Trading the ES (E mini S&P) November 2003

Status
Not open for further replies.
It appears that Mytrack may not be quoting the correct volume
and this was talked about on another thread where the volume
was very different from Mytrack to that of Tenfore. I attach a
chart from Tradestation for comparison. Although it says the 7th
of Nov it is the 5th of Nov that is displayed



Paul
 

Attachments

  • es 5th nov 03.png
    es 5th nov 03.png
    8.2 KB · Views: 728
Just look at that....the volume shows the change in trend.
Trade station data reliable T333 ?
 
It looks like volume is all over the place depending on the
package used ? This is bad news if you use volume for trading
decisions. That said I use IB as the live datafeed which ought to
be quite accurate (I hope).


Paul
 
Trader333,

I use primarily QC and www.marketvolume.com for volume readings. I find those 2 sources in sync with each other. Which makes me trust what i am seeing on QC (unless thez some global conspiracy :) )
 
I thought I'd read somewhere that IB only reports (having difficulty describing this) sections of the volume, not 100% of it. So they are effectively filtering some of it out as otherwise it would just overload the systems. I'm sure someone can expand on this, but I was left with the impression that relying on the volume recorded via IB is not ideal if you are trading on volume. Which is why I don't use IB's volume feed as I trade on volume.

On the four charts posted above, the difference is most noticeable in the first six 10 minute bars of Nov 5.

So stoploss's eSignal feed is virtually identical to my Lycos (Qcharts) feed.
 
Trader333,

Yes, mytrack volume is out on the ES (probably on everything, but haven't checked). However it isn't out by as much as your TS chart suggests.

Here I have actual globex volume figures for ESZ3 vs mytrack figures for the first 5 minutes of 05/11.

Globex:
--------
08:30-- 3,361
08:31-- 1,533
08:32-- 868
08:33-- 1,290
08:34-- 2,789

MyTrack:
----------
08:30-- 3,221
08:31-- 664
08:32-- 424
08:33-- 891
08:34-- 2,489

Really isn't that difficult to work out why MyTrack's volume is out. Essentially they are employing a tick throttling mechanism (similar to that employed by Q-Charts on options and TSE data once upon a time). You only get a tick when the ES trades at a different price (i.e. not when it trades at the same price). Missing ticks... hence missing volume.

If you rely on volume for your trading and you have MyTrack then you really do have the wrong quote vendor I'm afraid. Mind you, Q-Charts is not without it's problems (but that's a whole different can of worms).
 
Last edited:
I am finding this all very interesting. I have looked at the market
volume site and would like to know if their data can be fed into
another application ?

Skim,

Yes I remember this IB issue being discussed but I cant
remember exactly what was said. However I only need the data
to be correct over a 5 minute timescale. The Tradestation chart
posted is data downloaded at the end of the day from
historybank.

I have been looking into the IQ datafeed who claim to be cutting
out the middle man and providing data direct from the exchanges
so any comments on them would be welcome.

Whilst I dont currently trade the S&P, I have been developing a
strategy to do so which is heavily based on the use of volume.

I noticed that the volume quoted for the main S&P gives different
buy and sell signals in my strategy than volume for the ES and
yet the ES follows the main contract (I believe). I have also
noticed that if I use a main S&P chart and volume to provide
signals but then trade the ES that my success rate improves. So I
may well go for a data feed for the main S&P but use the signals
to trade the ES.

Has anyone else noticed this or am I misleading myself ?


Paul
 
Hi Paul
I have noted that
volume on IB is different on Mytack on ES Minis
Both are different from ESignal

But I find in my trading it makes no difference: all that matters is volume relative to prior periods.. and if it's all consistently wrong then it makes no difference..

but as my trading is based on price with volume to guide me.. then as long as price is the same (which it is NOT of course as IB - particularly at peaks- can be as much as 5 secs ahead of mycarp..)
 
madasafish,

Yes price on IB should be correct but I am concerned about
volume and wonder just how relative it is to the reality


Paul
 
Paul,

Volume reported on the pit traded S&P is of course just tick volume, since real volume isn't available until the next day.

Unlikely that MyTrack would throttle ticks on the large contract so it may well be more "representative" of the real deal. It is still only tick volume though.
 
Paul,

If you want to figure out how accurate IB reported volume is just do a comparison minute by minute against the globex time & sales for any given day.

The globex time & sales is downloadable from the ftp area of the cme website. It requires a bit of tinkering around with to get it into an understandable format but if you have concerns it is probably worth the effort.

The cme ftp area is an invaluable resource. It used to be essential to know how to get to the full day's time & sales for resolving disputes on the large contract. However, I guess now that so many people just trade the e-mini they don't ever bother looking at the logs. Shame really, there is a LOT to be learned if you can be bothered to go through the full time & sales for several days. As I mentioned above, if nothing else, you can use it to verify the quality of the data from your quote vendor.

Thanks for the reminder about IQ. Will add them to my list. And if MyTrack doesn't stack up this month I may try IQ next month. I too would be very interested in feedback from anybody that's used them as I have concerns about the viability of vendors supplying every tick on every contract (unfiltered), due to previous experiences.

MyTrack are only my fourth quote vendor in 6 years and I only signed up this week, so I haven't yet got round to objectively evaluating the timeliness of their quotes. So, I'm particularly interested in those comments from madasafish.
 
Last edited:
Sandpiper,

I will try and do the comparison from downloadable data at the CME and see how it compares.


Paul
 
Paul,

OK. For your reference:

http://www.cme.com/dta/hist/ftp_gtimeandsales3098.html

should be the link you want. Once you download the zip file for the date you are interested in, the .iom file is the one you want to extract (for the ESZ3) contract.

Just reply on here if the data format doesn't make any sense once you've downloaded it and I can give you a hand if necessary.
 
Paul,

never tried to feed www.marketvolume.com data into any other application. I'd assume it wudnt be that str8-4ward as it is a proprietary site and they charge for their subscriptions. However, if u go for some sort of paid subscription, u may be able to get some concessions from them - I just never looked into that.
 
Sandpiper

I track the European futures (Dax, SMI) I have in the Past used Tenfore & BIS datafeed's.......I have now switched to using Quotetracker with IQ as the feed, have only had it running for 3-4 weeks, so far I am most impressed.

they certainly seem as reliable as Tenfore, the cost is obviously much better with good service to boot.

hope this helps

Jay
 
don't know why nobody has posted ES stuff here for a few days....

I'll start it off again anyway..

An interesting day (if a bit frustrating). Days like today give good "keys" to subsequent action though, so they are not all bad.

Of particular interest:

01) Congestion area from yesterday.

02) Pivot zone co-incides with previous congestion.

03) Key area of congestion again.

The whole day forming an obvious triangle/wedge with a breakout to the downside. The apex of the congestion wedge co-incides with tomorrow's pivot. High and Lows co-incide with tomorrows R1/S1.

Should lead to an interesting day tomorrow. A test of TD low then up or a test of TD high then down? Who knows.....
 

Attachments

  • es 5m chart gif.gif
    es 5m chart gif.gif
    27.7 KB · Views: 597
Last edited:
just a quote from Mr T. Wood - I wud not comment on this personally. makes a rather tickling reading. :)

quote:

As I read about the Bull and Bear markets of the late 1800s and very
early 1900s, it becomes apparent that the Bull markets Mr. Dow wrote
about were the upward movements of the 4-year cycle and the Bear
markets were the downward movements of the 4-year cycle.

As our country became more and more sophisticated and more people
started investing, the Bull and Bear periods became longer. Bull and
Bear markets evolved into a series of multiple 4-year cycle periods.
For example, the Bull market from 1921 to 1929 was a period of two 4-
year cycles. The low in November 1929 was a 4-year cycle low. The
rally, "Secondary Reaction," that followed was the upside of
a 4-year
cycle that topped in only 5 months. Again, any top that has occurred
in 20 months or less has historically taken out the previous 4-year
cycle low. Once this "Secondary Reaction" was over, the DJIA
moved
down below the previous 4-year cycle low and into the 1932 4-year
cycle low, which proved to be the Bear market bottom.

I would also like to point out the 1921 to 1929 Bull market advanced
a total of 568% from the 1921 4-year cycle low at 67 on the DJIA to
the 1929 4-year cycle top at a high of 381 on the DJIA.

The next great Bull market began with the 4-year cycle low in 1942
and ran to the 4-year cycle top in 1966. This time the
"Primary" Bull
market comprised a series of six 4-year cycles. The Bear market that
followed was also a series of 4-year cycles. From the 1966 4-year
cycle top, the Bear market moved down into the 1974 Bear market low.
This was a series of two 4-year cycles.

The second great Bull market advanced a total of 1,076% from the 1942
4-year cycle low at 93 on the DJIA to the 1966 4-year cycle top at a
high of 1,001 on the DJIA. The bear market that followed ran from the
1966 high to the 1974 4-year cycle low at 570 on the DJIA.

From a cyclical perspective, the last and Greatest Bull market of all
time began with the 1974 4-year cycle low and ran to the recent 4-
year cycle top in January 2000. This "Primary" Bull market
comprised
a series of seven 4-year cycles.

This Great Bull market advanced a total of 2,061% from the 1974 4-
year cycle low of 570 on the DJIA to the January 2000 high of 11,750
DJIA. I can assure you; this Great Bear market is just beginning.

How Long Will The Bear Market Last?

As you can see, each Bull and Bear market has been a longer series of
4-year cycles and the percentage advancement of each Bull market has
been roughly double the previous Bull market's percentage
advancement. The Bear markets have indeed lengthened in terms of the
series of the number of 4-year cycles as well.

Now, I want to focus on the Bear market declines. The 1921 to 1929
Bull market was 8 years in duration and the 1929 to 1932 Bear market
was 3 years. The Bear market duration was 37.5% of the preceding Bull
market. The 1942 to 1966 Bull market was 24 years in duration and the
1966 to 1974 Bear market was 8 years. This Bear market duration was
33.3% of the preceding Bull market. The last Bull market ran from
1974 to 2000 and was 26 years in duration. Some argue that the last
Bull market began in 1982. I understand that argument, however, from
a cyclical perspective the Bull market began in 1974. 1982 was when
the Bull market broke out and became apparent. The point I am trying
to make obvious here is that this Bear market is just beginning. It
was not over with the October 2002 low. Based on the relationships of
the Bull and Bear markets of the past we are not very likely to see
the bottom of this Bear market before 2008 and possibly as late as
2010. I say 2008 because that would be roughly 33% of the duration of
the preceding Bull market. A bottom in 2010 would be closer to the
37.5% decline seen with the first Bear market. From a Cyclical
perspective, this Bear market will have to end with a 4-year cycle
low. I would say that we should expect the bottom with either the
2006 4-year cycle low and possibly not until the 2010 4-year cycle
low.

How Low Could it Go?

My minimum price objective for this Bear market based on my technical
studies take the S&P 500 down to approximately 315 and the DJIA down
to about 3,000. These targets are also confirmed if I apply a
fundamental measure, based on historical P.E. ratios. Let me explain.
At bear market bottoms P.E. ratios a found to be roughly equal to the
dividend yields. For example, in 1932 the yield on the S&P 500 was
10.50 with a P.E. just under 10. In 1942 the yield was 8.71 with a
P.E. of 7.3. In 1974 the yield was 5.9 and the P.E. was 7.24. In 1982
the yield was 6.2 and the P.E. was 6.9. Today the yield on the S&P is
1.7 and the P.E. is 30. Based on today's earnings a P.E. or 10
would
take the S&P 500 down to 348. In order for the S&P 500 to produce a
yield of 6% it would have to sell at 292 while a yield 8% would mean
that the S&P 500 would sell at 219. I know most people are probably
saying, "no way that will happen" and that is exactly what I
heard
back in 2001 when I was calling for a decline into the mid 7,000
range in late 2002. I can assure you this bear market is NOT over and
this forecast is highly probable.

Tim W. Wood, CPA
Editor, Cycles News & Views
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top