First off, this is posted in psychology because I dont have a PHD to adequately describe what I see happening on charts. However, it is an objectively definitive approach...
My question is this:
Based on anyone's experience, are the imbalances in market activity better captured based on pure price levels -> swing H's and L's and the time it took to get from one to the other... or is utilizing the duration of the bar (on chosen timeframe) an integral part of how it all comes together i.e. the bar must be made before its created (thx r.n.) thus giving the market direction, trendlines, etc
To sum it up, are arbitrary bar times like 60 min necessary when attempting to capture a snapshot of price/potential imbalances or is knowing the path of price then vs now adequate to cause imbalances for one to project?
thank you kindly for any real responses.
bd
p.s. I ask cause I want to switch to range bars to control risk but also feel like knowing/trading the same timeframes as everyone else is what gives this approach a potential exploitable edge which could be lost
My question is this:
Based on anyone's experience, are the imbalances in market activity better captured based on pure price levels -> swing H's and L's and the time it took to get from one to the other... or is utilizing the duration of the bar (on chosen timeframe) an integral part of how it all comes together i.e. the bar must be made before its created (thx r.n.) thus giving the market direction, trendlines, etc
To sum it up, are arbitrary bar times like 60 min necessary when attempting to capture a snapshot of price/potential imbalances or is knowing the path of price then vs now adequate to cause imbalances for one to project?
thank you kindly for any real responses.
bd
p.s. I ask cause I want to switch to range bars to control risk but also feel like knowing/trading the same timeframes as everyone else is what gives this approach a potential exploitable edge which could be lost