Due to time constraints, please do not PM me if your question can be resolved or answered on the forum.
Need help? 1) Stop changing things. No new indicators, charts, or methods. Be consistent with what is in front of you first. 2) Start a journal and post to it daily with the trades you made to show your strengths and weaknesses. 3) Set goals for yourself to reach daily. Make them about how you trade, not how much money you make. 4) Accept responsibility for your actions. Stop looking elsewhere to explain away poor performance. 5) Where to start as a trader? Watch this webinar and read this thread for hundreds of questions and answers. 6) Help using the forum? Watch this video to learn general tips on using the site.
If you want to support our community, become an Elite Member.
The following user says Thank You to Big Mike for this post:
I voted no but it is possible, only because in general I am not a fan of subjective TA. Which includes trend lines, channels or anything else that if 1 person draws one way another person could draw another way.
However it is possible, the only issue here is determining an criterion that would determine the swing high to swing low. Simply off the top of my head, use a zig zag indicator and then have that draw a fib retracement. would work although the issues with zig zag are well known due to its redrawing. But conceptually it would be similar. Another method could be some highest high / lowest low of the some x group of bars etc etc.
possible yes, a lot of trouble for a small pay off is more likely. But then again you never know....
The following user says Thank You to treydog999 for this post:
i think they are in the since that they give you simple measurement. so if you wanted to look for at least situations, such as first target is 150 of prior swing. or price has to at least pull back 50% to consider scaling or what have you. along with vwap and other tools they serve as a measuring tool, like trend lines, not magical numbers. just my noob opinion.
For me Fibs are useful in general.
But wondering about the quantifiable way. Wouldn't quantifiable mean having a statistic on our hand?
Just thinking what kind of question such a stat should be based on.
Looks quite difficult to me how such a stat could be build.
Sure, they are useful, and they can be "quantifiable" - if you mean that there are certain retracement and/or projection levels that are more significant than others. I have been using them for years with good results, once I understood that like most tools, they cannot be used in a vacuum. When used as relative measures of support and resistance - to be confirmed with other methods - they can be very useful.
The following user says Thank You to Morpheus for this post: