Does volume matter?

Currently I use a combination of both but I don't know whether to remove the time and volume charts and use only the volume bar charts.
That is why I have started this debate.
 
Volume shows conviction. That said, when a stock breaks above resistance, the volume should be at least average. Of course above average is a nice confirmation but stocks can continue upward on average volume. I get concerned when a breakout or breakdown for that matter is done on low volume. Thats a red flag usually.
 
these volume questions seem to be asked to intentionally start problems (The question comes usually once a month here). If a new trader wants to learn about volume, then they should study it like we all did.
 
Futures, I don't think it really helps at all. There's time when if volume is over "x" contracts traded late in the day that it give you some type of probability that the market has a better chance to bounce back up if it was a down day, but over all I couldn't find it helpful.

Stocks it seems to be more helpful, but even than for me personally I didn't end up using it.
 
Agreed -- and volume more useful for individual stocks, not as helpful if you're trading indexes, futures, etc.

trdes said:
Futures, I don't think it really helps at all. There's time when if volume is over "x" contracts traded late in the day that it give you some type of probability that the market has a better chance to bounce back up if it was a down day, but over all I couldn't find it helpful.

Stocks it seems to be more helpful, but even than for me personally I didn't end up using it.
More...
 
formikatrading said:
Agreed -- and volume more useful for individual stocks, not as helpful if you're trading indexes, futures, etc.
More...

Even that is a BS notion. To "know the volume", you have to wait for the "bar" to be completed, right? Is that daily bar... an hourly bar... a 5-min bar? Whatever it is, at best it's a LAGGING "something" (I don't want to use the term "indicator" here.. or ever). If you're any good at the markets, you'd catch your signal from price... before anything you think you might get from volume.)

I don't know where the Hell the notion of "price and volume" ever got started. Whenever it was, it was WRONG... just as it's wrong today.

(Ya think I'll "burn in Hell" for my bucking of conventional wisdom and TA heresy?) :)
 
Last edited:
Hmm, I use volume as data, not as an indicator as they "teach", which is conviction is proportional to volume or waves and climaxes. That worked for awhile. But now it is so easy to game, bots and algos do it all the time. Hence, e.g. the order book spoofing.

There is a concept of knowledge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Lehrer), that can be applied here. E.g. "beyond a reasonable doubt" is defined as information confirming and no information to the contrary.

Like all things, the details are not so linear, let alone, black and white, and so it is trading. I think a lot of peoples ego goes on steroids trading, and they substitute actual thinking with bravado. Most people don't even understand the concept of "truth" in a technical sense but go around claiming stuff. IMO it would help you trade better if you know what you don't know, especially in regard to meta-knowledge.
 
Bad_Badness said:
Hmm, I use volume as data, not as an indicator as they "teach", which is conviction is proportional to volume or waves and climaxes. That worked for awhile. But now it is so easy to game, bots and algos do it all the time. Hence, e.g. the order book spoofing.
More...

Yeah, all of that.

The ONLY thing that pays the trader is to have his position in tune with price. And volume is not a legit concern.

All arguments "defending volume" as an analytical tool are WRONG when applied to trading!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top