Can there be more Bid than Ask in a tick? - page 5
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Well at the end of the day I don't care what you mean, don't twist or change what I saidhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/3168/page2#comment_47242
We're back to the argument again. :) What am I twisting - you wrote "it's a CHANGE of the best price". So here "change" is a noun - just as for example here "value" of the best price, "sign" of the best price, and therein also refers to "change" of the best price.
Quote :
>>Tick is exactly that moment of satisfying the two sides :))
>>no, a tick is a "best price" change.
Or then, even simpler - if as you said I am wrong in your understanding - write the same but more elaborately.
:) but then why I rarely but seldom see ticks when nothing changes
What is meant by 'nothing'? I was wondering the same thing...
The server can easily generate a new tick based on a bunch of inputs, and at the same time a bunch of parameters can be sent to the terminal.
Even if all the information seems to be "same", I do not see here a contradiction with the rules of trading.
But so far I am interested in what is a TIC? Maybe the problem is that there is a misunderstanding of it? What is TIC? Is it a change as Mischek thinks? Or all the same as I wrote it is a transaction?
As far as I remember a tick can be generated by the server without any changes, at least without changes in Ask/Bid and other explicitly analysed parameters.
Nemo in this case, I do not see other data, on the basis of which at least can say that the object, las price, and the state of the "cup" has not changed (this is for example, although I am sure that the server can easily throw in a new tick without any changes).
So - do you think it is a mistake? I don't think so - I think it is normal. But why? That's what the topic is about. Well OK, we can accept for now that those who are here - don't know it.
So - do you think it's a mistake? I don't - I think it's normal. But here's why?
For the stock market (using the NYSE as an example) it is quite normal. There a specialist (read server) can show in such a way a certain situation and his intentions about the further development of this situation.
It is possible to analyze a given situation (at least, to make conclusions by its presence), but it is hardly possible to forecast successfully (at least, in my opinion).
Ok, we can accept that those who are here - it is not known.
1.From remarks of A. Gerchik (I apologize in advance for mentioning) about the work of a specialist on the NYSE and the emergence of such a situation - If the specialist "does not want" a certain level to be reached.
2. The specialist/server can create such a situation (even long enough) in order to "squeeze out" sellers and "let in" buyers.
This would show the specialist's intentions, without contradicting the first statement.
The idea is that if the seller sees this situation, he should think about exiting the position or transferring his stops.
If you dig deeper into this subject, you need to dig deeper in the field of specialists, say, on the NYSE or the Russian stock exchanges (if I am not mistaken, the MICEX also has specs).
At least the book by Vladimir Twardovsky / Sergey Parshikov "Secrets of stock trading" mentioned the work of specialists - Chapter 38. The Work of Market Maker and Specialist, p. 386-397 (Part VI. Games Professionals).
With regard to the Forex market (especially this market), I do not see much sense in it, unless of course the broker/dealer has its backstage "wars" (or for some internal reasons).
In this case, as far as I understand such a situation, only automatic machines can really track (and adequately respond to it). More correctly, mostly automatic machines, and it is necessary to analyze a lot of additional information, first of all it is necessary to "understand" the work of specialist/marketer (read server) in certain market situations.
PS
So if we are talking about the stock market it can be seen as a certain behaviour of the specialist/server, in the Forex market it is either a server error or an attempt to play "behind the scenes" certain games.
IMHO
Yes, of course. I didn't ask for nothing. :)
0x000000810040#+3774 2007/03/28 03:03:11:840,Bid:1.33510,Ask:1.33510 (spread reduced to 0)
0x0000000000810040#+5961 2007/03/28 08:30:00:924,Bid:1.33470,Ask:1.33470 (spread decreased to 0)
0x0000000000810040#+5962 2007/03/28 08:30:01:039,Bid:1.33480,Ask:1.33470 <------------------
0x0000000000810040#+5963 2007/03/28 08:30:01:083,Bid:1.33560,Ask:1.33470
0x0000000000810040#+5964 2007/03/28 08:30:01:263,Bid:1.33550,Ask:1.33470
0x0000000000810040#+5966 2007/03/28 08:30:01:610,Bid:1.33470,Ask:1.33470 (spread reduced to 0)
0x00000000810040#+5967 2007/03/28 08:30:01:618,Bid:1.33510,Ask:1.33470 <
0x0000000000810040#+5968 2007/03/28 08:30:01:625,Bid:1.33520,Ask:1.33470 <---- almost three ticks in a row
0x0000000000810040#+5971 2007/03/28 08:30:02:175,Bid:1.33550,Ask:1.33500 <
0x0000000000810040#+7407 2007/03/28 10:34:38:156,Bid:1.33720,Ask:1.33720
10 Records from 0 to 9. Total marked:20555 total with this flag:3862.
And there have been a total of 3,862 ticks like this since 2006.
Looking at this picture, I can at least say that the specialist/marketer/server (read: brokerage company/broker) protected a certain level for 1-2 seconds (maybe more), at that protection was performed at Ask price (exactly at Ask, because during several ticks this price didn't change).
Also I see from this situation that Ask was forcedly "frozen" and the seller was "shaken out" of positions with attraction of new buyers.
It seems to be a clear signal that the specialist/server is trying to protect/create the support level (as far as I understand it) and try to create an uptrend if possible.
Although it is also possible to simply weed out the "advanced" sellers from the market.
In any case such behaviour would be a very good signal to exit short (well, or move stops).
As far as I see before the start of this "dancing with balls" spread was lowered to 0 (marked blue), then the Bid was set higher than the offer, which already says that the server "was up to no good" (marked black).
After that, during 5 ticks server just "shook" sellers out of position, while offering buyers to buy at reasonable prices at the beginning (the first three ticks). A certain signal for people would be another decrease of spread to 0 during the "inviting" buyers (the last tick in the three).
After that the server continued to shake out the sellers, at the same time hinting to the buyers that the train will soon move north (the last two ticks, with an increase in Bid).
Towards the end of the story, Ask gradually began to increase, indicating that the train has moved to the server. And as I understand it, buyers were still being attracted (but only at increasingly unprofitable prices) and the remaining sellers were being shaken out.
PS
In short, I believe either a scenario like this (maybe someone will specify it yet) or a "quoting machine" error on the server.
I would like to see more data (at least to see the tick history within the period when Bid was less than Ask), preferably also examples for other instruments or at other points in time.
1. I should also add that a "smart" seller, having understood that the support level 1.33470 is being protected and cut off the sellers (which is exactly what was happening), would have closed the position in this point
0x0000000000810040#+5966 2007/03/28 08:30:01:610,Bid:1.33470,Ask:1.33470 (spread decreased to 0)
hence a smart buyer would have entered the position exactly at that location (or at any other location with similar characteristics).
2. The opposite situation is quite possible, when the resistance level would be defended (the server would try to keep the Bid already unchanged).
PS
The smartest sellers have already made a decision of course here, but how many of us are like that...
0x0000000000810040#+5962 2007/03/28 08:30:01:039,Bid:1.33480,Ask:1.33470 <------------------
0x0000000000810040#+5963 2007/03/28 08:30:01:083,Bid:1.33560,Ask:1.33470 (decision point)
Stupid to fight a market maker without paying attention to the obvious signal... :)
Regarding this example
How could they not? They did change, even very much (unlike the previous example).
There is evidence of a server "holding back" the sellers and protecting certain levels (though not as gracefully and cunningly as in the example above).
But the market maker/specialist (the server) is trying to restrain the pressure of one of the parties (I understand that the price regulation was performed by restraining the Ask and change of the spread).
If I'm reading the tick data correctly, exactly Ask 117.91 was defended. And the main "weapon" of restraint here was most probably only the spread (on the basis of the given data).
You are wrong to attribute the properties of a quote server to a specialist. The fact that the server that produces quotes (MT5) can do so is no question (an obvious failure of the Ask is less than the Bid). But the fact that you have attributed these properties to a specialist and moreover to the exchange market - this is nonsense. The specialist has a clear set of rules for how and when he acts and what he can do and when. If at least one NYSE specialist will do as you described above, I guarantee that he will not work there tomorrow 101% no, because it is a direct violation.
Z.U. To check, take NYSE quotes and find this situation there )))...
What is meant by 'nothing'? I was wondering the same thing...
The server can easily generate a new tick based on a bunch of inputs and transmit a bunch of parameters to the terminal.
Even if all information seems to be "the same", I don't see a contradiction with trading rules here.
I have already explained what is nothing. Nothing is the value of bid and ask is the same. Of course, the time is different. There are three values in a tick.
I don't know about you, but MT's tick information is this structure
structMqlTick
{
datetimetime; // Time of the last price update
doublebid;// Current price Bid
doubleask; // Current Ask price
doublelast;// Current price of last deal (Last)
ulongvolume; // Volume for current price Last
};
And why the new tick arrived is the next question.
PS
Besides, the examples you cited have changes even for Bid and Ask, I'm not talking about the rest.
And why the server has arranged such a "dance with tambourines" is a separate story.