Inverted head and shoulders on the SPX?

Quote from AMT4SWA:

Tracking the cumulative delta over a multi-day period we will make an example - On lets say March 3rd the market traded to 685.00 LOD and the most negative reading of the cumulative delta was -150,000 contracts at that time (when that spike low was created). Now lets say two days later on March 5th (after tracking the delta at all times the globex is open) we trade to 685.00 but the cumulative delta was now showing -132,000 contracts........at this point we would be showing there are NET Long Holders potential remaining from this level who bought two days prior (difference at current days reading is +18,000).

At this point I would look at the PER TICK delta from the day we first touched 685.00 on March 3rd and add up all the TICK levels ONLY with a positive delta in the area 3 to 4 points from 685.00 on up (or at least in that 3 to 4 point zone that has the biggest pocket of high positive delta ticks). This area may show all the positive delta TICK levels added up together to about 11,000 contracts in that 3 to 4 point area.....this I call a delta zone (zone which had a very positive bias to the delta in a small 3 to 4 point range where sellers lost control to buyers and price then change directions as the 685.00 LOD was created).

If I saw price at any point now trade down to the delta zone at 685.00 again and the overall cumulative delta went to -150,000 contracts, I would know we are in a neutral state (and as a confirmation I would want to have seen at least 50% of the 11,000 contracts noted before, which created the delta zone initially, showing now as negative delta within the TICK levels making up the previously defined delta zone of 685.00 and up about 3 to 4 points). This activity would confirm that delta NET Long Holders flipped out of the previously entered Long positions within this zone in a concentrated manner.

When you see this previously created Long Holders zone go heavy negitive delta, as price returns to this zone again, you can expect price to run through this zone and neutralize this previously held inventory (and then usually make a run beyond this zone which had previously held as support......many times it will run a minimum of 5 to 10 points after the held inventory capitulates).

Hopefully this will help make the concept become more clear. :)

This concept is fascinating! I took a stab at creating a CD database (cumulative delta for each tick level) based on the above example and then realized that I don't understand one key aspect of it.

In the example above, we have -150k at 685.00 on March 3rd, -132k on March 5th and again -150k on March 6th. If the "determined" reference point is March 3rd, we're indeed net long +18k on March 5th and neutralized on March 6th. But what if we (hypothetically) also had -132k at 685.00 on March 2nd and that was taken as the reference point? In that case, we'd be neutralized on March 5th and net short -18k on March 6th. The key question seems to be how to determine the reference point. Anyone else sees that problem or am I not getting this right? Thanks again to AMT for the guidance so far.
 
Can someone please help me understand the following noob question:

If market is quoted 814.25 - 814.50 and the following 3 trades happen:

3@ 814.25/ 5@ 814.25 / 2@ 814.25

Does this mean:

1) There are 3 limit buy orders on the bid side for 3, 5 and 2 lots - and there was a 10 lot market sell order; or

2) There is a 10 lot limit buy order, and there was a 3, 5 and 2 lot market sell orders?

Is there a way to distinguish between the two?

thanks
 
Quote from rida07:

Can someone please help me understand the following noob question:

If market is quoted 814.25 - 814.50 and the following 3 trades happen:

3@ 814.25/ 5@ 814.25 / 2@ 814.25

Does this mean:

1) There are 3 limit buy orders on the bid side for 3, 5 and 2 lots - and there was a 10 lot market sell order; or

2) There is a 10 lot limit buy order, and there was a 3, 5 and 2 lot market sell orders?

Is there a way to distinguish between the two?

thanks

There are AT LEAST 10 buy limits at 814.25

3 separate sell orders came thru at the market, sell 3, sell 5 and sell 2.

They all filled at 814.25 at the bids.
 
Quote from stoneface:

There are AT LEAST 10 buy limits at 814.25

3 separate sell orders came thru at the market, sell 3, sell 5 and sell 2.

They all filled at 814.25 at the bids.

Or alternatively 814.25 bid for 3 (order 1), 814.25 bid for 5 (order 2) and 814.25 bid for 2 (order 3) were the first in the GLOBEX2 queue and a seller sold 10 (or more) at 814.25,

or 2 separate sellers sold 3, 5 ,2.

or three separate sellers sold 3, 5, 2, or...

Perhaps even more info (which clearing member had the buy orders and/or the sell orders and/or both maybe) can be gotten from a GLOBEX2 terminal. It used to be that way. Not sure now.

JW
 
Quote from Whisky:

Or alternatively 814.25 bid for 3 (order 1), 814.25 bid for 5 (order 2) and 814.25 bid for 2 (order 3) were the first in the GLOBEX2 queue and a seller sold 10 (or more) at 814.25,

or 2 separate sellers sold 3, 5 ,2.

or three separate sellers sold 3, 5, 2, or...

Perhaps even more info (which clearing member had the buy orders and/or the sell orders and/or both maybe) can be gotten from a GLOBEX2 terminal. It used to be that way. Not sure now.

JW

thanks for the responses.. so in the market delta model - it's very difficult to get anything meaningful by filtering based on volume.. (as we are not able to tell whether the 3 volume was really on the buy or sell side), correct?
 
Quote from Uncle:

thanks for the responses.. so in the market delta model - it's very difficult to get anything meaningful by filtering based on volume.. (as we are not able to tell whether the 3 volume was really on the buy or sell side), correct?

Well, the sellers took the initiative to hit the bid. The sellers were the agressor. They might have been picking the wrong fight however, but at that moment in time the sellers CREATED the price at 814.25.

In this method, as I understand it, you are trying to climb in the back (as a parasite?) of some bigger traders that are driving/ are going to agressively drive the price in the intended direction of your trade, because they have older inventory to liquidate, or they perceive the price to be an opportunity.

I would like to create my own charts too...maybe one day. :p

JW
 
Quote from manlycure:

This concept is fascinating! I took a stab at creating a CD database (cumulative delta for each tick level) based on the above example and then realized that I don't understand one key aspect of it.

In the example above, we have -150k at 685.00 on March 3rd, -132k on March 5th and again -150k on March 6th. If the "determined" reference point is March 3rd, we're indeed net long +18k on March 5th and neutralized on March 6th. But what if we (hypothetically) also had -132k at 685.00 on March 2nd and that was taken as the reference point? In that case, we'd be neutralized on March 5th and net short -18k on March 6th. The key question seems to be how to determine the reference point. Anyone else sees that problem or am I not getting this right? Thanks again to AMT for the guidance so far.

My math teacher in high school used to say that when he discusses new material and there's total silence, one of two things is happening: (1) everyone is in full understanding of the material or (2) nobody understands a thing...

So, let me hammer on another issue I ran into with this example. Using uptick/downtick (with continuation) I am getting a CD differential of -45k between the LOD spike on march 3rd (it was actually 5 min into the next session) and the subsequent touch of that same price on march 5th. Assuming the +18k figure is *real* (and based on bid/ask method of CD calculation), is it possible that the uptick/downtick method would produce a contradictory reading of -45k?

D.
 
Back
Top