Emini divergence journal

Status
Not open for further replies.
3dog:

Thank you for pointing out my error. I kind of went nuts after reading your post and checked it out. When I found it to be true I starting feeling sick. I then went and setup two graphs of the emini. Top using the chaikin and the tick count and the bottom using the chaikin and the volume count. They looked nearly identical. I'm guessing either the tick count can be used as a proxy for volume, or the chaikin osc. puts a much greater emphasis on the average bar width than the volume weighting. I'm going to have to go back and try and understand what is going on. If the underlying assumptions are false then I may have to suspend trading for a little while. I'm starting to get a stress headache. Thanks again.
 
no pm,

I think that if you look at the ramifications of what 3dog is saying, it doesn't invalidate your method at all. It just explains why there's such a difference in volume related indicators between the big contract and the mini.

Volume divergence vs. price action has been a valuable technique in analyzing trends for a long time. And you've made it work successfully. I can't see how this is invalidated because you've discovered a difference in how the data is reported. If only price change is reported on the S&P, then you've also managed to incorporate a momentum factor through working with the volume figures.

Mark
 
Don't explode, NPP :p Even tho what you've been looking at may not be what you thought you were looking at, that doesn't mean that nothing that you've been looking at has any value. You may just need to call Mr. Tweak.

For example, I've been reviewing old charts using your setup but with a sto instead of the Chaikin and have had good results.

Don't despair!! :cool:
 
One of the side effects of keeping a journal is stress headaches. Based on the growth of your bank account while using this system, I am wondering why you would try to analyze this. I find it amazing that all of these problems have popped up for you since making a decision to post your trades. Think about it. Just keep trading and spend your time developing accurate filters for the all the "recommendations and advice" you get from your following here in the journal.
 
Quote from VisionTrader:

One of the side effects of keeping a journal is stress headaches. Based on the growth of your bank account while using this system, I am wondering why you would try to analyze this. I find it amazing that all of these problems have popped up for you since making a decision to post your trades. Think about it. Just keep trading and spend your time developing accurate filters for the all the "recommendations and advice" you get from your following here in the journal.
More...


I agree.

Don't look to create a future problem.

That's what unsuccessful traders do.
 


I also agree. After looking at what works and what doesn't during all this time, he seems to have tapped into the flow, making the specific indicator at least partly immaterial.

In other words, if it ain't broke . . . After all, some people use planetary alignment :confused:
 
Quote from dbphoenix:



I also agree. After looking at what works and what doesn't during all this time, he seems to have tapped into the flow, making the specific indicator at least partly immaterial.

In other words, if it ain't broke . . . After all, some people use planetary alignment :confused:
More...


NPP,
I think db is right. After this last year or
so of trading this, you see the
relationships that happen between the
prices and the indicators and the hits
and misses you've had and what
happened when. You've optimized
your head and your reactions with the
SP/Chaikin/Keltner movements. But if
you needed to, am I'm not saying you
need to at all, but if you did need to
change an indicator or two, you would
adapt because the basic movements
and reasons why stuff is happening is
hard wired into your guitar strummin,
keyboard playin brain.

Just one man's opinion.
And thanks again for starting me
looking at price/volume relationships I
had missed previous to your journal.

jd
 
Quote from no_pm_please:

3dog:

Thank you for pointing out my error. I kind of went nuts after reading your post and checked it out.
More...

Too much analysis. This method could work even if you removed most of its elements. The key is not the divergence of any sort nor even the ADX. Think about it and I am sure you will understand what the key element is.
 
Quote from electron:


Think about it and I am sure you will understand what the key element is.
More...

Why not clue us in to your observations, electron? If no pm is concerned about what he's doing at this point, and he's offered us so much, I'm not sure that it's particularly fair to give him something else to try and puzzle out!

Best,

Mark
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top