Percent volume by Time Of Day?

In credible thread.

I really enjoyed the comment on what the competition really is.

Not only knowing the protrata stuff, but knowing it for your trading periodicty, is of super cardinal importance.

One of the most terrific reality checks to do is to track the naivete of the competition.

Volume is a precursor of price and this thread is like seeing some pros struggling to get off ground zero. Un.......... believable.

All traders need to have the 65 day average volume showing right next to the cummulative daily volume. And you need it for all the other indexes (whether cash or futures).

The prorata % compared to the 65 day average must be posted on your quote sheet right next to the 65 day average as well. Especially as roll over occurs and the 65 day average is changing like crazy.

This is the requirement you have to meet to make money.
To ask what the values are for each increment of the day and be a professional is so startling.

On Qcharts the column that lists the prorata real time percent has an strange name. This naming is another indication of how screwed up the pros still are. What is more interesting is how long it taks the financial community to get with the program and even provide an indicator.

IBD started doing the 200 day moving average of cash index volume.. Check the WSJ for this line if you will. It is un..believe... able.

The name for the prorata volume starts with "unusual....... lol.

Does anybody know how to anticipate a price BO here????? Would you like to guess when the prorata volume of the 65 day average comes into view (what specific value at what time in the morning) for a stock that will BO on price in the next hour??? wow that pro training academy has a lot to add to it's curriculum if this thread shows where they are now.

The SEC stopped citing me after they figured this stuff out in the mid 90's. What an unbelievable state to find the SEC in way back then. Now the pros are getting curiouser and curiouser.

Is their a turkey award at ET yet?
 
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:

I just started looking at that yesterday for several small cap stocks. I watched their volume every hour and noticed that after 1 hour they had all three achieved close to one third of their total days volume. That's kind of my goal: see if I can get a rough estimate for total day's volume based on the first hour...
More...

let me make a suggestion.

To make about 10% a week on capital use this one and only thought with a well selected universe.

Enter on a BO.

The BO on volume precedes the price BO.

So do your idea backwards. Get the 65 day moving averages of volume of stocks. Use this as a go/nogo guage.

make short lists of stocks that have very low volume periiodiaclly. Note this low volume value. It is less than a 1/4 of av vol a lot of the time.

Monitor the volume on a quote sheet daily if delatyed 15 min who cares.

If price is at trough and volume is in low state (Dry Up) buy it if 65 day average is reached before 11:00 am new york time. If the stock is at a peak and volume is in low state, short it when volume reaches 65day av before 11:00am.

You have to be really disfunctional to screw this level of trading up. (See trend fader posts for such pitfalls in mentality, he has them all to the best of my knowledge).

The hold ends when the prorata volume begins to fade in the first hour of the day. An employed person in California can monitor this stuff daily before work. If you are an east coast guy just look in the evening on 30 min chart and go in late by a day; leave late as well. Who cares it is only 40% a month on capital these days.

Do not worry that the pros make more than 40% a month; as you see they are like old dogs not aware of new tricks based upon the P, V relation. Just suffer along at that rate of capital appreciation.
 
Trade Prospector Real Time (TPRT) as has and indicator they call Relative Volume. It compares an average volume of the stock by how much to the trading day has passed and gives you a value in percent. You can also use this value in your alerts. For example I like my alert to fire if last trade value is > yesterday (high or low on my setups) and relative volume is > 70%. I have found that stocks trading at less that 70% of their relative volume don’t get much of a break out and I pass on that one. This is the type of stuff that computers should be doing for us and should be in all platforms.
 
Quote from Grob109:
More...

I happened to had corresponded with three traders who were in your recent paltalk group. I solicited them for information rather than joining your group myself, only because you had exhibited a bad attitude toward me here on ET and didn't see why that would change if I joined your group. Your post above reinforces that notion.

Those members let it be known that the real-life results they experienced and that other members experienced were not positive. You may have been posting a profit and loss document that cited profits, but it did not accurately mirror the group's experience for several reasons. One reason cited was that you would often put on trades not according to the dictums you were putting forth.

One of the problems with the method I would imagine is that price breakouts do not occur strictly within one hour of the volume changeover, as you state as if some golden rule. Another problem would be that the subsequent price climax, if indeed there is one an hour later, is typically the smart buyers selling off their shares to the crowd coming in. With no large groups of newer buyers on their heels, price doesn't continue to run up. Another problem would be that dry up volume can occur with issues that have run their course already, not just those about to run.

That's not to say that low volume isn't indicative of pending price changes. But it's not the cookie-cutter simple trading formula you cite, or rather, bang over readers' heads while insulting them.

It's also noteworthy how you abandoned your group apparently when questions about your methods were being raised, answers were being demanded and dissatisfaction was being voiced, and yet you don't mind pounding your method-message here in a thread that didn't ask for it.
 
One of my favorite strategies is akin to what grob is talking about. I start scanning for high vol starting about 9:45 every morning. For this 1st scan I will be looking for stocks doing at least 20%-30% of avg vol. If I get too many hits I just crank up vol filter or maybe had a filter for "Within %5 of Annual High", or "2% of Daily High". On Monday I traded the following stocks on breakouts. SCON, FILE, FARO, SCUR, TGAL. Four were winners (got shaken out of FILE). I've been doing this for a few months and its almost second nature somedays. I don't even need to run the scan, I just look at current vol vs avg vol on my quote page.

I will sometimes run this scan throughout the day with different criteria. But bottom line, vol can be an excellent leading indicator of where the action is. It can also keep you out the stocks that have gone dull.
 
Quote from gms:


Those members let it be known that the real-life results they experienced and that other members experienced were not positive. You may have been posting a profit and loss document that cited profits, but it did not accurately mirror the group's experience for several reasons. One reason cited was that you would often put on trades not according to the dictums you were putting forth.

One of the problems with the method I would imagine is that price breakouts do not occur strictly within one hour of the volume changeover, as you state as if some golden rule. Another problem would be that the subsequent price climax, if indeed there is one an hour later, is typically the smart buyers selling off their shares to the crowd coming in. With no large groups of newer buyers on their heels, price doesn't continue to run up. Another problem would be that dry up volume can occur with issues that have run their course already, not just those about to run.

It's also noteworthy how you abandoned your group apparently when questions about your methods were being raised, answers were being demanded and dissatisfaction was being voiced, and yet you don't mind pounding your method-message here in a thread that didn't ask for it.
More...

I have been someone who has given my all these past 8 months really trying to get down what Jack talks about and has been learning from him in ET, MSN, and the Chatroom. It has been a very tough journey to say the least. I really appreciate you bringing up these points as i was very closely associated too the things you mentioned and wanted to share my view on the three paragraphs above.

While you are correct that the real-life results were not exaclty in-line with what my PnL was, they COULD have been in line with the results. This means that it is possible too achieve the results shown in the excel PnL. The discrepency was my lack of experience and lack of understanding during the trasfer of knowledge from Jack.

I understand your issues first hand of using volume as a indicator of a BO. It is very true that their is a possiblity that the price BO might fail and end up as a bad loss. This is always a possibility. If you know their are 2 possibilities, then the next step is to figure out the difference between a BO and a FBO. It took me 4 months to figure out this problem. Unfortunately, that is why my PnL did not mirror the excel sheet. He would just say too exit at a certain time with no real transfer of knowledge going on to explain it. I will not lie and say that it was frustrating as i wanted to learn. In the end though, through my losses and iterative refinement, i did come too decipher a FBO from a BO. I think Jack wants one too discover things(process) on their own instead of just giving it to you. It incorperates using the MACD and Stoch in conjunction. If you would like it, pm me and i will give you a write up that i am doing on the difference.

The last paragraph is a tough paragraph to touch on. To give you perspective, i left my prop firm to trade the ES under the guidance of Jack. Thinking incorrectly that I was an expert, i traded his SCT for a while. I ended up losing some of my account and took a step back to trade the intermediate level. I took the step back when he had left MSN and the chatroom due to his health problems. My account is pretty much back where it started in terms of equity. I know that there are a lot of people in MSN that HOPE He comes back to guiding the people who want to learn from him and there are other people who expect him too continue what he has started. While some people in the MSN group think he has abandoned them, he has laid out most of the necessary things too learn his methods. You just have too sift through a lot of posts and go through the process. If he chooses to post in ET over MSN....so be it.....he has given FAR to much to call it abandonment. Although, It would be much easier for people who want to learn his methods if he would answer the Q's that people had in MSN. Not to add, they would be much more grateful then the tough crowd of ET :p

Anyway, there is my perspective on the post that you wrote. Again, if you would like, pm me, and i will give you a way to combine the Volume BO, stochs, and macd too help determine a FBO from a BO.


JC
 
Quote from nwbprop:

I have been someone who has given my all these past 8 months really trying to get down what Jack talks about... has been a very tough journey... you are correct that the real-life results were not exaclty in-line with what my PnL was
More...
That confirms a lot of what I was saying.

It took me 4 months to figure out this problem... that is why my PnL did not mirror the excel sheet. He would just say too exit at a certain time with no real transfer of knowledge going on to explain it... it was frustrating... through my losses and iterative refinement, i did come too decipher a FBO from a BO. I think Jack wants one too discover things(process) on their own instead of just giving it to you.
More...
That's what I mean. To summarize your words, you spent 8 months being mentored without knowldege being given. The idea that one needs to figure things out on their own because the teacher is not "transferring knowledge" is the opposite of being mentored. Imagine a classroom where the purpose is to teach people how to read. Teacher points out that spaces precede words, words are groups of letters and sentences are groups of words. You have to not only be able to read those words but turn groups of words into sensible sentences to be successful at this, but the teacher leaves you to figure out how to decipher the letters into words and how sentences are correctly formed. That wouldn't be effective teaching.

I know that there are a lot of people in MSN that HOPE He comes back to guiding the people who want to learn from him and there are other people who expect him too continue what he has started... some people in the MSN group think he has abandoned them... he has given FAR to much to call it abandonment. Although, It would be much easier for people who want to learn his methods if he would answer the Q's that people had in MSN
More...
When someone leaves something they "started", and promises to return, and promising to clear things up and get on track, citing health reasons or personal committments that afford no time to the project, yet obviously spends time reading through online forums and posting multiple times, one has to wonder why that time wasn't given to the promise. One also understands that what was left behind was not all that helpful to the students. Obviously. At that point, it's abandonment, and that's why others feel he abandoned them. To continue with my analogy, the frustrated students from the reading class declare to the teacher that they need help to determine what words are not nonsense words and what the grammer is for correctly creating sentences, the teacher from the reading class says he will dedicate himself to clearing all this up in short order (though the teacher has been teaching this stuff for months already - and in some cases has been tutoring some of the students for years) but then instead takes a small time off to take care of personal matters but promises he will be back. The teacher never comes back but instead is found somewhere else throughout that time telling people he knows a superior reading method and starts to have a go at it. Actions speak louder than words, and in trading terms, make great indicators.

I feel I'm going off-topic on this thread, so I'll end here, but wanted to object to Jack (the Grob)'s insulting revamp considering his recent performance as a mentor, and make my reply to you.
 
GMS

Some of the issues that you raise are valid. However Jack was never paid a dime for all the time that he spent in the Paltalk chat room. Furthermore, he left quite a bit of material on the MSN group that is accessible to everyone. Abandonment or not, the bottom line is that he has no obligations to anyone in that chat room.

Take care
 
How likely is it that someone making 10-40% a month on Capital would be trolling these boards looking for devotees?

Can we say Sun Myung Grob?


sunny.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top