JonnyT.
Have been following your threads on Pnf.When you get your system sorted,could you kindly set out the method for me because I intend to trade the FTSE100 index via SB using PnF charts.Have you thought about using Fibbs retracements with your PnF charts. I intend to try this Im sure it would help with targets etc.
Ref your thread 13/2 what is 3x3 TSR and when you mention Fade,do you mean go short.?
Have been following your threads on Pnf.When you get your system sorted,could you kindly set out the method for me because I intend to trade the FTSE100 index via SB using PnF charts.Have you thought about using Fibbs retracements with your PnF charts. I intend to try this Im sure it would help with targets etc.
Ref your thread 13/2 what is 3x3 TSR and when you mention Fade,do you mean go short.?
Ian,
Seirra does give 'funny looking bars' rather than the normal X's and O's. Takes a bit of getting used to.
Paul,
Look at Richards Chart column G. A 3 box reversal off the test of support at 3534. Enter at 3543 initial target 50 points. Gave a possible 66 point trade. (first trade usually gives 50+, I look for less on a second trade).
Column R short 3591. Lower top reversed. Stop placed above that top. Gave a poss 39 points with any trouble
Fluke,
I don't like fibs
JonnyT
Seirra does give 'funny looking bars' rather than the normal X's and O's. Takes a bit of getting used to.
Paul,
Look at Richards Chart column G. A 3 box reversal off the test of support at 3534. Enter at 3543 initial target 50 points. Gave a possible 66 point trade. (first trade usually gives 50+, I look for less on a second trade).
Column R short 3591. Lower top reversed. Stop placed above that top. Gave a poss 39 points with any trouble
Fluke,
I don't like fibs
JonnyT
I'm confused here chaps. I would have thought that to show D4F bias one would have shown a chart of the D4F cash compared with the FTSE 100 index.
Or a chart of the D4F futures compared with the "genuine" futures.
By comparing a cash chart with a futures chart is one comparing like with like?
Or a chart of the D4F futures compared with the "genuine" futures.
By comparing a cash chart with a futures chart is one comparing like with like?
Cash to Futures is currently about 34 pts premium.
Concerning entry points on P&F see my earlier posts.The basics are not magic, just break out levels. Yesterday's break was 3546 at about 08.35.This signal reversed at 3585 at 13.16 if you'd stayed in that long! 3606 was the P&F high on this run. Many vendors offer P&F but according to the well respected Indexia not all of it is accurate. Don't ask me why..... I use Tenfore and Indexia.
Good luck,
Concerning entry points on P&F see my earlier posts.The basics are not magic, just break out levels. Yesterday's break was 3546 at about 08.35.This signal reversed at 3585 at 13.16 if you'd stayed in that long! 3606 was the P&F high on this run. Many vendors offer P&F but according to the well respected Indexia not all of it is accurate. Don't ask me why..... I use Tenfore and Indexia.
Good luck,
Hi JT/Richard
Looking at Richards chart the overall range for the day was 75 points on each.
But in column K we have a 43 point rise in the futures and a 57 point rise in the cash.
Some of which can be accounted for by D4F's habit of switching the spread from under to over the base price as the price moves from a downward trend to an upward one, but not all of it.
So on this evidence I'm tempted to agree with JTs initial
supposition.
Interesting to see though that it did't affect JTs entry points.
Jonny is your "lower top reversed" a recognised P&F formation or a "Trader Vic 2b" (Possibly both)
Anyway thanks to the both of you for a thought provoking thread.
Now what should I really have been doing this morning?
Looking at Richards chart the overall range for the day was 75 points on each.
But in column K we have a 43 point rise in the futures and a 57 point rise in the cash.
Some of which can be accounted for by D4F's habit of switching the spread from under to over the base price as the price moves from a downward trend to an upward one, but not all of it.
So on this evidence I'm tempted to agree with JTs initial
supposition.
Interesting to see though that it did't affect JTs entry points.
Jonny is your "lower top reversed" a recognised P&F formation or a "Trader Vic 2b" (Possibly both)
Anyway thanks to the both of you for a thought provoking thread.
Now what should I really have been doing this morning?
Hi DrMike,
If you look at my chart col S Futures (Not Richards) you will see a double top. I went short at reversal from this.
This is not a standard PnF signal, but I find it works extremely well with futures.
I am currently automating a system for the S&P eminis that has averaged over 4pts profit per day for the past two contracts
This trades pullbacks so isnt standard PnF breakouts (don't work on S&Ps a lot of the time due to volatility).
JonnyT
If you look at my chart col S Futures (Not Richards) you will see a double top. I went short at reversal from this.
This is not a standard PnF signal, but I find it works extremely well with futures.
I am currently automating a system for the S&P eminis that has averaged over 4pts profit per day for the past two contracts
This trades pullbacks so isnt standard PnF breakouts (don't work on S&Ps a lot of the time due to volatility).
JonnyT
I've found these sites with P&F, they may help to understand a bit better. Have a play.
http://www.trendsoft.com/p&f.htm
http://www.incrediblecharts.com/index.htm
http://www.chartanalysts.com/
Good luck
http://www.trendsoft.com/p&f.htm
http://www.incrediblecharts.com/index.htm
http://www.chartanalysts.com/
Good luck
Hi Dr Mike,
Looking at Richards chart the overall range for the day was 75 points on each.
But in column K we have a 43 point rise in the futures and a 57 point rise in the cash.
No, the overall moves were the same. On the futures there was a brief retracement that can be seen in column L of the futures before it continues up in column M to the same height as the D4F move. The total size of this retracement was 11 points (from 3583 down to 3572). At the same time the D4F quote went from 3623 down to 3614, 9 points but not quite enough to give a 3 box reversal. Note that if the D4F quote had been a single point higher at the time the retracement started then the 9 point move would have resulted in a 3 box reversal!
So at most, you could claim that there was a 2 point bias introduced here. More likely there was a slight spike up in the futures before the retracement and a slight spike down at the bottom of it. Remember that the futures chart is formed from actual trade prices whilst the D4F one is from the mid point of the spread.
Some of which can be accounted for by D4F's habit of switching the spread from under to over the base price as the price moves from a downward trend to an upward one, but not all of it.
This doesn't make any sense as an explanation. If this had happened then the retracement would have been present - and larger - in the D4F chart. More generally, if this was the case then why aren't the major moves larger on the D4F chart than on the futures one?
I strongly suspect all that you are refering to here is the simple fact that the futures lead the cash and the D4F 'cash' quote is based on the futures. The futures regularly move a few points further than the cash index and move slightly in advance of it.
Looking at Richards chart the overall range for the day was 75 points on each.
But in column K we have a 43 point rise in the futures and a 57 point rise in the cash.
No, the overall moves were the same. On the futures there was a brief retracement that can be seen in column L of the futures before it continues up in column M to the same height as the D4F move. The total size of this retracement was 11 points (from 3583 down to 3572). At the same time the D4F quote went from 3623 down to 3614, 9 points but not quite enough to give a 3 box reversal. Note that if the D4F quote had been a single point higher at the time the retracement started then the 9 point move would have resulted in a 3 box reversal!
So at most, you could claim that there was a 2 point bias introduced here. More likely there was a slight spike up in the futures before the retracement and a slight spike down at the bottom of it. Remember that the futures chart is formed from actual trade prices whilst the D4F one is from the mid point of the spread.
Some of which can be accounted for by D4F's habit of switching the spread from under to over the base price as the price moves from a downward trend to an upward one, but not all of it.
This doesn't make any sense as an explanation. If this had happened then the retracement would have been present - and larger - in the D4F chart. More generally, if this was the case then why aren't the major moves larger on the D4F chart than on the futures one?
I strongly suspect all that you are refering to here is the simple fact that the futures lead the cash and the D4F 'cash' quote is based on the futures. The futures regularly move a few points further than the cash index and move slightly in advance of it.
cassiopeia
Active member
- Messages
- 155
- Likes
- 4
Of late, I have been examining at a scalping strategy using breaks of support and resistance of FTSE100 stocks. Although I have only looked at a few stocks so far, this strategy seems to work well using the charts on ADVFN but poorly using the deal4free charts. The latter gives more false breaks so it is difficult to evaluate how it would fare in practice.
I thought deal4free followed FTSE100 SETS prices exactly so why the discrepency? Is it because their charts include out of hours trading or is there significant early morning bias for these stocks?
I thought deal4free followed FTSE100 SETS prices exactly so why the discrepency? Is it because their charts include out of hours trading or is there significant early morning bias for these stocks?
Hi Cass,
Certainly early morning spreads on FTSE100 stocks take a good while to settle down. I generally have to remove stops at the previous close and then reinstate them after a few minutes into trading. Fortunately a lot of the FTSE100 have extended hours trading which helps a bit, but that might also be a reason for some of the disparaties you see.
HTH
Certainly early morning spreads on FTSE100 stocks take a good while to settle down. I generally have to remove stops at the previous close and then reinstate them after a few minutes into trading. Fortunately a lot of the FTSE100 have extended hours trading which helps a bit, but that might also be a reason for some of the disparaties you see.
HTH
Most interesting, even though my version of daytrading is 'I trade on some of the days each year'. I'm slighly amazed to find that you were unaware your feed was delayed - this isn't me calling you daft, I'm querying how the service you subscribed to could leave you unaware it was delayed! Crikey, what if you'd just lost the family mansion and then found your data was delayed instead of RT? Waiving fees... I'd cas***te the b*****ds!
Dave
Dave
cassiopeia
When you compare your charts of ADVFN vs Deal4Free be sure you are comparing like for like. ADVFN is giving you mid-price charts, whereas D4F provides charts on Bid or Offer prices. If you switch your D4F charts between Bid and Offer you will (should) find that the mid price equals the ADVFN price. When markets open there is a massive spread which can take 10-45 minutes to close (depending on the liquidity of the share in question). D4F reflect these wide spreads (as will any other broker) and any strategy you have needs to take this into account.
cheers
When you compare your charts of ADVFN vs Deal4Free be sure you are comparing like for like. ADVFN is giving you mid-price charts, whereas D4F provides charts on Bid or Offer prices. If you switch your D4F charts between Bid and Offer you will (should) find that the mid price equals the ADVFN price. When markets open there is a massive spread which can take 10-45 minutes to close (depending on the liquidity of the share in question). D4F reflect these wide spreads (as will any other broker) and any strategy you have needs to take this into account.
cheers
Last edited:
cassiopeia
Active member
- Messages
- 155
- Likes
- 4
Yes, I think you are both right a combination of spreads and extended trading could explain the discrepency, unfortunately this does not make it easy to test any strategy.
I have never seen any (numerical) historical data which includes information on the spreads, it seems these can be important even with the more liquid stocks.
I have never seen any (numerical) historical data which includes information on the spreads, it seems these can be important even with the more liquid stocks.
