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)
Trading: Primarily Energy but also a little Equities, Fixed Income, Metals and Crypto.
Frequency: Many times daily
Duration: Never
Posts: 5,051 since Dec 2013
Thanks Given: 4,393
Thanks Received: 10,208
Not an order flow trader, or bar trader myself, so purely hypothetical, but yes that's what I was thinking.
I always advise people trading QM the crude eMini to base decisions on the CL chart not the QM chart. You comment on being stopped out in the less liquid contract on a "noise tick" is interesting and not something I have ever considered. While you can time entries and exits in Data A (less liquid) based upon Data B (more liquid), I suppose it's not possible to say, "if my stop would be triggered on Data B then stop me out on Data A.
With Bookmap/Jigsaw Vista or similar, ie a chart showing orderbook depth, there is a marked difference in the look of a QM chart compared to CL or MES compared to ES, MNQ to NQ and so on. Especially if using Rithmic data or a data feed that has full depth and not only ten layers.
I can't bring up charts now, as I don't have that data or using those programs presently, but I just remember it as something I recall from when I did do so. The fullsize products were much more defined with size resting at orders waiting for price to come to it, whereas the micro contracts at that time frequently tended to have size shadowing price up and down a constant distance above or below price. Much more what I would imagine to be algo actively.
Another point in favour of charting the fullsize product if trading the corresponding micro.
You do not win as a trader, you just get to play again the next day. If that game doesnt appeal to you then you should not trade. Gary Norden
Stepping-in late in this discussion, but I just found this thread and like the subject.
I'm not an order flow trader and don't use the DOM, but I look at ES chart, volume, tick and tape while actually trading MES.
Sometimes there is tick difference, which is not relevant in my case.
Recently I found out that VWAP on MES is different than the VWAP on ES. Logical ofcourse.
As long as you're not trading for a few ticks, my experience is that trading ES while watching orders on ES makes perfect sense.
I think itīs because, in the end, it is the same market. In futures trading you can only trade the minimum size which is 1 contract, the size of the ES mini is 1 contract and you canīt change that like you can in forex where you can trade 1 lot or 0.1 lot in the same instrument.
So they had to create a new instrument to offer 0.1 size.
In the end the chart just mirrors the ES mini, it is better to overlay the volume of the ES mini on the micro chart.