down through the first level of resistance, but again is unconvincing, with price closing off the lows, suggesting at least some semblance of support.

TDTDB - To me this is the area that if broken would signify a trend reversal, so we would expect it to be a reasonably strong support level. Im not too sure I understand "the dog that didn't bark" correctly, as I understand it we are right at a crucial level here, and if sellers were going to get price down, there should be a lot of effort with a lot of result, taking us through this support level. As it happens, volume increases slightly, the effort is good (down) but not spectacular, doesent even reach the lowest support level, but from the following bars it is clear that sellers are done, and price rises on little volume.

E/R - The second to last week in October, volume increases significantly - I would have expected price to have a better result with this volume, and break through the resistance, however the result is not significant, a small up bar. The next bar it looks as tho buyers are done, selling pressure takes price down easily, but then buyers come back in and take it up just as easily, all on low volume - real tug of war.

The next couple of bars volume is reasonable, & it looks as tho sellers are gaining the upper hand again, with $ closing near the lows.

Thx DB for providing these exercises, it makes a big difference writing this all down as compared to running it through in your head
 
Originally Posted by Splitlink
I've been through these posts more than once and have come to the reluctant conclusion that I am incapable of reading anything meaningful into volume figures .

. . .it is unlikely to be either better or worse than any mechanical method which has been reasonably backtested and is coupled with self-discipline.

Not everyone is. And if one trades something that doesn't provide "volume figures", as you call them, then he will have even more difficulty assigning meaning to something that doesn't seem to be there.

Volume "figures" are, of course, largely irrelevant to the task. As are volume bars. What does matter is trading activity, which is what volume "figures" and volume graphics are supposed to illustrate. But few people are able to get there because they attempt to learn how to incorporate the dynamics of trading activity into their trading by reading message board posts rather than by watching price and "volume" move in real time. One can post illustrative examples, as I and others have done, but regardless of whether they are examples of what happened several years ago or five minutes ago, they are by their nature hindsight. The only way to surmount this obstacle is by tracking these movements with somebody in real time in some sort of chat room or by IM or video replay or whatever.

And as for the testing, yes, of course. Only through observation and testing can one determine the truth, as opposed to hanging on some guru's every word or on what one read in a book somewhere. I'm sure you've read, for example, that one should "never short a dull market", but I've found no truth in this at all. You've probably also heard or read that one shouldn't trade at all if volume/trading activity drops below some threshold or other, but I haven't found any truth in this either.

Unfortunately, 95% of the people I've "worked" with are unwilling to do the work. And without the work, it all just lies there. But only through testing can one determine whether or not something works and why and why not. For example, there are various opposing camps with regard to the so-called "Ross Hook", which is essentially a variation on the Dunnigan One-Way Formula and nothing particularly original (though nothing during the past few decades has been particularly original), as well as Bollinger Bands, Fibonacci, "pivot points", MAs, trendlines, etc. All of these features "work" sometimes and "don't work" other times. If, however, one were to incorporate a knowledge and understanding of support and resistance into these efforts, as well as the dynamics of trading activity, he'd very likely learn much that was valuable regarding when all of this is likely to "work" and when it is not likely to do so.

Note also that one need not receive a "volume" feed in order to incorporate trading activity (which, again, is all that volume is) into his tactics. One can determine by watching price movement alone whether trading activity is lackadaisical or fevered. This can't be done in a hindsight chart, of course, but it is obvious in real time. And the point of locating potential levels or zones of S/R in advance is to enable the trader to anticipate that activity (as with the charts I posted in early May).

None of which is to say that you must understand all this in order to trade well. But you might also be misinterpreting the purpose of the work and, therefore, not seeing what is there.

Or maybe not.

--Db
 
You seem to have put your fingers on my problem. I don't watch real time charts. If that is the reason for my lack of understanding of volume then there is no solution to it. I study daily charts simply because I have no time to do otherwise. Trading is, very much, a pastime for me, although that is no reason not to be good at it, like woodwork, sailing or anything else.

That lets me out gently. I'm not as daft as I thought I was!

Split

It doesn't have to let you out unless you want it to.

The process is practically unvarying, and unfolds according to principles that manifest themselves again and again.

For example, using the chart I posted earlier, the first task is to locate potential S/R.

14686d1120045845-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-waves.gif


In this case, "2" is potential S from the previous year (this is obviously a daily chart, but the principles apply regardless). Therefore, when price pauses at "1", one is alert to a potential reversal in advance of the test and draws a line there.

14732d1120338860-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-waves01sr.gif


Price "rallies" slightly, but falls through that line in order to continue with the test. The trader notes the trading activity accompanying "1". When S is tested at "2", he notes that, although there is a "lower low", the trading activity is considerably less, suggesting that selling is exhausted. An aggressive trader buys here with a stop below the swing point. A less-aggressive trader waits for a retracement of some kind. This occurs just before price reaches the line drawn at "1". There may be a failure here or there may be a continuation. "Volume" doesn't provide any compelling clues one way or the other. So he looks for whatever signs of reversal he's found through his testing or he waits for a continuation, if any. Price stalls here for quite some time, so he draws a second potential R line at "3", just in case price runs into further R there.

Eventually, price breaks thru both these levels. Maybe the trader buys this BO or maybe he doesn't. His choice. Maybe he waits for a retracement, which occurs shortly thereafter when price returns to R become S at the line drawn at "3". He then draws the next potential R line at the most recent swing high.

Trading activity, or "volume", is relatively quiet throughout, demonstrating yet again that powerful volume is not required for substantial moves. All that is required for substantial upside is a lack of selling interest, clearly evident here due to the fact that price can rise without much effort.

These are the same principles I've stated again and again with multiple examples. There are only a handful, and they quickly become repetitive. There's no mystery. Nothing labyrinthine. One only has to trade what he sees without bias as to what he thinks or "believes" should be or ought to be or has to be.

And another.

Price breaks through that swing high from the retracement to "3", retraces a bit, but doesn't even make it all the way back to the line, suggesting a preponderance of buying pressure over selling pressure. "Volume", again, is not enormously compelling one way or the other. One has to focus on price. Since there's no important S/R here, there's no reason to expect a lot of trading activity, though one must be open to any eventuality.

14733d1120339709-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-waves02sr.gif


Price continues all the way up to a December high with no "volume" spikes. However, when an attempt at a higher high is made, traders aren't interested. The fact that the activity reflects the holiday is irrelevant. Price doesn't make a new high, and that's that. It then begins a precipitous decline and trading activity at last increases, suggesting that sellers are at last coming into the market and overwhelming demand.

Same principles as always. Bars not required.
 
Hi DBPhoenix,

I can see a long and hard road ahead for anyone who wishes to learn this type of trading.

When I look at your charts, it seems so easy. When I look at my UK stock charts, it often seems extremely difficult. (It's like watching the Brazilians play football: looks so easy, but just try playing like that...). I really struggle to see any pattern in many cases. Some of the signs are easy to spot: e.g., breakouts on heavy volumes, reduced volume on pullbacks, long bullish candles on good volume etc. But many stocks (on my daily charts) do not seem to follow any pattern at all, they continue to rise for ever on low volumes, pullbacks are on heavy volume but they do not last and so on.

Is it something to do with the market? I.e., do price-volume techniques work better in certain markets than others? Or is it a question of me giving it much more time before I start to see the patterns in any given market?

One more question: how long did it take you to master this art? I know it's a long and hard road, but it would help me to some extent if I know what timeframe I am looking at, e.g., couple of years, ten years, more...?

The easy answer to your second paragraph is to trade only those signals that are easy to spot. But as for the specifics of the relationships between price and volume, I'd have to see examples. Sorry.

As for having to do with the market, yes. Due to the enormous increase in funds, arbing, hedging, whatever, the volumes on the indices are largely irrelevant, maintaining a consistency that they didn't have thirty years ago. However, I'm not sure what you mean by "price-volume techniques". Perhaps you're trying to apply what you believe you learned in one timeframe with another timeframe that's inappropriate. If, for example, you were to look at Farley's book, you'd likely think that it all looks pretty clear and relatively easy. But nearly all his examples were taken from a narrow window during the bubble period of five years ago. Applying all of that to today's market would likely be problematic. More helpful might be an examination of the '94 market.

As to mastery, probably never. To master this means mastering human behavior, and few people are capable of that. Understanding it well enough to take advantage of it, however, is another matter. I've said that I trade fear, but many people couldn't care less about that. They have no interest in it. And whether or not they can apply the principles of trading by price without being interested in trader behavior, I have no idea. I should think it would be very difficult. But I haven't done a study of it. It does seem, however, that those who think it's all baloney would never even try.

In any case, it'll take more than a weekend seminar . . .

--Db
 
Posted October, 2005

Originally Posted by dbphoenix
Those who are interested in the interpretation of price movement, the relationship of price and "volume" (i.e., trading activity, not inventory), and how all of this interacts with support and resistance would have a tough time finding a better example than the movement of the major U.S. indices over the past two-three months, particularly yesterday.

The question now is what the probabilities are from this point of an upmove or a downmove. I hope that those who've read this thread have a handle on this by now. If not, analyzing the movements during this period may help to tie up whatever loose threads there may be.

--Db

This is my understanding of where we are, using the S&P

1 - Weekly Chart - Momentum is clearly lessening, as evidenced by having to fan the blue trend lines, and also by having to flatten out the red supply lines - meaning that supply is coming into the market at relatively lower & lower levels. Trend is still up, however there is a potential trend change at hand, as the last blue trend line has been broken to the down side.

2 - Daily Chart - Again we can see from having to fan the 2 red trend lines that momentum to the upside is lessening.

In the A-C area, we have a healthy uptrend, the uptrend is broken in the C-D area however bulls would probably be calling this a normal correction, as volume is relatively low in this area.

Price reverses at D, slightly above the previous swing low, this too would still be bullish as we have a higher low.

Bulls hit there first problem area in the D-E zone where price makes a lower high and this should be the first major warning sign for the bulls. Also worrying should be the very high volume day around the 19 September, which failed to propel price to new highs, looks like a lot of distribution is going on.

Price turns up again in the latter half of September, which forms a nice coil (blue lines). Shortly after E price falls through support in the coil.

The current question is will price hold at current levels, being the level of the swing low formed at end June.

And to me that is also the significance of 2050 in the Nasdaq, it is the bottom of the potential resistance zone & last major swing low prior to the high.

If this level is broken to the downside, the trend would officially have turned down (at least by my definitions....)

All criticisms welcome :confused:

33031d1201633315-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-highlights-image3.jpg


33032d1201633315-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-highlights-image4.jpg


Very nice. Swing highs and lows can and often do provide S/R, but among the more important S/R levels are those at which the greatest number of people have the most to win or lose. Price has spent the last 16 weeks at this level (+/-). That represents a lot of trades. If price can't hold here, an awful lot of people will be under water, and they'll be concerned. This is essentially the same dynamic represented by the "head and shoulders", though most people focus on the pattern rather than why the pattern formed in the first place, resulting in their not knowing what to do with it.

For future reference, this is also why climactic tops and bottoms of swings often don't provide S/R, because so few trades are taking place at those points (which is why the reversals occur in the first place).

--Db

[Note, 2008: Gavin was indeed correct about the significance of 2050 on the Nasdaq; price held there in October, 2005, and again when tested in July, 2006, subsequently rallying nearly 700 points.]
 
Originally Posted by blackcab
That seems to assume two things: that a high proportion of the positions opened at that level are still open, and that the most significant level for holders of those positions is that level itself, i.e. breakeven, rather than, say, targets based on prior S/R, fixed dollar targets/stops, time stops, TA-derived signals that trigger in the meantime, etc.

If those assumptions were valid then the above quote would be the natural conclusion, but how do you gauge whether they are valid? If the great majority of positions opened at that level were closed in the meantime then those traders wouldn't care about that level now, at least in terms of their current positions. Any thoughts on how you can gauge this?

Experience. And while that may seem coy, that's pretty much what it comes down to.

If all or a substantial portion of all the shares bought in that timeframe in that zone have already changed hands multiple times, then support and resistance and chart patterns are purely imaginary, and new highs and new lows have no significance at all. But anyone who's ever seen a short-covering panic or a cascade would think twice about dismissing all this.

There is also the issue of what you're looking at. If it's a small cap and the inventory of shares turns over in a fairly short timeframe, then S/R are more likely to be flimsy. But if it's a large cap adored by B&Hers, then one can expect much less turnover and, consequently, more significance in important S/R levels.

There are also a number of conventional wisdom nuggets that are held onto and often unexamined, such as the significance of "52-week highs". This used to matter because of taxes (otherwise, "52" would be purely arbitrary), but whether or not this still holds true is open to new analysis.

Because I've been doing this for so long and because I focus on trader behavior, I've seen what are for me significant changes in this behavior over the past two years, causing me to make a number of adaptations, such as switching to 1m charts. Even so, I see far more guessing now than I ever have before (I've heard that Justin Mamis detected the same thing recently, which I found interesting).

But all of this simply reinforces the principle that one must focus on what he's looking at, not on what somebody tells him he's looking at. The truth is in the chart, and every bit of conventional wisdom, such as "high volume" on "breakouts", has to be re-examined with fresh skepticism in order to be relied on. And the less one has to rely on, the more the trading environment becomes a hot tin roof.

--Db
 
Originally Posted by PKFFW

1: How can one go about analysing P/V when looking at EOD charts? Is it truly possible to do so or is this type of study and analysis really only useful if one can do it real time to see where the bulk of the trading activity took place.

2: Is there any testing software that can test strategies based on these ideas. As S/R lines, trendlines, chartpatterns etc are so subjective, I can't see how the ideas could be put into a piece of software to test. It seems to me that only paper trading historical data would provide an idea as to wether a strategy would work or not. If there is some sort of software that could test it then I'd love to get my hands on it.

Cheers,
PKFFW

1. If one is using EOD charts only, he can get a sense of the flow of price and of the dynamics between buying and selling pressure by plotting a chart with intraday data. For example, plot 1m bars and zoom out as far as possible to get a continuous line. Being able to plot volume as a line rather than as a series of bars is also a plus, though not critical. One can also use "replay" and set it for a multiple of normal speed, e.g., 10x.

2. No. Regardless of the claims that are made, no.

21113d1152624593-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-image7.jpg
 
I'm trying very hard to understand the relationships that move the market. Based on essentials like support and resistance I try to determine a direction of the trend. Price is the main element I focus on, using volume to support my hypotheses. Therefore I believe I've read and studied enough material (mainly the posts of dbhoenix on ET and your excellent PDF files and noted charts).

Unfortunately it doesn't really seem to work out, I've been trying at this for a couple of months now and each time I think I got/see something and implement it after succesfull backtesting, it just doesn't seem to work quite as often as I wish it to be.

Can you give me any feedback? Lamont_C from ET said you'd be more than willing to give me support or suggestions to help me out. I'm trying to look at this from other perspectives but don't know what I'm missing or doing wrong here.

Attached you find a first chart where I noted my entry point.

attachment.php

Well, first, firewalker, you shouldn't be trading with real money at all until you have this nailed. There is no virtue in learning by burning up your equity. If you have no trading plan that comes even close to being consistently profitable, then your entire approach is based on hope. And now fear. Therefore, your focus is shifting from learning how to trade price to learning how to avoid losing your money, and this is not the best place to be in order to develop as a trader.

You've asked some good questions and, for the most part, they are well within the scope of this thread. However, questions regarding strategy and tactics are more appropriate to a journal since they are specific to you and since they will likely be ongoing, and this thread is plenty long as it is

Therefore, I'm going to limit myself to principles here -- or try to -- even though that won't be nearly enough. If you truly want to master this, I suggest you open up a journal (Trading Journals - T2W Day Trading & Forex Forums [see my post in the "stickie" at the top of the page]) so that we can get into where you should enter, where you should exit, what kind of stops you should use and where, and all the other details of whatever it is you decide to do in your particular situation.

I've looked at Lamont's comments and I concur with everything he says. Somewhere you got off track. But rather than review what's already been reviewed here and elsewhere ad nauseum in order to figure out exactly where you wandered off into the weeds, let's focus on your charts, one at a time. This is, in a way, a sneaky means of reviewing principles, but doing so through application, which is the only way many people can learn, and which is the reason why I've begun focusing on application -- such as with the S/R thread -- rather than get involved in yet more discussions on theory and philosophy which invariably turn out to be discussions of what has already been discussed over and over again.

So.

First, it's clear that you've put a great deal of time and thought into this, which is good. And encouraging. However, you refer several times to this stuff "working". Support, resistance, and price are not a method or a system. The analysis of all this is an investigation of how markets work, i.e., how traders trade. Once you understand the dynamics of how buyers and sellers interact with each other, it is then up to you to determine how best to take advantage of those interactions. In other words, there will be no flashing red arrows which say "enter here".

Second, it's always easier to see thru the window after one cleans the glass, so I've reduced your first chart to the basics, i.e., price and volume (though even volume is not necessary, as you will see, and may even be a distraction). Since this takes some doing, I'd appreciate it if you'd convert your charts to what I have below: no channels, no S/R (support/resistance) lines, no trendlines, no colors other than black and white.

Now. For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that life begins at the left edge and not get into the backstory here (otherwise, we could be here all day). Note that price hits 5655 and recoils from it. It then drops below it to 5647.5, then rallies back to 5655 where it is halted. Ah Ha! Resistance? Probed once from the topside (twice if you count the drop through) and now from the bottom side. This should cause a Hmmm on your part, something to pay closer attention to. Price then waffles around (and when I say Price I mean buyers and sellers) for a few bars, probes 5655 again, then falls. However, when it drops below the last swing low (LSL) at 5647.5, it rallies back in the same bar to close well off its low (if you were to look at a tick chart of this, you would see the wave of the dynamics of the exchange between buying pressure and selling pressure rather than a "bar", which would enable you to understand candlestick voodoo much easier and avoid assigning quite so much "meaning" to candlesticks and candlestick patterns). It's the closing well off the low that matters, not the color of the bar since buying pressure had to exceed selling pressure in order for this to occur. The volume bar tells you how much trading activity accompanied this movement. But what matters is the movement of price since that's where you make or lose your money.

33129d1201962502-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-highlights-image4.jpg


But this particular test is not yet over. Sellers push price down again, and this time the trading activity increases. But what happens? Going back to what Wyckoff describes as effort and result, traders put more effort into this movement (more trading activity, i.e., higher volume) but the result is that price not only rebounds above the low of the previous bar (or the previous swing low if you're looking at a tick chart), but it also rebounds above the close of the previous bar, creating a potential shakeout (you mention my pdfs; the description of the shakeout is in Demand/Supply, so I won't go into that again here).

The proof, however, is as they say in the pudding. Look what happens to price now. It rallies all the way back to R (resistance) rather than plunge lower, suggesting that what looks like a shakeout really is a shakeout. It then breaks above R. Do you take this or not? And here's one example of where trader-specific strategies and tactics depart from "principles". There is no inherent good in taking or not taking this BO (breakout). You can determine in part whether or not to take it by developing and testing a trading system (or method or strategy or whatever you want to call it) which incorporates trading BOs. If that system as you've designed it is consistently profitable, then by all means take the BO. If it isn't, don't.

But whether you take the BO or not, traders again waffle around here, and while the waffling can be frustrating and even prompt you to exit, the waffling does confirm the importance of this level or zone (if it weren't important, price would breeze right through it). There is yet another quick downdraft, and this time on heavy volume, i.e., substantially increased trading activity, the highest so far. Lots of effort here. And what is the result? Again, price closes well off the lows, i.e., both buying pressure and selling pressure increase (more trading activity), but buying pressure wins the day. What matters, in other words, is not so much how far price travelled downward, but where it ended up. This tells you who -- for the moment at least -- is in the driver's seat. And if you have not yet bought the BO, you'd have a bit more confidence in doing so now.

If you don't, you can wait for the retracement (RET), which is where I've placed the second red dot. RETs disturb many novice traders because they think they screwed up. They want to reach their target as quickly as possible. If they don't, they think they're in trouble. So they cut their profits short. But rather than descend into flop sweat fear, focus on what a RET represents to those who didn't buy the BO. This is their second chance. And if they take it, you may be in for a nice, profitable ride (if they don't, you perhaps have -- and reasonably so -- a stop at BE by now and aren't especially concerned about it one way or the other). If you're one of the people who waited, you can enter now. However, this is next best to taking the BO since your risk is higher. You entered "late", placing you in the ranks of "weak hands" (i.e., the first to bail when the going gets rough because they have no cushion or buffer). If you wait even longer for further confirmation and buy (the third dot) when price BOs past the last swing high (LSH), your risk is higher still, and you'd be in the red almost immediately, though ultimately, if you insisted on hanging in no matter what the risk, you might make a few bucks, or at least BE.

By now, you have a higher high (HrH) and a higher low (HrL). The third dot represents the next HrH. Therefore, until you fail to make a HrH, you are in an uptrend. Shorts are not an option. In fact, depending on your particular strategy, shorts may not be an option even if you have a LrH if the LSL is still intact (more on this later). Price continues its ascent, finally retracing its progress to find S (support) at the previous swing high at 5667.5 or thereabouts. Entering here would be ultra-conservative given all the confirmation but it would also be near-suicidal. The weakest hands would enter even higher still, at the new high, which is where panic sell-offs are conceived. It then rallies yet again, making what is in hindsight "the high".

But what now? You're trading in real time. Hindsight is a luxury you don't have (and note that I've said nothing about volume so far exc with regard to the shakeout because it's not esp relevant or even helpful). What does price do? It retraces. But how far does it retrace? Does it drop below the LSH at 5677.5? Hmmm. Seems a bit weak, doesn't it? But you're up almost 40pts, so a little rest is in order, not unusual. Perhaps price will consolidate here for a while and buyers will prep themselves for a push to a further advance.

And, apparently, they do. But when price reaches the previous high, it runs into trouble (if you're waiting until now to go long, I can't help you ). It appears to form a double top (or a LrH if you're using candles and pay more attention to the bodies than to the wicks). Here again volume can be helpful to you since the trading activity here is FAR less than it is on the previous high, suggesting a lot less buying interest (not so much because of the amount of trading activity per se but because price isn't rising). Thus, if you were to SAR here (stop and reverse), you'd lock in the profits on your long and be at near the best possible position for your short (near best because your stop could be so near). This last, however, gets into strategy and tactics and is best left to your journal, if you choose to pursue this.

If shorting there is too aggressive for you, you can wait until your trendline is broken (not drawn in here, but I hope it's obvious) and the reversal confirmed, i.e., a drop below the LSL, which is where I've drawn the lateral red line at about 5671. Note that it is on the way down to this line that the trading activity increases. The importance of this line is confirmed by the extreme dryup of trading activity just before price breaks thru this line and the teeny-tiny bars that are the result of that activity. Then donk!, at which point you might want to enter your short, even though the stop must be much farther away and your risk much higher.

Again, you can wait for the RET, though this one repenetrates -- temporarily -- the S/R line (the last red dot). This is safer and represents somewhat less risk, not so much because of the price entered but because of the confirmation of weakness and because of the possibility of a tighter stop. But there clearly is weakness here along with a confirmed reversal. There is no long here, only shorts. (If somehow buyers manage to pull it together and reverse the reversal and make yet another attempt at a higher high, you at least are out with a profit on your long and perhaps a tiny loss on your short. And it happens. But that's the difference between trading in hindsight and trading in real time.)

Then, of course, WHAM! The weak hands cry Uncle and you've plunged 25pts.

As for predicting, don't even bother. Even if the attempt weren't so difficult for the novice (and often the not-so-novice) and didn't take so much time, it wouldn't matter. If and when you thoroughly understand what's happening in front of you, you'll know what to do, or at least what is likely to be the most appropriate course of action. If you allow yourself to sink into the muck of the minutiae of what each itty-bitty bar "means" and how it "relates" to every other itty-bitty bar, the trade will be long gone before you ever decide what it is you should do. Focus instead on the setup, on the conditions for the trade. This is where principles will guide you. But you must then decide exactly what it is that you're going to do if and when the conditions are right. Predicting what will or won't or might or might not or should or shouldn't happen after the trade is entered is wasted brain time. Knowing what you will do if and when certain events happen is part of your tactics and has been planned out long before.

Here's the chart with the demand lines/trend lines in case they're not so obvious after all.

33130d1201962502-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-highlights-image5.jpg


Db
 
Originally Posted by firewalker99

I must say your "step-by-step" guide following this chart is very interesting for me.Before I try it myself, I'd ask you to review [the attached] chart, if you could analyse and comment on that one, I think it could clear up my head a bit. Next week I will be papertrading as I believe my losses have amounted too much and I'm trying not to be emotional about it - but it's not that easy. Now the only target for me is to get a clear understanding of it and put my theories back to the test although I must note that I've had several profitable days always. Albeit you might argue this was just luck, I hope all my time and effort waren't in vain and I'm going totally the wrong way. If so, please let me know, otherwise I'm looking forward to your comments.

[This is] a continuation of the [first] chart. I believed it to be a SC, at about 11:40. But it continues to go lower till around 13:20, after which the selling is over. I know the market can do anything at any time, but this one troubles me, I can't seem to find a reason as to why the market goes down after 11:40. Even though I don't need to understand everything to be succesfull as a trader, if I keep entering at these signals that mislead me, I'm in need for a better understanding as to why I'm getting it wrong most of the time...

33028d1201621528-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-highlights-image2.jpg

You weren't wrong. 1140 was in fact a selling climax (the SC). But a selling climax does not necessarily mean an end to the move. An SC is equivalent to stomping on the brakes at high speed: even though the brakes are applied, the car continues to move forward. Or compare it to throwing up. The big chunks come first and fast, but you continue to toss it up even so, eventually ending in dry heaves. (And I use this analogy because so many of The Wise use vomiting as a metaphor for capitulation.) In this case, the SC is a big red flag, but not necessarily a "buy" signal. Same thing happened with the market as a whole in 2002. The SC occurred long before the eventual bottom. And there was no buy signal (at least none in my book) until spring of '03.

In any case, note where price stopped after the SC: dead on the S/R line where all of this started. And the importance of this line is confirmed again and again by the repeated tests of it during this consolidation (and the weakness of buying interest by their inability to push price above what appears to be 5662.5).

Then, when buyers finally yield and allow price to find equilibrium, or try to, it spends no time at all at the next low but immediately tests yet again that S/R zone. The fact that it breaks back into it is as strong a signal of serious buying interest as you're going to get in this world (if the buying interest weren't there, price wouldn't have risen). Not that I would go long here, but, if I did, I could have a hell of a tight stop.

To try to predict all of this, though, would not likely have had any benefit to you, assuming that you could do it. Attempting to predict these movements would more likely guide you toward a bias and prevent you from seeing what was in front of you, or, as Douglas put it, prevent you from "being available". These perceptual biases are often the cause of hanging on to losing trades.

Db
 
Originally Posted by Porks
Db,

Realistically, how long do you think it would take a beginner to go through the steps you suggest to study the principals, tactics, and develop/test a trading plan and aquire the correct mindset.

I know this'll be variable, but from your experience what's the least amount of time someone has picked all this up in ?

It's been said before that it takes 1,000 hours to learn something, maybe 5,000-10,000 to master it.

What do you think, could a complete novice pick this up in 6 months spending around 8 hours a day ???

Porks

There are too many variables involved to provide anything approaching a satisfactory answer. If, for example, the novice were literally complete, had nothing to unlearn, had no preconceptions, was able to work without investing his ego in it, was curious, was able to concentrate, was reasonably intelligent, then he would be able to get it far faster than someone who was or had the opposite.

But if you're asking in your heart of hearts how long it would will should ought to take you to "pick this up", that depends on how willing you are to focus on application rather than theory (since you registered more than two years ago, you very likely have had more than enough theory).

Some members tire of my continually encouraging newcomers to this subject to open journals. But there's only so much theory. This thread, for example, has over 1000 posts (which is around 950 too many). The "theory" just isn't that complicated. When it seems so, the reason is more likely that whoever is trying to understand it is focusing on something else entirely (so and so says, or I read somewhere that, or I took this seminar once that, or this book said, or but the ADX says). Therefore, the sooner one begins looking at real charts, the sooner he is likely to "get it".

Db
 
Originally Posted by dbphoenix

YOU determine the signal by specifying the conditions you're looking for and YOU determine whether or not those conditions will provide a high-probability signal by testing.
Db

What would then be a good definition of a high probability signal? If I were to look for one, I need to know actually what that is.

Making high probability trades:

Use a variety of bar intervals and timeframes to confirm and time trades.

Trade in the direction of the primary trend.

Have a predetermined exit strategy.

Plan trades before the market opens.

Have a reason for every trade.

Predetermine the amount of risk you’re willing to assume.

Stay focused.

Maintain discipline.

Be patient and wait for the best opportunities.

Incorporate the inevitability of loss into your system.

Don’t chase trades. Any entry subsequent to the best entry has a lower probability of success.

Adjust your risk according to the probability of success of the trade.

Trade more heavily when the odds are in your favor.

(I just saved you $40 . . . )

22351-dispatches-front-tradersjnl.gif
 
What's wrapped around the ankles of those who stumble and fall is the quest for a set of instructions.

This search for instructions as to where EXACTLY to draw the line is in large part what makes Pivots and Fib and Gann and MAs and so forth so seductive. One doesn't have to think about just where it is that price(traders) really react. All the trader has to do is draw the calculated lines. This search for exactitude also motivates the search for the EXACT stop and exact TYPE of stop that the trader should use, along with the EXACT trigger and the EXACT target. But if it were all that simple, one could package it into a kit and sell it (wait a minute . . . ).

Many people can't get this. Maybe most people can't get it. They simply cannot trade without indicators, they can't trade without patterns, they can't trade without candlesticks, etc. And if they make money doing whatever they're doing, who's to say they're not right to do it. However, a lot of people also struggle with all of that and can't make money at it. They find instead that focusing on price is best for them. Unfortunately, by the time they reach that point, they have to unlearn an extraordinary amount of what for them is generally -- or entirely -- useless information (I've read that . . . People say that . . . I've been told that . . . ). This state of affairs makes learning to trade by price vastly more difficult than it would have been had the trader learned how to do it outright in the first place. But there's no going back, this side of amnesia, so wanting to is simply wishful thinking.

The Go With the Force, Luke stuff only goes so far, true as it may be. But the individual who's willing to backtrack and learn a new or at least different way of looking at charts and price action may -- not will -- find that when he's looking at his umpteenth chart, the light suddenly goes on and he understands all those back and forth pressures which are propelling price one way or the other. All the babble about pace and momentum and trend and chop and all the rest of it will make sense.

But there's no shortcut. One may have to look at hundreds of charts. Maybe thousands. And he may never get it. Which is why people continue to spend so much money on 4x Made Easy and Weekend Seminar (lunch included) and Profits R Us.

Db
 
The following series of posts, consolidated into one, was made several years after the rest of the posts in this thread. But given that this "abridged" thread is essentially a summary of the longer thread, and that this post touches on most of the more important points of trading price, volume, support, resistance, and so on, I'm adding it here as a way of wrapping things up.

Out of interest, a question for those of you who use indicators:

How do you determine when to NOT trade from indicators? For example, on the Dax today you should have stayed FLAT for most of the day. I only know of 2 indicators that kept me out today.

Second question for those that DO NOT use indicators, how do you determine to stay out of choppy/sideways markets like today? Is it as simple as drawing 2 horizontal lines above and below the sideways action and simply trading a significant break above or below these lines?

As a member of the party of the second part, I can't speak to the DAX as I don't maintain a chart of it. But I didn't stay out of the NQ today. I entered shortly after the open and stayed in until I got a reversal signal at support.

I posted the following a few days ago. The S/R zone of interest is 1750 to 1850, with a secondary S level at 1800.

.
32804d1201041239-price-volume-support-resistance-demand-supply-image2.jpg


.
Note here that there is a clear rejection of the opening price, which is 25pts outside the S/R zone.

.
32908d1201308727-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image1.jpg

.
Note here that the volume on the test of S at 14:09 is considerably less than the volume when price hits S the first time.

.
32909d1201308727-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image2.jpg

.
All looks good, but how do you know when the S/R lines will hold and when they will be breached?

Volume. And if you're wrong, you have your stop.

And more importantly, you need to know how they act in REAL TIME,

True. That's why it's essential to learn the principles.

looking at charts in hindsight has limited value IMHO.

Hindsight charts are the only way to illustrate principles, though replay is much preferable to a static chart. If you're interested, find someone who knows this and get him to sit down with you with some replay charts. I doubt it will take long for you to get it. Absent that, take a look at VSATrader's threads (e.g., http://www.trade2win.com/boards/price-volume/27069-s-p-analysis-friday-2nd-oct.html).


You mentioned a clear rejection of the opening price based on that high volume, but without any other point of reference than those 25 points off from the major S/R area, how can you know that the peak in volume isn't just occuring because the market just opened?

Doesn't matter. Price is at R, there's a surge in volume, price falls*. If that's not enough, there's a springboard at 1850 a few minutes later, and one can short that. If he's not confident in the short, he can bracket. Of course, if he hasn't thought about any of this before the open and/or doesn't know what to look for (which is one of the functions of hindsight charts), then he'll probably just sit there and do nothing.

It seems hard to reconcile S/R zones on such a big time frame with 1-minute charts. As you say, the zone of interest, is as wide as 50 points, so you'd need either very wide stops or you need to find some minor S/R zones in the meantime...

What matters is the point at which price hits R and what happens there. It makes no sense to me to use an hourly chart or whatever and wait up to an hour to see what happens. If traders are reacting to R, why wait? Waiting requires a much wider stop.

Those who perseverate on bar intervals are likely using price bars as indicators, just as many people use candlesticks as indicators. The bar interval is irrelevant. What matters is the movement of price. Any bar interval beyond a tick is a summary. What sense is there is in waiting for, say, a 5m bar to "close", much less 10 or 15 or 30? Are professional traders 'round the world waiting to act according to what price does in five minutes, or are they acting on what price is doing right now?

*I've added a couple of charts that may help clarify. The first chart is a CVB chart (Constant Volume Bar). It provides the context (or at least some of it; this illustrates a few days; the relevant S/R zone on the NDX chart posted earlier represents six months; six months trumps a few days). Clearly there is a lot of sludge to work through if one wants to get past 1920. And then there's another layer up to 2000. As for "short-term" R, one can draw a line through the middle of all this, but I find this distracting more often than not, and it can set up an anticipatory mindset that prevents one from focusing on the volume activity as it is as opposed to what it might be or will be or could be or whatever.

.
32934d1201356531-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image2.jpg

.
The second chart is a one-second chart of the open. This may be a more graphic illustration of the "hot iron" comment I made above.

.
32935d1201356531-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image1.jpg

.
Originally Posted by DDI
I look at daily and weekly charts and go with the trend, but in fx and futures where my trades can last from 30 mins to a few days, that's where i have a problem. For example, sometimes if the 15 min chart shows reversal, to go with daily chart trend, I find that the 60 min (or 240 min) are contradicting.

Anyway the problem I have is not restricted to indicators alone (subject of thread) but technical analysis as a whole.

Whether one TF "contradicts" another or not has less to do with price action and more with the choices one makes in displaying it. Consider that there are no contradictions among TFs, that price simply moves from one area to another. If you trade, for example, support and resistance, then questions of "trend" become largely irrelevant. If you attempt to trade trend without regard to support and resistance, then focus on your chosen interval and ignore everything else.

Originally Posted by PinkPig

How do you manage the risk of entry lower down without a very large stop, or is that me being daft? I would if I entered lower down find it hard to say I am wrong until the area of rejection falls, ie Hard STOP over R. Even then, another rejection very possible.

Most often, this question translates not as "how do you manage the risk" but as "how do you manage the fear". But in both cases, the answer is the same: you have to know what you're looking for and you have to know what you're looking at. The trader who doesn't know what he's looking for or what he's looking at is going to be crippled with fear, and he will eventually fail.

The dynamics of real-time charts are generally missed by those who use static charts, much less hindsight charts. This is one reason why people dismiss hindsight charts: they don't know what they're looking at. Here, for example, is a repeat of the 1m chart I posted earlier:
.
32961d1201436238-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image2.jpg

.
There seems to be nothing particularly remarkable about the circled bars. However, when one plots this using a 1s interval (again using the chart I posted earlier), the circled bar appears to be considerably more urgent:

.
32962d1201436238-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image3.jpg

.
But to go through an entire day like this would take a great many charts, and the point of it would be quickly lost through sensory overload. Therefore, anyone who has no experience with dynamic real-time charts, i.e., charts that move, but concentrates instead on static "snapshot" charts will likely not be "ready" to understand what's happening in the charts posted here.

This is the same as the 1m chart above with a few additional bars after the breakdown. The springboard is circled:

.
32963d1201436238-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image1.jpg

.
Note how the springboard looks on a 5m chart:

.
32964d1201436238-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image6.jpg

.
Note that on a 10m chart, it does not appear at all, even though it's still "there":

.
32965d1201436238-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image7.jpg
.
Now, how do I manage the fear?

Here is a 5s chart of the open. Note that price plunges to 1862, but there's no follow-through. There is then a rally. Does this frighten me? No, (1) because my stop is above all this and (2) volume dissipates as price rises. Price then resumes its decline and levels off around 57/58 at around 0942. If one looks at 50 as an important level that's likely to be tested, this leveling constitutes another springboard, i.e., a preparation for a further decline. This decline occurs and price hits 50, or close to. Price rallies back to the springboard level at 57/58, but then volume dries up. There's no follow-through. Instead, it falls back to 50. It hammers away at 50 again and again, rallying to 54 three times but never breaking through. How do I know it's going to break through 50? Because of the volume, which is heavier on the downside and evaporates on the upside. Can one see this in a static chart? Only generally, and perhaps not even then. In a real-time moving chart, however, what's happening with volume and its relationship to price is very clear.

.
32966d1201436238-most-indicators-useless-why-does-anyone-bother-them-image5.jpg

.
Of course, not everyone can look at RT charts. They can only pop in every few hours. If they're going to take this trade at all, they may have to resort to some line crossing some other line or some bar touching or recoiling off some band or other. But they're not going to take the trade because they understand what traders are doing. They're going to take it because some line is crossing some other line or whatever. And for this reason, they will never truly conquer their fear.

And what if it all goes wrong? What if selling suddenly dries up and buyers push price back through the springboard and out the other side? I'll see and understand what's happening by monitoring the volume (cause) and its effect on price. I'll be out by 52 +/- and ready to go long at 55 +/-. If buyers lose their juice and the springboard becomes instead an equilibrium level, then I exit and stand aside, waiting to see who gains the upper hand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top