Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
This is a really interesting thread. My data feed is CQG. Not CQG Continuum but CQQ direct. I word it like that because I have a wealth of evidence that these 2 data feeds are "different", contrary to the claims by NinjaTrader that CQG Continuum is just a repackaging of CQG.
Now, to clarify I am specifically talking the chart differences when using tick data. I haven't investigated any other data series as I don't use any other data series.
I have experimented and researched this to the point of exhaustion. I have discussed with NinjaTrader who remain firm with their response that the feeds are identical. I got so granular with my testing that the only conclusion I could draw was the fact that the CQG direct feed and CQG Continuum feed were in fact slightly different. I am not talking night and day here, but very subtle tick data differences. Enough of a difference in some instances, to execute slightly different trade entries on my algorithm or not execute them at all.
The comparisons I made (with some trading friends assistance) was between 4 test beds that were as identical as I could possibly make them. And I mean identical, right down to the PC clock being within nanoseconds of each other, with the same internet feed continuously monitoring data packets to ensure consistency.
2 machines were running CQG and 2 machines were running CQG Continuum. On 1 second tick data there were visible and calculable differences between CQG and CQG Continuum feeds.
The 2 CQG machines were identical live and upon chart refresh. The 2 CQG Continuum macines were identical live and upon chart refresh. But when comparing the 2 feeds there were differences. One conclusion I came to was perhaps it involved exactly WHEN the Bid and Ask changes arrived – before a transaction or after it - else I have nothing.
Now, does any of this matter. Well, probably not. You trade what you see and any algorithm using this underlying tick data will produce signals accordingly. The problem arises when this issue means the difference between a winning day and a losing one depending on what feed you have. I have seen it and have a wealth of research to back it up.
--------------------------------------------------------
- Trade what you see. Invest in what you believe -
--------------------------------------------------------
My Principle is, “Trade what you see, Not what you think, feel, hope, expect, or hallucinate about.”
That means, it does not matter if the chart looks different on some other platform than on yours. You should concentrate on the chart on your platform and then trade what you see there.
As for the different timeframes, you should practice them and become comfortable in one of them and then stick with that.
I use tick charts exclusively using different tick values depending on the market. However, any moving averages I use always use the mean value of each bar since the the closing price of any tick bar is completely irrelevant. Works well for the way I trade
This is an extremely interesting thread - I also follow PATs methodology, and have been watching Mack's videos religiously. Lately this topic has come up quite a bit, but I don't think there's been a satisfactory explanation. But I don't think there NEEDS to be one, it's more of a preference thing - if you watch Mack's videos & your charts don't match you're not getting the most out of the videos. But it's not a huge deal in the big picture.
I agree with most of the replies so far, in that it really doesn't matter if your chart doesn't match someone else's chart & you should just trade what you see. Also IMO tick charts are arbitrary, what time they start counting determines what they look like. In fact, I've experimented with having 2 versions of the same 2000 tick chart open, with one offset by exactly 1000 ticks (I used a 1000 tick chart to find out where to change the start time of the offset chart). They give very different results, but it turned out to be way too much info to process adequately. I may go back to it someday once I've gotten more comfortable.
Anyway I kind of did a deep dive on this, and took some screenshots of a recent Mack's video & compared to mine. It's odd, but it seems like the day always starts off with our charts perfectly in sync (mine & his). But at some point they stop lining up, sometimes soon after the day session open and sometimes a little later.
For reference, I use Sierracharts with CQG data. I'm with AMP if that matters also. I start my session time at 16:30:00 and start a new bar at the session start.
The attached images are from the chart lesson on 4/14. Image 1 shows mine & Mack's before & just after the day session open (mine is Sierra Chart on the bottom). They're identical.
Chart Image 1
Then around 9:55 Eastern the bars stop lining up. I put arrows on the last bar(s) that seem to line up perfectly. After that they're off.
Chart Image 2
BUT the mystery deepens: Mack put up a Think or Swim screenshot another viewer emailed him from later in the day. He made a strong point about how ToS charts aren't reliable, and you're at a disadvantage if you use them, etc... What surprised me is that the ToS chart he showed matches my CGQ/Sierra chart EXACTLY:
Chart Image 3
So my CQG/Sierra charts match Mack's in the morning, and the Think or Swim chart later in the day (assume they match all day?). So I somewhat disagree with Mack's conclusion that ToS charts aren't accurate - they match exactly my CQG charts. The question is why do mine & Mack's diverge after matching in the overnight/early day session?
I've noticed this is the pattern - early in his trade review videos my CQG/Sierra charts match Mack's bar-for-bar. But there's always a point at which they diverge.
I'd love an answer to this, if anyone's got an idea.
That is often true. There is often a discrepancy, from one guys tick chart to another. For me a tick chart shows patterns better. And if nothing is happening, then nothing is happening and a bar isn't printing like a minute chart. The best you could do I think is to have a internet connection and computer setup like the guy your following. Cause all that stuff affects it.
Entry and exit are both interrelated. If you are in a trade, exit the trade where you think that the trend is reversing. For example (see the image), if you are in a bullish trade and you get a bearish candle at or around the top of the trend, not only exit the bullish trade but also get into a bearish trade. In this case, there was a shooting star at the top of the trend (marked with b-/x-), hence exit from a bullish trade and entry into a bearish trade.
Not a surprise, each data feed can do tick data differently. I was introduced to this "anomoly" some years back, on eSignal its called "conflation". By default, not giving ALL ticks but a subset, I'm guessing to save on their server performance. The guy with the chart where I noticed huge differences said change my tick setting, he was well aware of the issue. I don't remember now if he said cut my number in half, or double it. Like his chart was 5000 tick, and mine matched much better after I changed it to 2500 ticks (I think). You get the idea. I had conflation turned off and ticks matched much better. Bet your eyes bugged out when you saw your two charts!