How can you trust the analysis after that? - page 11
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
As my grandmother used to say: there are two fools in the bazaar - one sells and one buys...and the levels are pure psychology...
No, well, they work, some people make profit... Fibo helps me a lot, but I guess you have to play the opposite, where you see a profit you get a loss... and only then profit, when you realize the underlying insidiousness of Forex - its desire to leave you without trousers in any way...))
But they say monkeys are easy to deal with... And only those who are overcome by greed perish completely and irrevocably ...))
Happy New Year, happy new "mini-peezer", as my granddaughter says, profits...))
Yes, 1 - 2% a day is all you need...))
I agree with the whole post, from start to finish.
In reality, you see the mass of the object, even if you don't see it, but you know that the tank weighs a lot. On the market you only see an "image" through volumes, it could be a real tank from which you can take something. Or it can be an empty cardboard decoration in the form of a tank, of course with the advantageous concept of mass that has no resemblance to the movement.
So there is and there is not a difference.
Similarly on your "there is a difference", you can ask - "are you sure that you exactly can identify what passed, with what speed, and mass?
Some levels can form on nothing.
Imagine a large option writer has sold an uncovered option for a large amount (we are talking about real options, not casino binary options). Expiration time is near and the price is approaching the strike price of this option. What should the seller do if the price reaches the strike, he will get a lot of money. In order to avoid this, the writer of the option will work on the underlying security, trying not to let the price reach the strike price. So the level appears out of nowhere.
As the matter of fact it turns out that the option seller is like an insurance company, which sold 10 policies of 300 000 RUR each with the obligation to pay 1000 000 RUR if the insured event takes place. The insurance company received their premium of 3000,000 р. and sits back without a buzz, the owner took the 1000,000 р. and went to the Caribbean. Then all of a sudden, bam, an insured event occurs on all 10 insurances. The company has to pay out 10,000,000 rbl. and they don't have 2,000,000 rbl. So the company hires a bunch of lawyers for these 2,000,000 r. and tries to prove that the case is not at all insurance and in general the owners of these 10 insurance policies themselves are to blame.
That's what I'm saying. I'm saying that there may be no historical levels on the chart. Everything depends on traders who see in their terminal that the asset price, for example, did not go above the price 100 on August 20 and they start speculating that it will not go higher this time. On approaching to this level the trader will sell. The other trader sees the same thing and does not know anything about the first trader. But this second trader thinks just the opposite. He thinks that the price will go higher and prepares to buy. There is a third trader, and he also does not know anything about the first two. But this trader bought the asset earlier at 50 and also sees that the price will not go higher than 100. And this third trader thinks that we should close positions, because it is not clear what will happen next. Then there is a fourth trader, who has plenty of money and he does not care what the first three traders think. :)I forgot to mention that there is also a 5th trader. This trader is similar to the first 3, but he has a super advanced indicator, which he developed and tested for three years on historical data and at that time, when the price comes to 100, this indicator drew a curve, according to which the fifth trader should leave everything and immediately open a buy position. At the same time, the fractal is of a higher order, like here, which strengthens the signal and suggests that we should buy with all available funds.)
...
In general, to sum up what I want to say. Let's imagine that there is a country with 100 traders and one analyst. And according to the law of this country, all traders have to follow the opinion of the analyst. Each trader has an equal amount of money to buy or sell 1 contract. There is always 1 contract on each price point in the pile as well. I will not describe what happens when the analyst says that you should buy. Now imagine that there is not one but two analysts in this country. And the traders will be divided in half. 50 follow the 1st analyst and 50 follow the second one. When the first one says to buy and the second one says to sell, the price does not change. When both agree, the price can change. At some moment in the country, the third analyst appeared, but the third one is followed by only 1 trader but this trader has enough money to buy or sell 50 contracts. So, if the first one says to sell, the second one says to buy, and the third one says to sell. Then it is safe to calculate that the price will fall. If the first and the second group agree in their opinions and both of them say to buy, and the third one says to sell. The first two groups can easily beat the third group, because 100 is bigger than 50.
So there's talk of options... just like I thought I'd see you posting like this.
because the posts you wrote earlier can only be written by a person who understands the physics of price formation
options do not appear out of nowhere, they are just placed, and the price begins to fluctuate there, after which the level appears
The latter is post factum, but the appearance at an empty spot - this is far from being post factum, this is the only correct approach to the analysis.
the easiest way to learn something useful and decide how to analyze - look at the latest futures for the euro-pound
it's just a unique event over the past three months and try to answer the question - what the fuck put it and why and how it affected the price movement? ;)))))
the whole truth about forex is in it, i would say ;)
Imagine a large option writer has sold an uncovered option for a large amount of money (we are talking about real options, not casino binary options). Expiration time is near and the price is approaching the strike price of this option. What should the seller do if the price reaches the strike, he will get a lot of money. In order to avoid this, the writer of the option will work on the underlying security, trying not to let the price reach the strike price. So the level appears out of nowhere.
If the seller has enough capital to manipulate the price, he does not need to play around with options.
In the currency market, for example, it is several orders of magnitude more expensive to keep the price at the level than it is to take a loss on an option.
So you're talking about options... as I thought I would see such posts from you
because the posts you wrote earlier can only be written by a person who understands the physics of the price formation process
options do not appear out of nowhere, they are just placed, and the price begins to fluctuate there, after which the level appears
The latter is post factum, but the appearance at an empty spot - this is far from being post factum, but the only correct approach to the analysis.
the easiest way to learn something useful and decide how to analyze - look at the latest futures for the euro-pound
it's just a unique event over the past three months and try to answer the question - what the fuck put it and why and how it affected the price movement? ;)))))
the whole truth about forex is in it i would say ;)
I didn't say the option came up out of thin air. I was talking about the level of how it could have formed even if there are no historical extremes at that location.
If the seller has enough capital to manipulate the price, he does not need to dabble in options.
In the currency market, for example, it is several orders of magnitude more expensive to keep the price at a level than it is to take a loss from an option.
It is not about the possibilities and desires of a seller with large capital but about the levels and how a level can appear at which the price changes direction or meets an obstacle that requires a lot of effort to get over. The sentence begins with "imagine ...", so the reasoning was purely hypothetical. Who knows what in the mind of this hypothetical salesman can hold and prevent the price from going anywhere more profitable than taking a loss.
It is not about the capabilities and desires of a seller with a lot of capital, but about the levels of how a level can appear at which the price changes direction or meets an obstacle that requires a lot of effort to overcome. The sentence begins with "imagine ...", so the reasoning was purely hypothetical. Who knows what in the mind of this hypothetical salesman can hold and not let the price go either way and it is more profitable for him than to take a loss.
I see, pure theory
I didn't say that the option originated from nothing. I was talking about the level of how it could have formed even if there are no historical extremes at that location.
It could arise and then disappear.
It's a normal transaction.