Looking for patterns - page 24
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 this means an adaptive number of ticks. The inverse of the daily average tick volume profile. From where by an easy logical movement of the mind we simply arrive at range-bars.
It is a bad solution, it is more complicated and, the main thing, much worse than a simple equivolume chart. Moving on to range-bars explain, how are they equivalent to volume charts?
Bad solution, it's more complicated and more importantly much worse than a normal equivolume chart. Moving on to the Range Bars, can you explain how they are equivalent to volumetric charts?
However, the conversation has gone far down the path relying on the OHLCV representation. Meanwhile V (supposedly the number of ticks in the time period covered) is an interesting thing. I have just never encountered what it actually corresponds to. Actually, I refused to use V after I checked many years ago whether the volumes in the terminal add up when drawing OHLC. It appeared that the tick volume of the five-minute card is not similar to the sum of tick volumes of five minutes. Now I checked it in one brokerage company and it is the same. I did not find out what the numbers called in the terminal mean by the volume.
Meanwhile the V (supposedly the number of ticks in the time period covered)
Vladimir, I was comparing the flow of ticks in two DCs. In one, it was as if there was a filter, very heavily thinned. And I realised that it's hard to rely on these figures. When access to CME was still open, I wrote a script that got quotes flow from their site with volumes, but in general they all have different numbers. Not just the numbers, but the ratios between them.
On the CME exchange, at the pivot points with the long candle, there were the highest volumes, and in the DC, nothing outstanding.Vladimir, I was comparing the flow of ticks in two DCs. In one it's like there's a filter, it's thinned out a lot. And I realised that these are numbers that are hard to rely on...
And you thought the Grail was so easy to come by?! Hehe... The trick is to see the real flow of events in the market, which does not depend on how brokerage companies filter ticks (either thinning or thickening). And that's not all, but at least something...
to behold the true flow of events in the market
All right, Alexander, let's get closer. Put out
That's the trick, to see the true flow of events in the market.
Is there one in forex? If a tick = one trade, then flow = number of trades, and here a tick does not equal a trade.
So what if even
It turns out that the tick volume in the five-minute tick does not look like the sum of the tick volumes of the five minutes included in it.
Although, as I understand it, it should be equal. Are the data written from a phonor or what? And where is the probability that the price is not written from nothing?
And where is the likelihood that the price isn't written in from scratch either?
The price in the DC and CME was almost identical.
But I agree about the tick volume. I have doubts about the reliability of the information. How can we build a strategy on such data? Where is the true flow of events, Alexander?Is there one in forex? If tick = one trade, then flow = number of trades, and here a tick does not equal a trade.
What to say if even
Although, as I understand it should be equal. What from the phonor data is written from? And where the probability that the price is not written from nothing.
A tick does not equal one trade, by the fact that trades may pass within the gang, but the entire volume will not be redeemed and the tick will not be there.
Where is the true flow of events, Alexander?
The true flow of events is everywhere. You are looking for it in digital and it's in analogue. So when it comes to smart systems, you can't do without big date. And the reduced algorithms are a playful option, but not for the real market.
The true flow of events is all over the place.
Vitaly, you still need to come up with a figure to take action: do we enter or do we not enter, do we enter upwards or do we enter downwards? This requires more or less reliable information and a logic for processing it that systematises the information.
And here the initial question: can we trust the ticks? Which brokerage company's ticks? Or where do we get reliable ones? Or how do we handle unreliable ones?