A question for mini Russell 2000 index traders

G

Gabfly1

I'm curious to know how TF's general volume on ICE compares with its predecessor ER2, which traded on Globex? Also, has the character of the very short-term price action changed in any meaningful way when it shifted from Globex to ICE? Stated differently, if you previously trades ER2 in the very short term, do you trade TF in essentially the same manner with no notable modification?

I ask because I have been looking at TF lately and am intrigued. However, I never bothered to review ER2, so I am unable to make a comparison. Not that I actually need to make a comparison, but I am curious.
 
imo, the TF is much more spiky and erratic now than the ER2 was in its zenith. It is tradable, but trying to hold stops inside congestion between directional swings is tough. When TF is moving north and south, it is by far the best emini symbol to trade. When it moves east and west, the sideways chop can be world-class.
 
Yes, there is no denying the spikiness. TF is far less smooth than NQ, which has been my market of choice for a few years now. However, I became enchanted with CL's daily range and tried to adapt my method to it. Surprisingly, I found that the modification I made (actually, augmentation) made the resulting approach more amenable to TF than to CL. An unintended consequence, but not an unhappy one. And so, I have tested the TF waters a bit and am not disappointed. However, I note that TF's volume is generally less than half that of NQ and less than a tenth of ES's volume. That's why I was wondering how ER2's volume compared before the switch.
 
The data you seek is available publically. Having said that, I would say the volume is at least double. There are many more iceberg type orders, iow the available size is not as apparent as it was. Lots of bots, absolutely. This affords some advantages at times, yesterday for instance.

Nonetheless, it feels like home, so if you traded it profitably before, you will do so now. I have traded ER2/TF now for years with the exception of a period when the move to ICE happened, fwiw.
 
Quote from Gabfly1:

Yes, there is no denying the spikiness. TF is far less smooth than NQ, which has been my market of choice for a few years now. However, I became enchanted with CL's daily range and tried to adapt my method to it. However, I found that the modification I made (actually, augmentation) made the resulting approach more amenable to TF than to CL. An unintended consequence, but not an unhappy one. And so, I have tested the TF waters a bit and am not disappointed. However, I note that TF's volume is generally less than half that of NQ and less than a tenth of ES's volume. That's why I was wondering how ER2's volume compared before the switch.
More...

At the time ER2 ceased trading, it was running 250K to 300+K contracts daily volume. Anything above 150,000 now is pretty good. The intramarket spreading is gone, so that may attribute some of the greater spikiness.

I work the TF myself on a 500(ish) tick chart looking for bigger swing moves while trying to filter out much of the congestive noise. Almost every day there is at least one if not two or three +5pt trade swings in TF. I hunt for one of those, and leave the smaller stuff to others who prefer playing a tight game.

TF is perfectly fine to trade, imo very polar. Days when it's good it is the best. Days when it chops and congests, it can be brutal unless you play strong defense.
 
I should correct myself, sorry. I wrote double, but I meant half. TF trades about 1/2 the daily volume of ER just before ER2 moved. But, ER2 had a large volume increase after 2002, so as I recall TF is more or less like the early 2000's ER2. Hope that makes sense.
 
the TF is amazing...very amazing..it rivals the CL and GC with tick value...with load daytrade margins you also can load up on contracts to trade...but...tread lightly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top