Simples, you trade ES if I understand correctly, and may be (I do not know) for ES it is good timeframe. ES is 100% speculative.
CL is totally different. The volume distribution across time scale is extremely far from uniform. The spikes are sudden and huge, because of hedgers activity. For any 5 min high volume bar 80% of volume are in 15-30 second interval. So
1. 5 min timeframe seems to be 'long term' for intraday short term traders.
2. pro rate volume is totally misleading for CL
BTW, reason for the minute about the activity on CL. Hedgers and big speculators step in when and if they get proper PRICE to activate the trade. Firstly, the proper price level is seen, and than the activity manifests. PRICE first, VOLUME second, RSI&MACD&others are third. Price leads, volume follows. Is the ES differnt? May be...
To address the last part of your post, in the methodology that
@Simples and
@tiddlywinks are referring to, I ‘ll use different languaging which distinguishes more detail.
All this is based on astute observation with an open mind and based on deduction, not induction.
There are only 25 unique forms a single 4-tick price bar can be.
When compared to a second price bar, there are 10 unique form combinations that exist.
The second bar in the ten cases of price can either have increasing or decreasing volume.
The form of a two bar Price combo gives permission to measure. What is measured in this paradigm is the corresponding volume bar.
Many volume bars are measured, many are not.
It’s the selective filtering of volume that decreases noise and increases signal.
By filtering, Volume presents a pattern. This pattern is defined by events and not time.
This pattern is primarily oriented left to right and not up/down.
The closest thing in CW that compares is pivot points and s/r. In CW, these are up/down orientations. An entirely distinct world comes into view when these concepts are translated to a left/right orientation. By doing so, an archetypal pattern comes into view.
The archetypal pattern exists in reality and can be observed. Any problems to the perception of this fact has everything to do with an individual’s perception even though one’s perception would indicate otherwise. This would be defined as a blind-spot. The reason for this is not the sensing part of perception, it’s the inference part. There is no inference by which to form an accurate perception. That is the function of drills - to build an inference point of reference based on work.
The pattern is fractal in nature and can be observed on all timescales and is symmetrical.
The pattern consists of 3 moves of price to 4 elements of volume. The 3 moves of price are Dominant -> non-Dominant -> Dominant. There are two elements of volume to the first Dominant move of price, after that it’s a one-to-one relationship in the progression of a trend until trend failure. At trend failure, a trend in the opposite direction is starting. As this trend fails, this reveals the cycle of market operation.
The archetypal pattern nests and has a faster pattern within as well as a slower pattern that contains it. The nesting and nested patterns are the same.
This archetypal pattern is defined by a sequence of events.
So price gives permission to measure volume. Measured volume gives a signal of the progression of trend. Volume leads price in this paradigm. Trades are made when volume events fit a defined catalogue of volume patterns that lead changes in price. At first lookup tables at used, until memorization is complete. It requires similar effort to memorize a 12x12 multiplication table.
Sometimes moves in price do have unusual volume attributed to them. That leads to the differentiation of the following; 2 Failsafes, the 4 types of trends and three types of turns (and all their permutations) that the market constantly cycles through in the process of continuous dual auction price discovery.
The comments mentioned above indicate why backtesting as it’s generally performed is fundamentally flawed. CW backtesting treats all volume bars the same when they are in fact not.
So in a way there is truth to the notion that price is the above all and be all. It’s just that volume is intimately intertwined with price and as two variables in an equation, one is the independent one.
In this paradigm, volume is the independent variable and price is the dependent variable even though on the surface it appears to be the opposite. Changes in price migrate, surges in volume can come out of nowhere.
Nowhere = now here.
Like the sun traveling across the sky,
it can be argued. Just like flat-earthers argue for the validity of their belief affected senses. This vs the progression of logical discernment that has developed over centuries of focused thought/observation by thinking minds paying it forward.
To change one’s perception, it’s necessary to progress through a finite set of drills designed to accentuate what most look over and discount.
Naturally this is the result of a simple choice. Every choice has a consequence. Everyone is currently living the consequences of their past choices and creating a trajectory into the future of their present choices.
If one is not receiving the benefits of what being in the market and on the right side of the market has to offer it’s simply making better choices.
The context for the above is in the notion of positioning oneself to receive the full offer of the market at any given time.
The realization of the above comes from the work of purposeful learning. There are no-shortcuts or one-liners that can encapsulate the system with any accuracy.
In fact, with exception, attempting to pre-maturely use bits and pieces without the understanding of where those pieces fit can be detrimental and can lead to false conclusions.