Still a worthwhile book to read even though the system may not work as it once did. You just have to adapt it to today's market.
I think the big change in the market since this book was written is HFT's and the markets moves much quicker than they once did.
I think a lot of the floor traders (and floor traders who made the transition to electronic trading) were scalpers and mean reversion type traders. Both of these methods are presently very difficult on an intraday basis. Hence, on an intraday basis I think the market are much more 'trendy' and move much quicker than in the past. The significant change did not happen until 2009 (in my opinion). I would be interested to know how big Fischers prop group is today?
Finally if anyone has access to the Fischer webinar, I would love to watch it.
The following user says Thank You to tflanner for this post:
You are correct .. Mark Fisher's method requires both high volatility and large stops as it is written. I found that a single measure like VIX was not successful in helping with this method since you still have small range days of consolidation in periods of higher volatility.
I could not stomach the low win rate and large stops with this method , so after much tweaking , I abandoned it several years ago.
I do think you can build a tradeable system with an edge using ORB as a guide, but not like it is written in his book and it will rely on some other methods as confluence. It looks like some others on BM's trade ORB with some other methods as confluence.. which is really not what Fisher was doing.. but it appears to work for some.
" I like to use the ACD Methodology when the market is in Vertical Development. It switches me over from a passive nature of fading the market used in Market Profile trading to an aggressive nature of hitting the bids or lifting the offers. Instead of waiting for the market to come to me, I go to it."
Very well written by the author of the link above.
The following user says Thank You to mfbreakout for this post:
the precious metals have market participants that are clustered narrow but great depth trenches,
ES and other equity based contracts have market participants that are spread out in shallow depth trenches save for the institutions, which move the markets based on their (MP / market profile) prints, even when they choose to break up their orders into smaller odd lots over time
so the essence of whom is participating comes into the volitility equation more so than what has been the historical representation of volitility, if you can distinguish between those narrow definitions. to some, I just said one equals one; to others I just gave away the essence of what makes one symbol / contract / market tick over another....
hey, what data source are you using to obtain live VIX data?