Registered User
Joined: 5/6/2009
Posts: 10
|
Why is there no concern for the lack of volume with this bull run?
No one, CNBC et. al. seems to be discussing this. Where the he!! is the volume?
Falling volume on a increase in price is just plain suspect.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,181
|
Yes, couple that with the bullish looking charts that were developing over the last few weeks in the VIX or VXN.
It's getting curiouser and curiouser.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/15/2006
Posts: 132
|
I thought for sure the Fib cycle that came in on the 24th was going to be it. A different cycle I use also came due on the 24th so looking at the pattern and the volume I went inverse etf and put shopping.
Just goes to show the market will but the hurt on as many people as possible.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 5/6/2009
Posts: 10
|
And the volume just continues to dwindle.
Do this - put a 200 day ma in one color and a 5 day ma in another color on your volume bars.
It's just dismal. Makes you wonder why this market is going higher. Seriously, if there is NO volume, what is the driving force here?
I do not trust market makers and traders. One has to wonder if they're behind this.
I once had a good broker tell me they are all charlitans and theives. I tend to believe him, although I thought he was nuts at the time.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/19/2004
Posts: 415
|
QUOTE (Linebacker) And the volume just continues to dwindle.
Do this - put a 200 day ma in one color and a 5 day ma in another color on your volume bars.
It's just dismal. Makes you wonder why this market is going higher. Seriously, if there is NO volume, what is the driving force here?
I do not trust market makers and traders. One has to wonder if they're behind this.
I once had a good broker tell me they are all charlitans and theives. I tend to believe him, although I thought he was nuts at the time.
Distribution?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 6/6/2005
Posts: 1,157
|
Volume desn't make the market go higher -- more buyers than sellers make the market go higher. I think a good question to ask is, why are there more buyers than sellers? Or who is buying? You could have a few big buyers and a ton of little sellers or the other way around -- a ton of little buyers (maybe retail traders) and a few large sellers.
Anyone in this market could be a thief...we all want it to go up or down according to our trades. If we had the power and the size we might even play some games to get it there -- but you can only do that short term...
If you're trading against the rise -- don't worry about whose making the market go up -- just be sure to keep your stops -- don't add to losing trades, and only take small contrarian positions until your idea is proven correct -- or wait until the turn comes and trade the trend, not the anticipated move.
Good luck all.
David John Hall
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/31/2005
Posts: 266
|
QUOTE (Linebacker) Why is there no concern for the lack of volume with this bull run?
No one, CNBC et. al. seems to be discussing this. Where the he!! is the volume?
Falling volume on a increase in price is just plain suspect.
cnbc? lol? they are the media's market cheerleaders. if you watch bloomberg it seems like entirely different news.
volume is a concern, along with these oversold conditions. time to tighten up the stops, and look for some shorts. however, price is the ultimate indicator. as long as the trend is up and intact, trade it. otherwise, stay on the sidelines for now.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/31/2005
Posts: 266
|
QUOTE (driger) QUOTE (Linebacker) Why is there no concern for the lack of volume with this bull run?
No one, CNBC et. al. seems to be discussing this. Where the he!! is the volume?
Falling volume on a increase in price is just plain suspect.
cnbc? lol? they are the media's market cheerleaders. if you watch bloomberg it seems like entirely different news.
volume is a concern, along with these oversold conditions. time to tighten up the stops, and look for some shorts. however, price is the ultimate indicator. as long as the trend is up and intact, trade it. otherwise, stay on the sidelines for now.
sorry, overbought conditions.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/31/2005
Posts: 266
|
If you look at the indexes rather than the etf's, volume did "expand' at the beginning of the rally, from the bull flag. so, although volume has not been great, it has been adequate, and expanded during advances.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/4/2009
Posts: 1
|
It appears to me that volume has been on a steady decline since the rally began after the March 9 low. It is a concern to me as well. Without broad participation it makes you wonder just who is trading. Did I hear someone say GS??
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 6/6/2005
Posts: 1,157
|
This is pretty interesting...
Market takes 17 months to drop 55% -- market takes 4 months to gain 46%. If time is money, these charts are very interesting to me.
David John Hall
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
spy has risen 46% from the bottom in short amount of time, yet its only a 38% retracement of the total decline from the top.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 6/6/2005
Posts: 1,157
|
I know. It's very interesting to me -- this is the first bull I've traded through. If you followed pattern trading you wouldn't have been in at the exact bottom but you wouldn't have been out at the exact top.
It makes me want to sit out as many declines as I can (I'm not the biggest fan of goign short anyway) and only looking for bottom patterns after big declines.
I know you trade patterns alot funnymoney. What do you think about the speed of the rise vs. the decline? Is it a matter of you'd make more money trading short than sitting cash in the decline so why sit out?
I made more money going long after March in these few months than I did going short over the last 18 months (as I said -- going short is already not my strong point -- I did okay but not great at all when all said and done).
Just thinking aloud...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 6/6/2005
Posts: 1,157
|
That was supposed to "bear I've traded through" not bull.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
QUOTE (davidjohnhall) I know. It's very interesting to me -- this is the first bull I've traded through. If you followed pattern trading you wouldn't have been in at the exact bottom but you wouldn't have been out at the exact top.
It makes me want to sit out as many declines as I can (I'm not the biggest fan of goign short anyway) and only looking for bottom patterns after big declines.
I know you trade patterns alot funnymoney. What do you think about the speed of the rise vs. the decline? Is it a matter of you'd make more money trading short than sitting cash in the decline so why sit out?
I made more money going long after March in these few months than I did going short over the last 18 months (as I said -- going short is already not my strong point -- I did okay but not great at all when all said and done).
Just thinking aloud...
with the super bull being from 1982-2000, most of us haven't seen many bears, and haven't had to worry about considering overall market environment when picking stocks. i'm keying off the indexes position in relation to the 50 dma now when i decide whether to look for longs or shorts or hit the sidelines. if you didn't lose a good chunk of money, in the bear, be happy, i know plenty that did.
if you look at the decline from september to december of last year it was also quite sharp and fast. i really don't make much of the speed of the rise, just that its a v-bottom, typical of bear rallys, fast and furious, and may fade quickly.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2009
Posts: 97
|
That chart above also shows SPY down 42% in seven months, which is a bit more comparable to being up 46% in five.
Still, the speed of this uptrend has been massive by all historical accounts. I'm primarily an options trader and we're almost conditioned to "beware the downside" because movement generally occurs so much faster and to such a larger extent than to the upside. Not always true since the latter portion of last year, however.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 6/6/2005
Posts: 1,157
|
I think not much is always true since the latter portion of last year. LOL The chart above is still down 55% in 17 months. No arguing that. We're talking highs to lows here as in a cycle. Don't need to make it comparable if it's not comparable.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/19/2004
Posts: 415
|
QUOTE (davidjohnhall)
Volume desn't make the market go higher -- more buyers than sellers make the market go higher....
David John Hall
I would make a small point with that statement, sicne there are an equal number of buyers and sellers(unless the total float changes by the company). I believe that a more accurate thought would be that BUYERS are more willing to pay higher and higher prices.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 6/6/2005
Posts: 1,157
|
Hi BK,
I agree with your clarification, but, as I understand it, there is not a buyer for every seller. There is an equal number of shares sold for those bought. But you could have one big seller selling a block of 10,000 shares and you could have 100 buyers buying 100 shares each. In that case you would have 1 seller and 100 buyers.
But still yes, they are willing to pay higher prices. I like that. Thanks.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/19/2004
Posts: 415
|
QUOTE (davidjohnhall) Hi BK,
I agree with your clarification, but, as I understand it, there is not a buyer for every seller. There is an equal number of shares sold for those bought. But you could have one big seller selling a block of 10,000 shares and you could have 100 buyers buying 100 shares each. In that case you would have 1 seller and 100 buyers.
But still yes, they are willing to pay higher prices. I like that. Thanks.
Yes, and that is correct, I should have said the number of shares traded.
|
|
|
Guest-1 |