/biz/ - Business & Finance

I'll explain my process before I start. This process is basically a copy of principles and ideas Mark Whistlers - Macro to Micro and some from Anna Coulling - Volume Price Analysis. Both of which were really fucking helpful in understanding the true nature of markets

>Open 4 time frames, ideally on the same chart, but as long as you can cross reference quickly it's fine too.
>Weekly > Daily > 4h > 1h > 15m > 5m > 1m
>Load up 50 and 200 length Bollinger Bands (type in triple bollinger bands from users, it'll save 2 indicator spaces)
>Change the standard deviation multipliers to 1.25, 2.2 and 3.2. These will cover most of the data as long as you have a high resolution time frame open
>Something to understand, a bollinger band measures the volatility of the distribution of price
>The bollinger band MEAN is where price will revert to IF, and ONLY IF there isn't any clear guidance as to what price will do next.
>The 1.25 multipliers can be considered as where price is contained while moving laterally and can be considered as the strongest support/resistance as long as there is certainty in which direction price is going
>The 2.2 multipliers, above and below, can be thought of as the support/resistance of price when they are trending or trading laterally and you're expecting a bearish or bullish move
>The 3.2 multipliers are really used as the containers for price, price rarely should exceed the 3.2 standard deviation ON THE HIGHEST TIME FRAME POSSIBLE
>The MEAN is where the most uncertainty lies, it's where volatility of the price range collapses if the market participants (that's us and the 'big money') are unsure of where price is headed to next
>The 2.2 - 3.2 range is where 'expectations of price trending in that direction' are aligned among all market participants
>We've been erroneously taught that price trading beyond the 2.2 - 3.2 multipliers/standard deviations are where the 'anomalies' are, in reality this is where the senitment of bull or bear is highest

Just to prove I ain't bullshittin', i'll use the chart of BTC, first using the 50 period bollinger band on the Monthly chart, and then the 200 period bollinger band on the Weekly chart for a slightly clearer picture.

On the Monthly chart for BTC (using Bitstamp because it has the largest time period available).
1. Notice how the slightest breach of the upper 2.2 mean caused the subsequent candle for the next month to be so narrow and tight. The big fish are looking for any excuse to push a bear or bull trend, especially if they know that the data is visible for everyone to see and make the same judgement.
2. Following that, price trended above the 2.2 multiplier for around 11 months which is where we saw the bull run up to 20k. Not bad considering just by using one indicator you could have bought the confirmation around ($900-1500) that price was definitely staying above the 2.2 multiplier.
3. Price around then was trading above the 3.2 multiplier, which is usually where people are looking to sell as they assume that 'the reversal is coming'. Realistically it's more of a test to see if the 2.2 multiplier will hold for a further bull market. Unsurprisingly, the candle at number 3 was short and narrow for sure, but it breached ALL the way down to nearly the 1.25 multiplier. People were uncertain what price was going to do next.
4. Following the uncertain period, price failed to close above the 2.2 for 3 months, a sure sign that price was definitely uncertain, and following that we saw the first breach of the wick touching the 1.25 multiplier for 17 MONTHS.
5. For the following 2 months or so, price desperately tried to stay above the 1.25 multiplier, but it seems like the writing was on the wall, it had been breached 3 times already, and was surely headed for the mean as that's where price heads when uncertainty prevails over 'muh bull or muh bear' market. I'm even sure that if we scanned the archives of /biz/ we'd see the most pink wojaks between 4-5

6. Of course, price then headed to the mean, where uncertainty is hashed out between market participants and the future is decided whether to drop down below to the lower 1.25 or go back up to the upper 1.25 multiplier as they're the next obvious and strongest points of support/resistance. Notice how price not once even breached the MEAN, maybe only briefly touching it with the candle wick.
7. Here we are in present day (near enough), May of 2019 saw prices blow straight past the 1.25 multiplier, probably indicating that this level could hold for the relative short term as we try and test the upper 2.2 multiplier. But with no signifcant actual candle closes above the 2.2 multiplier in the last 2 months, for now we move sideways between the upper 1.25 and upper 2.2 multipliers.

Where to start with TA

Now we'll look at the Weekly view with the 200 period bollinger band for a slightly closer look.

1. Price has for the first time, breached the upper 2.2 multiplier, this is possibly the sign market participants were waiting for, but wasn't really confirmed until March - May 2017 where we were still testing if the 2.2 was a viable benchmark to hold, if it hadn't have been, you could be sure that price would have dumped further and even touched the 1.25 multiplier, but it didn't at all, closing and wicking well above the 1.25 multiplier. May was when the real volume came in.

2. Just before the '2' there was a significant dump from 2.5k back down to 1.75k, but AGAIN, not breaching the 2.2 multiplier at all. Probably indicates that the expectation for a bull market is still there, so no need for the long term short YET. Just after the '2' the price bounced directly off of the 3.2 multiplier, clear indication price is still trending bullish.

3. Here's where we see the decline from 20k, for 2 weeks directly under the '3' price closed under the 2.2, even wicking at the 1.25 multiplier. Price tried to react and stay above the 2.2 for the next couple of weeks, but failed with wide spread candles indicating volatility was prevailing and price wasn't obviously moving one way or the other with conviction.

4. This area would have been good for a short term long, just as the price was looking to see if it could actually hold the 1.25 multiplier and then break into another bull trend if it convincingly broke above the 2.2 multiplier. It didn't of course and price and participants reacted by dumping it back down to the 1.25, but truly back down to the mean which is where UNCERTAINTY IS MOST PREVELANT.

5. Another short term attempt at rallying back past the 1.25 - 2.2 range, which failed, it should have been somewhat obvious that price might be returning to the mean based on #4, but I guess this was the last attempt to try and hold the 1.25 multiplier.

6. Price reverts to EXACTLY THE MEAN, doesn't breach it, doesnt wick beyond it, doesn't fuck around. It was a temporary (relatively speaking) pullback to decide the future of the price. Pretty good for just using ONE INDICATOR and some knowledge of volume, if you notice also thats where the volume started picking up, price had been uncertain for so long, that participants stepped in and took charge of the situation, they chose to BUY instead of to DUMP.

7. Where we are currently, price convincingly closing above the 1.25 multiplier, now testing the 2.2 multiplier. No significant closes yet above the 2.2 multiplier, but the latest Weekly candle shows only a wick down to the 1.25 multiplier.

>>14840422

Hello fren, you could read the two books I recommended:

Mark Whistler - Macro to Micro
Anna Coulling - Volume Price Analysis

I suggest making notes and looking at your own examples along side theirs in real time. Hopefully the examples and information here I've provided are a good start.

Do you have any specific other questions? Or a coin you'd like me look at weary bagholder fren?

I understand that most people aren't looking to make trades once a year and then holding it out for the right time to exit/enter. I'm not like that either.
BUT it's important to understand the larger picture before you even start to consider the smaller timeframes like Daily all the way down to 15m. If you can understand how price is expected to move in the next MONTH or even WEEK you know roughly where price will stall and be supported at. Pretty good information for someone looking to trade smaller time frames if you ask me.

>>14840422

Also a clear understanding of how markets work would be a good start, look up 'institutional order flow' and how 'static/dynamic support and resistances' work.

>>14840554
Not necessarily any coins (I'm out of most alts) but thanks for the recs! I'll add them to my reading list. Looking to read more books since I'm pulling out my stonks and looking to make better market decisions, but figured I'd use the time to read more instead

>>14840422
>>14840554
>>14840635
lmao at this pathetic incel just sitting here on /biz/ talking to himself about a bunch of bullshit

>>14840968
Its only cause its a wall of text & most do gif related

>>14840968
Yikes

>>14840968
>>14841014

I guess no one here wants to learn how to successfully do TA based on reliable methods?
Seething

I'm still here if anyone wants help, I just want to make /biz/ worthy of visiting again, it's so shit full of FUD and memes it's not a proper board anymore.

>>14842004
If you're willing to take a crack at stocks, what do you think about LPTX short term?

>>14842004
Thanks Anon, you've defiantly taught me about Bollinger bands!
Do you have an opinion on Options? unironically learning about them RN to hedge my trades.
What's your opinion on Tom DeMark's,TD Sequential i.e Tone.
Lastly & most importantly, is this the bottom of 'the dip'?
Thanks for the consideration you've given to /biz/

I guess i'll carry on and post a trade I took yesterday
XRPBTC.

1. I was looking for the potential of a short term long for XRP since the inital test of the lower 1.25 multiplier the start of yesterday, previously I was keeping an eye on the 13th, but I guess I missed the mean reversion on the 1h chart. No matter! There's clearly no support on the Weekly and Daily time frames so we obviously look to the lower time frames, mainly the 4h and 1h.

2. After the initial test of the 4h 1.25 multiplier failed, I kept an eye on it to see if it would rebound anywhere of off the lower time frame of 1h, where it convincingly closed well above the lower 1.25 on the 1h time frame. Based on that information I kept a keen eye on whether the price would be able to break the 1h MEAN again, I guess because the distribution moved the mean downwards it was easier to break this time round, the distribution moving the 1h mean downwards also meant that the 4h lower 1.25 was moved down lower, which made it easier for price to break through.

3. It obviously had to break the local resistance of around 3090 to be able to test the next clear area which would be the Weekly lower 1.25 multiplier, or the Daily 1.25 multiplier, or the 4h MEAN.

I took a long position around 3090, buying about 30-40 percent of my order there, just seeing if it holds the price, it managed to, but then I waited for confirmation on the 1h chart to see if it would actually break the 2.2 upper benchmark to confirm a short term bull period, it did and I was able to buy some more around 3250, not bad considering, my average buy in was closer to the upper range around 3200 but as long as this short term bull trend continues we're likely to see a REVERSION TO THE 4 HOUR MEAN, which would see me profit about 13-18 PERCENT.

>Pretty simple tools used, nothing overly complicated

>>14839075
wow is this man a savant?

Chart RSR for me please.

>>14842171

Glad I could help Anon, i really suggest you read Macro to Micro to read an in-depth non pleb version of this breakdown of the method.
Sadly I have no opinion on Options, I don't really trade Options but i'll be happy to look into and come back to you once I do and if the thread is still around.
Unfortunately I don't place much thought to 'patterns and sequences'. For me the best data is the data that doesn't asume anything but the facts in front of me, bollinger bands are the best tool for that in my opinion. It measures the 'wingspan' of the distribution of data and SEEMINGLY most assets/coins really seem to respect that indicator (I CAVEAT THIS WITH, ONLY ON THE LONGEST TIME FRAMES DO THEY RESPECT BOLLINGER BANDS)

>>14842158

I'm doing it right now, but I'm having dinner at the same time, pardon for my lack of response and speed Anon.
I'll post it in a few minutes once I clean up.

>>14842231

Of course Anon, as soon as I clean up and post the LPTX Anons chart, i'll do RSR.

>>14842334
No worries fren. It's a biotech I'm bullish on long term, but news is pretty dead

Obligatory pls chart link for us brainlets

>>14842356
Never heard of Leap therapeutics. How the fuck do they have so many trials with their one drug combos. Might have to toss some money into this

>>14842158

>LPTX
Short term (meaning on the 1h-4h charts).
I think i'll use the 4h chart for this, it's showing the best data for the short-ish term.
Let me preface this with some things i've observed.
>The distribution slope shape is still descending on the WEEKLY
>The distribution slope shape is tightening every so slightly on the DAILY

This is kind of indicative of bearish sentiment, which suggests to me that a mean reversion on the DAILY and POSSIBLY WEEKLY will be rejected or flatten out and we'll see some short term (days) sideways action until participants figure out whether or not to push it higher.

1. After seemingly being in no mans land for a while, I guess participants found opportunity to be had in pushing the price through the 1.25 lower multiplier (containment zone) on the 4H CHART (bottom left)

2. And considering we're in no mans land, that means NO GUIDANCE and UNCERTAINTY PREVAILS! Which really only means one thing, prices are likely to revert to the mean, and they did, or atleast attempted to. Only really being stopped by the presence of the higher time frame WEEKLY LOWER 1.25 which violently stopped any further travel to the mean. You can also look at the 1H CHART, as prices failed to hold the 2.2 upper benchmark to indicate short term bullishness. The failure to hold that and the presence of the WEEKLY LOWER 1.25 caused the 4H MEAN REVERSION TO FAIL and ultimately fall back down.

3. Well, how far will prices go down now then? The price firstly will try and be 'CONTAINED' in the 4H chart, there's no other LOCAL SUPPORT around on the Daily and Weekly charts. To confirm, we look at the 1H chart and see that indeed, price has STOPPED at the 4H LOWER 1.25, and never even breached the 1H LOWER 2.2 which would have indicated bearish sentiment. Good news for us, it means that price is then headed back to the mean.

>>14842158
>>14842577

4. Here's where we are currently. The WEEKLY and DAILY charts both show a similar if not same MEAN line. Well guess we're headed back to the DAILY and WEEKLY means, already having breached and held the 4H mean, which makes sense seeing as we're in no mans land and price goes to the MEAN WHEN UNCERTAIN!

4a. As long as price can hold firstly the 1HOURLY upper 1.25 benchmark with CONVICTION (which it looks like it's doing, even with the red candles we have), it then must break above the 4HOURLY upper 2.2 with conviction to sustain a short term bull trend to either the DAILY or WEEKLY mean.

4b. Failure to hold these benchmarks, well then we're in short term UNCERTAIN NO MANS LAND and price will act accordingly, going back down to firstly the 1H MEAN to see if it will hold and participants come in to push prices up, or the 4H MEAN and see if it will hold and participants come in to push prices up.

4c. The longer this period of MEAN to 2.2 goes on, the flatter the bollinger band (distribution of volatility) becomes, and thus will dynamically change the MEAN of both the DAILY AND WEEKLY MEANS.

I think price has to break 2.16 ish area with conviction to see a MEAN REVERSION TO DAILY AND WEEKLY MEANS.

>>14839075
when will you learn that TA wont make you money. only memes can do that.

>>14842577
>>14842683
Damn, this is some good stuff fren. Thanks! Definitely gonna check out those resources you posted. Any other general resources you'd rec, not necessarily TA related?

>>14842707
That's one opinion fren, would you like some advice or a chart I can analyse for you? Any practice is good practice

>>14842735
No worries Anon. Hmm i'm not sure, the Macro to Micro is the best i'd recommend, it covers topics like psychology and things we've erroneously learnt to be 'factual', really the best book i've read in terms of shaping my thinking, period.
But more importantly the best thing I have ever learnt was "If you know the way broadly, you will see it in all things"

Can you tell me why you invested in LPTX? Quid pro quo?

>>14839075
Starting to learn more about it instead recently but im at a pretty basic level.

Tools i use:
Multi time frame analysis: Weekly, 1day, 4HR, 1HR, 15M

Fib retracements: i have custom settings but cba posting xD

Bookmaps: To view order blocks at key levels (likely resistance points) If you dont use it i'd really recommend it as it's very useful and intricate. Eats away at RAM though.

Order blocks drawn on graph: Use it as indicator whether were breaking out to confirm longing or if rejected to scalp short.

Would appreciate tips

>>14842814
Certainly. It was a big meme stock a while ago, but when it dropped off a lot of people sold (I myself stopped talking about it). There seems to be a lot of good people involved in the project, but I'm really also interested in their results from both a financial and medical standpoint. https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-drug/def/dkk1-neutralizing-monoclonal-antibody-dkn-01 if their initial results are good, this could be a big one and could moon like crazy. Furthermore, it would be a BIG step in cancer research and the likes, as it would be extremely unique and could help a lot of people (one of my core values of a good investment is "makes lives better") of course, there's a lot of loss potential too since they have only one drug as >>14842532, so it could just fail and everyone gets burned.

Was interested short term so I can load my bags up some more if it dips. Definitely recommend getting in on anymore dips, believe they should be sharing some data either this month or next. Personally I prefer gambling on biotechs more than crypto, but that's my personal opinion.

>>14842951
Thanks Anon, I'll check it out and look into it myself! The data they share this month could be the news that participants are waiting for to sell or buy the mean reversion (which is likely at this point), possible make or break scenario. Traditional company stocks react most of the time based off of news ESPECIALLY when uncertainty is prevailing, either uncertainty in the asset itself or in the general market/sector. I suggest looking for any volatile spiky action that creeps slowly higher JUST before the news releases, and conversely any spike volatile action that creeps downwards before the news releases. Could be indicative of the sentiment once the news is released; just something to consider.

>>14842231
I hope you're still here Anon, these are rather time consuming so I hope you forgive me for taking so long.
I'll post it shortly. I will warn you/caveat it with this.

>The bollinger bands only really work with long period time frames, which is why it's necessary to have DAILY and WEEKLY data stretching back at least 250 days or weeks (respectively)
>RSR has only 9-10 WEEKLY candles, and around 50-60 DAILY candles, these aren't enough to make somewhat an accurate prediction or analysis but i'll try my best
>Once a larger time frame bollinger band shows up, that will take precedent and any analysis beforehand could be moot by that point, always keep that in mind

OP, could you do one of these for XSN, please?

>>14842441
>>14843065
Of course Anons, i'll get around to it eventually. This is taking a lot more time than I originally thought!

The next on my list is RSR > LINK > XSN

>>14843065
There is no data available on TradingView fren, would you kindly provide me a link that allows me to use TradingView charts on XSN?

>>14839075
I just day trade with support/resistances, pretty profitable lately and have had more success lately with Idex shitcoins.

Just learn to find supports and resistances with meme lines, they work well.
EMA's work great for this too, i use 10,25,50,100,200.
Ichimoku is a must too
Volume profile can help you find meme lines if available


To mitigate a bit the risk of IDEX shitcoins, pick only a few with strong fundamentals / heavy shilling. I just trade with FXC, QNT, VIDT, LIT, RSR, FTM, LTO, XBASE. Only trade them when the buybook looks strong and the volume is rising. Else, is more risk.

Amazing man, keep the good work done. First quality thread on /biz/ i've seen in a long time.

can you please do TESLA stock?

Also, what do you think of meme lines, trends?

>>14842945
>>14843092

Have you considered using Bollinger Bands? I urge Anons to look into the analysis provided here and read Macro to Micro, it gives a new clear context that I wasn't able to grasp before.

>>14842945
Thank you for the recommendation of Bookmaps Anon, it sounds interesting and something I really wanted on TradingView, a look at the order books levels historically!

>>14843092
Peronally I don't like using indicators that are overly comples, I have experimented with Ichi clouds before and it was a disaster. The beauty in bollinger bands are that they are measures of 3-4 things all at the same time, and most if not ALL assets I have analysed all respect the bollinger bands in a way I have never seen on any other indicator.
I think you need to factor in that just like TIME is dynamic, so is the DISTRIBUTION OF PRICE. Using static indicators won't effectively give you a realistic view on dynamic things.

>>14843089
Unfortunately, I've never used this service, so I'm not sure how I would go about working that out for you. I've looked briefly to no avail.
Admittedly, I'm pretty new to this.

>>14843238
That's ok Anon, can you give me a link that displays XSN price data historically? maybe on the exchange XSN is sold on, they usually have the data, or something similar. I would find it myself eventually but it may take me a while.

BT is a fat nonce

>>14843230
Thanks for the response, iv'e played around with bollinger bands a bit but wasn't fully able to grasp them. Will have to watch some more videos on them and i'll definitely take a look at that book.

>>14843273
https://
digitalcoinprice.com/coins/stakenet
sorry it took a minute. i'm a bit busy as well.
still, i appreciate it

>>14843230
If you do decide to try Bookmaps you will know when big price movement is about to happen as well since your pc fans will sound like a turbine before it actually occurs. If you're quick you can make it work haha

>>14842231
>RSR

Because of the lack of data, i'll be starting from the DAILY chart and work downwards from 4h, 1h, 15m. Be warned though, that once the Weekly 50 length kicks in we may see the context of analysis change and what was bullish suddenly is now bearish etc.

I am only able to give a few points of analysis it looks like, as the other historical data is fresh and obvious.

1. Price failed to breach convincingly on the LARGEST POSSIBLE time frame of the 2.2 benchmark, indicative that prices aren't ready currently for further bull trend. This makes sense, I guess RSR is still actually trying to discover it's true valuation, so the movement is not slow but rather fast and volatile, hence why the DAILY bollinger is really fat and looks similar to the bell curve shape laying on its side, likely that price will range between the 1.25 CONTAINMENT AREAS for a while (until larger time frames become apparent)

2. The area where the data is most 'usable' seems to be the 1HOURLY charts, as you can see there, the price after failing to break the UPPER 2.2 on the WEEKLY, (the second attempt at the WEEKLY 2.2 caused the 1H UPPER 1.25 to be distributed higher by the way) price broke the upper 1.25 1HOURLY and reverted to the MEAN, because as we said, that's where UNCERTAINTY PREVAILS, and price was sure as hell uncertain after failing to break the 2.2 on the weekly while at the same time raising the distribution. I guess it panicked a lot of participants that the second attempt at the Weekly 2.2 failed.

3. Price seems likely to head to the DAILY 50 LENGTH MEAN, which seems to coincide with the 4HOURLY MEAN and the 1HOURLY LOWER 1.25 Containment Area. This makes sense, as it's the best guidance that the majority of people can see on all time frames. I guess this will be confirmed by the 15MINUTE time frame, and the failure to break the 15M LOWER 1.25 (which it looks like it has failed).

Likely that price heads back to around 28, it will probably lateral trade a while

>>14842441
>>14843227
I am working on it Anons, these are really time consuming.
If this thread is kept alive it will certainly be posted in the next 30-45 minutes.

>>14843377
>>14843453
Thanks fren, that sounds like such a niche advantage, let's hope I can make use of it! There are sadly no videos on Macro to Micro (I looked extensively because reading is again so time consuming!), be prepared to make notes.

>>14843414
I'm sorry anon, I looked around and I can't find any charts that have the indicators I typically use (mainly Bollinger Bands), there is a chart I potentially could use on Coinall but it's the lowest trading volume of all the exchanges I saw listed, which makes it rather innaccurate. I will attempt it last because of this, I'm sorry for the disappointment and the extended wait you'll have to endure.

>https://www.coinall.com/market?product=xsn_btc

bump

>>14842441
>LINK

1. As i've previously explained, when prices are UNCERTAIN they revert to the mean, which is exactly what LINK did after failing to keep above the WEEKLY upper 1.25 benchmark, what's curious is that price never really touched the WEEKLY mean at all, instead of trying to attempt the breach of the WEEKLY mean it instead used the 4HOURLY and partially DAILY charts to provide support for participants. The circled area shows price that had been rejected by the DAILY MEAN and was then basically in no mans land according to the WEEKLY chart, so the next best place it had to go towards was the WEEKLY MEAN. Price used the DAILY LOWER 1.25 (i tried circling it vaguely) to provide an absolute bottom (in conjunction with the weekly mean), I guess participants were somewhat happy with letting price fluctuate in the Containment Zone for the DAILY chart for clearer guidance. Upon further inspection on the 4HOURLY chart, we can see that price was really ranging between the lower 1.25 and lower 2.2 ranges, but again NO SIGNIFICANT breach of the lower 2.2, hmmm seems suspicious if you ask me, you could have used this data as a sign that maybe expectations were aligning for a bullsh move away from the WEEKLY mean; well all that would be left would be to confirm what we're seeing. This was half confirmed by the fact that price on the 4HOURLY was trading between 1.25 and 2.2 (lower) and then further confirmed by price violently moving away from the LOWER 1.25 DAILY which also happened to be the LOWER 1.25 4HOURLY, I guess you could have bought either of this confirmations and held for the recent run up, excellent buying opportunity!

2. This is one rather self explanatory, because the wicks had formed above the WEEKLY 2.2 on 20th MAY 2019, it was apparent that there would be an actual 'candle close' test shortly afterwards on the WEEKLY, which did happen from 19-24th JUNE 2019. I'd like you to note however, what caused the initial sell off right under the 2 on the DAILY CHART. It originated from the 15MINUTE CHART, once price had reached that high wick test on the WEEKLY chart, it was up to the shorter term distributions (15m/1h/4h) to keep the distribution in that high range, price would had to have been kept above 16500 ish (according to the WEEKLY 2.2) for it to sustain the bull trend consecutively (without the small pullback it experienced), it failed to do so on the 4H chart with conviction and OF COURSE, WHEN PRICE IS UNCERTAIN, prices revert to the MEAN. Which is exactly what they did, price reverted to the DAILY and 4HOURLY MEAN and held convincingly! Great news, it means that this was a temporary pullback, and a test of the upper 2.2 WEEKLY can happen again without any 'weak hands'. This is exactly what happened and after breaching the DAILY UPPER 2.2 with a few wicks (circled) and holding ground above the DAILY 1.25, it was likely that this time the WEEKLY 2.2 would surely be broken.

3. This is where we are currently. By now hopefully it's apparent what will happen. There seems to be a test ongoing this weekly candle for the battle of the UPPER WEEKLY 2.2, a wick has definitely breached that benchmark, but no significant closes under it yet. We'll have to look to other time frames for a more comprehensive look on what's happening, smells pretty uncertain to me though. I've drawn what I think is the local support line for LINK to penetrate to confirm a move to either the WEEKLY 1.25 or ultimately the WEEKLY MEAN where uncertainty prevails. Right now the 4HOURLY MEAN is where the most uncertainty is,it seems likely that if this 4H MEAN doesn't hold, then one and/or both scenarios are viable. We look to also the DAILY UPPER 2.2 for guidance and see again that it has been wicked with a bullish candle but no CONVINCING CLOSE above it.

3a. We could now examine the lower time frames to see where we stand, the 1H shows no clear guidance in my opinion, as that too has price trading around its 1H mean, with no recent significant closes above that 1H mean.

My belief is that if LINK will try to stay afloat above th WEEKLY UPPER 1.25 which means a temporary bearish move down to around 18000, which coincides with the 4HOURLY LOWER CONTAINMENT AREA, which ultimately makes sense that a lateral period is incoming to shed distribution mass (weak hands) and to solidify that price and bring up WEEKLY/DAILY distributions to be less volatile and compress slightly before the next move.
However, if the WEEKLY UPPER 1.25 can't be held, then the next logical area for people to rebuy at would be at the point of most UNCERTAINTY, which would be the WEEKLY MEAN, by then however, there may be more data available and potentially a DAILY or 4HOURLY mean might be more palatable.

LINK is probably the most fun/vague coin to look at.

>>14843917
Thank you Anon for waiting patiently, I think TESLA will be the last one I do today. I will post it within 15 minutes.

>>14843917
>TESLA

Some things I'd like to point out beforehand.
>The slope, lack of albeit there being some slight upward slope is largely flat, on the MONTHLY 50 period chart indicates this is a period of consolidation, starting from about MARCH 2018.
>Price has reverted to the MEAN on all timeframes barring anything lower than 4HOURLY. This is the most uncertain period for a long time, and a decision on the future of price won't be made quickly or lightly, I predict there is still a lot to hash out in the smaller time frames judging from the fact that this is the first time it has MEAN REVERTED back from the LOWER MONTHLY 1.25, rather convincingly I might add.
>It's apparent that price is UNCERTAIN presently, I can therefore only make predictions based on some of the smaller timeframes, which again are rather innacurate because I don't have the larger timeframe 'bearings', well because none of the market participants know yet, the prce has reverted to the mean because it's the 'safest' area to decide and make 'rash' decisions (shoddy way of putting it)
>If this lateral period is to continue, you can expect to trade any points of CLEAR and CONVINCING MEAN REVERSION, be that shorting from the UPPER MONTHLY 1.25 down to the MEAN, and vice versa longing from the LOWER 1.25 back up to the MEAN; and of course LONGING/SHORTING FROM JUST THE MEAN.

I'll attempt to analyse the shorter time frames next.

>>14844612
Something I forgot to add.

>As this is a traditional 'stock', it's more likely to react with potential good or bad 'news', be it any advances in technology or if the market/tech sector is doing well, what are the profit/dividend reports this year, are they profitable, do investors expect future long term growth or not, has Elon Musk done something reprehensible like smoke weed again? and so on. The mean reversion we see here could be timed well with some good news (or bad).

1. The initial bearish move down to the LOWER MONTHLY and WEEKLY 1.25 bechmarks were caused by the shorter time frames not being able to hold price around that level as the distribution of price moved within the larger time frames. It seems like its most obvious on the 4HOURLY AND 1HOURLY where price wasn't able to sustain levels above the LOWER 4H 1.25 (to then move into 4HOUR MEAN REVERSION) and the UPPER 1HOUR 1.25 (which would indicate a move to try and push for higher ground testing the 1HOURLY 2.2). With nowhere else to go after the initial failure of MONTHLY and WEEKLY means, the only logical place to drop down to was the WEEKLY and MONTHLY LOWER 1.25, which it did. The next question then however is how far is price likely to drop, and is this a continuation of a bearish trend? The answer to that came from the drawing of a local support/resistance firstly, drawn in blue, the lower of the two horizontal lines, and then looking at how price reacted on lower time frames, was price respecting the lower time frame lower 2.2 benchmarks and keeping above it? The answer to this is found on the 4HOURLY and 15M charts, on the 4HOURLY chart price was very very tightly hugging the LOWER 4HOUR 2.2, which was then backed up by the 15MINUTE LOWER 2.2 being BARELY breached and NO CONVINCING closes beyond that LOWER 2.2 BENCHMARK. Of course, to save yourself the trouble you could have longed from the MONTHLY and WEEKLY LOWER 1.25 benchmarks once you had confirmation that indeed, price was not going any lower. Confirmation of that would have become clear on the 4HOURLY chart, where LOWER 1.25 held with clear water below it, and the 1HOUR MEAN (which coincided with the 4HOUR LOWER 1.25) also held with clear water below it. From then onwards it was clear sailing to the MONTHLY/WEEKLY MEAN which is where we kind of are at now.

2. This is where we are at currently. Price uncertain, but lower subset distributions (lower time frames like the 1h and below) are seemingly moving UPWARDS. Just based on the 1H chart, it seems like for now expecations are aligned for some short term BULLISH movement, this isn't to say that price will skyrocket past the mean, but we know that price will surely reach the mean (about 8-10 percent away currently), the real test will be the 4HOURLY CHART and the topmost BLUE HORIZONTAL LINE i've drawn in. If the 4H chart can sustain levels above the UPPER 1.25 and then even try to push onwards to the UPPER 2.2 with CONVICTION, it's likely we go to the UPPER 1.25 of the LARGEST TIMEFRAME PERIOD, in this case being around ~340.

Anything beyond that is up in the air, as there isn't enough short term information for me to determine what will happen if/once price reaches the uppermost 1.25 benchmark on the DAILY/WEEKLY/MONTHLY, which all seem to line up pretty well. Once/if that happens, the shorter term distributions will do well to guide you. What we hope for is that even if the MONTHLY and WEEKLY distributions stay large and volatile, the DAILY distributions should compress to reveal the range at which price will be trending for the next couple of days/1 week.

I hope the Anons who lurked/posted in this thread have gleaned some valuable information. If this thread is around tomorrow, I will gladly repeat what I've done today to the best of my ability.

is rsi and bull flag legit

>>14839075
Can't read now bc am working but I'll read it in the archive later, thanks for posting TA info anon

>>14843675
I'm not at all upset that you're taking time to help me. There's no reason to apologize. If you do it, I appreciate and intend to thank you. If you don't do it, I won't stress.

nice info , trying to learn a bit

>>14845254
I'm not sure, I guess they are, they have their uses, but do all useful profitable patterns form in bull flags, does RSI predict every overbought/sold situation? do they provide any context to the larger/smaller picture, they're to be used with something else just like all tools

>>14845102
Don't worry lad, there are some of us who went appreciate your effort. I'm a TA brainlet but I took the time to go through it, thanks.

H-How do I learn this? And where do I plot my meme lines? Also, any strategies for selling during a pump? Sell a few % below current price?

>>14845687
well you should obviously start issuing sells when it starts jumping crazy high

>>14845687
This

Any videos or online programs for learning TA?

>>14845732
How do you understand what is crazy high, though? Nobody knows the top. But is it just an eyeball?

>>14845774
well you look at the chart and if the line goes up a lot when it was down a lot then you start making your sells.
look, i'm new at this too, so for the most part, your guess is as good as mine
>is it just an eyeball
well, unless you can really read charts like this guy, have some insider knowledge, or know enough about any parts of the process to disprove bullshiters, basically, yes.

>>14845835
>im new to this too
im.. im from 2017
i just need to get my emotions in check
i have, generally, good intuition--but i cant keep my emotions stable

OP, what do you think of volume profile?

OP how profitable are you bro?

Is there really edge in learning this kind of shit or is it all in your discernment of when to follow the TA and when to countertrade it?

>>14845687
>>14845753
Try and learn the basics first, like actually try and understand them, don't just gloss over it like you know it like it's the back of your hand, you need to be able to be confident in your method (the information you know)
The basics for me were literally:
>what is a candlestick?
>how does RSI/MACD/BB/insert name here actually work?
>support and resistance, how to calculate them, how to note where pivot points are etc?
>how does trading actually work, order flow, buyers/sellers?

>literally every question you can think of until you know deeply how it works
>try out a bunch of methods, keep reading until you can see the information as the 'forest instead of individual trees'

>>14845950
Overall probably a little under broken even, but that's because I was in over my head when I started. It's a balance between using common sense and the real data, stuff like volume, volatility, price action and what they represent, and so on.
I really think the method has value, it takes only time and a few weeks to read and make notes to find out if it does or doesn't

>>14846140
You've given a lo of valuable information, thank you. But I want to know one more thing: are you in LINK?

>>14846140
The problem I see with successful TA guys is they'll talk about TA like they're married to it but in their own trading they know when to flip the switch and come out of a losing trade on top, that's all instinct and live market reaction ability not TA

>>14845901
I used to use it, i'm not sure I ever gleaned anything that valuable for me in terms of usable information to ever use it consistently or effectively, i've dropped it until I can figure out how to effectively use it

>>14846261
'Flipping the switch' instinct you could call it, more like a combo of knowledge, data, common sense, comes from being able notice points of 'movement', observing them to see if they move as you expected, and then being able to act accordingly.
>Sometimes the best trade is the trade you don't make, missed opportunity is better than a bad trade done in desperation

How deeply have you tried learning about the concepts revolved around trading? Read some books and actually form some ideas for yourself in why markets react in this or that fashion. Use the knowledge you've gained to see if reality reacts somewhat similar to how you expected, if it doesn't, adjust accordingly

I hope I don't give the impression of someone whose qualified to 'teach' people something, I just feel like I can articulate the way I see things in a way other people can hopefully absorb it and also make sense of it.
I also was just sick of seeing shit threads on /biz/, I mean it's funny to see shills, FUD, memes and that but it needs to be tempered with people actually discussing things passionately and openly

>>14846572
Is long term/investing stuff valuable background knowledge? I find those books more reasonable/interesting to read than trading even though I want to do trading

>>14846706
you certainly heightened the quality of the for me board tonight senpai

>>14839075
Haven't read your thread yet OP but it looks good. I used to believe that TA is bullshit (and I still do, as a value investing loyalist), but all of crypto is bullshit so I think it's applicable.

Which books or resources did you find most useful as you learned? Is there a TA version of The Intelligent Investor or Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits?

SUP OP
your thread seems interesting, and its good to find quality content despite the usual bullshit arround here, btw on your first book mentions you forgot a elder trading for a living (lateste vrsion), which i thnk is pretty good to start with

>>14846748
Yes I believe so, not necessary in my opinion to trade starting from 'newbie' but having more information never hurt anyone, pursue both, try and find an overlap or a way to encompass both points of view, only because that forms a more comprehensive understanding of reality

>>14846789
Probably true; but you won't make it far with that attitude fren, hah! My best recommendation for the open minded is first to learn the absolute basics, no matter how trivial atleast get some working knowledge of the concept, read a few books including the ones others and I have mentioned in this thread, form your OWN opinion in which books YOU found worthwhile/worthless.
You need to gain your own perspective firstly to see where you are in error and where you are correct.

>>14846862
That's a good book, hopefully by the end of this thread we'll have a few book recommendations from everyone here too.

If anyone wants to post a coin/stock/xyz to look at please do, i'll have a look and hopefully others can chime in if they feel like it.

>buy high, sell low

Fantastic thread OP.

Any more book recommendations?

Macro to Micro looks fantastic

>>14846976
IOTA

>>14847032

>Mark Douglas - Trading In The Zone
>Anna Coulling - Volume Price Analysis
>Mark Whistler - Volatility Illuminated
>Ray Dalio - Principles

Read a variety, look for books that challenege your preconceived ideas

>>14847130
>IOTA

The weekly candle from last week remains having touched the WEEKLY LOWER 2.2, it remains up to this weeks candle and the following weeks candle do try and keep the close well away from that bearish scenario.
It seems like price has been trying to break free for a while now, or atleast break away from being too bearish for the long term.
The circled area shows only on the DAILY and 4HOURLY time frames where the real action is happening, the WEEKLY shows little to nothing on first glance. The Daily chart clearly shows price attempting to respect and then respect the LOWER 2.2 benchmark, coincidentally or not, the highs made were respecting the 4HOURLY LOWER 1.25, two times previously, and this time seems like we've broken through.
Just a note on the two previous attempts at breaking the 4HOURLY LOWER 1.25, let's see why exactly they failed to convincingly close consecutively higher.
The 1HOUR chart reveals this information for us:
>1. The first attempt was unable to break past the UPPER 1.25, and considering we're in a bearish trend, it went back down no hesitation
>2. Even though the distribution of price had moved down on higher time frames, it STILL wasn't low enough to even break the 1HOURLY MEAN, down we go again, still looking bearish.
Both times we are respecting the DAILY LOWER 2.2, which is the reason why further bearish sentiment wasn't coming in for a rapid violent sell off.
>3. This time the price bounced off the 1HOURLY LOWER 2.2, coinciding or giving support to the idea that, short term price is moving away from the DAILY LOWER 2.2. It looks to have broken the 4HOUR LOWER 1.25 now, and if things are looking uncertain (which they are considering the WEEKLY outlook of flat lateral trading and resting along the WEEKLY LOWER 2.2, you can be the 4H chart is trying to revert to the mean, to try and make sense of this situation. Do we go further down? Do we attempt to test the WEEKLY LOWER 1.25, or even the DAILY LOWER 1.25?

>>14847130
>>14847677
I think for now price is looking to trade above the WEEKLY LOWER 2.2, just so it has a chance of being able to trade laterally for a few more weeks, only judging that by the reluctance to drop further, the push this week (the narrow weekly candle) to keep it above that benchmark.
I think it needs to close this week either very narrow and wicking above to be able to stay 'not bearish' but still lateral or choppy in price.
That would require price closing above 3088 sometime by the end of th week.
I've highlighted the level at which I think price would need to be sustained for the next 100 or so candles for the 1HOURLY chart. You can then almost bank on price attempting to breach minimum 3087, if you had bought the 4HOUR LOWER 1.25 breakout or the 1HOUR LOWER 2.2 rejection, you'd have about 5-8% even if the bullish move didn't work out, as long as you had a smart stop loss or were watching intently and reacted within reason.

Price doesn't move quickly, it's a cargo freighter carrying a bunch or smart money individuals and corporations as well as a bunch of Anon bagholders.

A lot of alts are subject to the will of BTC, don't forget that. BTC acts like the 'news of greater posperity or news of decline of wealth' to come.
>Look at the areas that i've circled, look how price reacts when BTC moves up or down, i'm not saying it happens all the time or at all the biggest move ups and down, but it surely plays a role that you need to acknowledge.

>>14847677

no one wants to touch your shitty rapefugee coin. FTM is already light years ahead

>PYX
Chose a stock at random, just looking for interesting areas that show the utility of bollinger bands.

I was just curious why this pattern appeared on the DAILY chart. Why was it 'barting' like that?

I circled the area, and added the LOWER MONTHLY 1.25 as a horizontal blue line just so we can see the containment area for that month, and subsequently, if it would hold.
I had to zoom into the 1HOURLY chart to find the answer amongst the noise.
Price was so uncertain if it wanted to push to try for higher ground that all it could do for 20 DAILY candles is fluctuate in that pattern.
It's clearer on the 1H chart, price is definitely supported around for that LOWER 1.25 area, nothing has breached it for a while, but the peski MEAN is keeping it held back.
It finally broke as participants realised this was a wasted effort for now, atleast in the short term.
Now note how price bounced EXACTLY off of the LOWER 1.25 MONTHLY, you can check for yourself, the bottom in price was 13.10, the value for the LOWER 1.25 MONTHLY was 13.10, it wicked briefly just under that.
You'll note then where the arrow is pointed, the price respected the 13.10 to such an extent, another attempt was made to breach the mean, with the market opening AT the mean and nowhere near the bearish 3.2 LOWER 1HOURLY it was headed in the direction of.

>>14848566
I think that PYX will look to try and maintain staying above the MONTHLY LOWER 1.25 and then the 4HOURLY LOWER 1.25, maybe not in that exact order, but it seems like only for a few weeks/until the next monthly candle is 'solid with data'.
There's slight downtrend overall, so it's yet to be seen if the WEEKLY MEAN will come into play, if there is an opportunity it could be a short term volatile range from ~15 - ~17.

bum[ping a quality thread for OP fren

>>14849363

bumping this thread, gonna read it all tomorrow, good job anon. never change

>>14839075
Thank you anon, this was a good read. Finally a quality thread after so so long.

>>14839075
If more people were like you and added good content rather than just bitch about the crap that's on this board and cry about "the good old days" then it will make biz great again.

>>14842004
dad shark