Can anyone make a thread about: 'how to make profit' + proof?

Where's the proof? I see a lot of writing, but very little proof behind any of it.

Thank you so much for the detailed reply! Do you use slope degrees in your trading, if so, how?

I agree fully with your statement. As is stated in the first #1 post, the new OP may choose whether or not to use my template. For now, the example is clear on what template he (the OP) should use. I hope you are interested to fill a role on gathering info to benefit this thread on how to make profit.

The market contains repetitive characteristics in the market. How can you exploit this? There are many authors (namely Sloman) that cover this topic. In this post I will show the characteristics of a good order block.

Before we get into the details, let’s examine how an order block looks like and what characterizes a good order block. Here are the key points of an order block:

1. An order block is created after a long and strong trend. The order block then looks like a market top or bottom
2. Price leaves the order block with a high momentum breakout and/or starts a new trend when leaving the order block
3. Price should not stay too long in a range during the creation of the order block

Please watch this YT video: https://www.tradeciety.com/how-to-fi...ding-strategy/

Hi michaellobry
No, no slope degrees I just take each trade as it comes along. No thinking involved at all, no support or resistance, no indicators (except the MA), just managing each trade as it goes along. Just trading the probabilities!

Hello Rover,

please post more detail...

Thanks and Regards,
anton

I have already posted details antonsatu, post 80

What other details would you like?

Thanks for reply.
Would you please teach more?
Regards,

Forex is not a zero-sum-game. Forex order flow:

"Some skeptics argue that the order flow driving exchange rates is irrational, and therefore does not
represent information. Well, irrationality is always a possibility. But even if part of the order flow is
determined irrationally, if this part is affecting prices, then it is because rational players view offsetting
these orders fully as being too risky. In this case, the resulting effect on prices is a portfolio-balance
effect—the adjustment in price is exactly that required to induce the rational players to step in. Even in
this case, then, order flow is conveying information about equilibrium risk premiums." - page 4

Osler (2001). She finds that stop-loss
orders on the buy (sell) side tend to cluster at prices just above (below)
round numbers, which can cause trends to gain momentum once support
and resistance levels are crossed.
public
information flow is virtually uncorrelated with the direction of exchange-
rate movements (at horizons of one year or less). - page 5

Order Flow Does Not Have to Sum to Zero. The Evans and Lyons (1999)
model shows why order flow between dealers does not have to sum to zero.
Conceptually this is important, because many people are under the mistaken
impression that order flow must sum to zero (and therefore that any
flow measure that correlates positively with price must be unrepresentative
in some way). This is not always the case. - page 6

The FX market has undergone important changes over the last ten years.
Perhaps the most important change is the shift from voice-based interdealer
brokers to electronic interdealer brokers. This trend away from humanintermediated
transactions is evident in many securities markets throughout the
world.12 It shows no sign of abating.
The shift from voice-based interdealer brokers to electronic brokers is important
in itself because electronic brokers provide a different (mostly higher)
level of order-flow transparency than was provided by the voice-based brokers.
This alters dealers’ information sets, which affects their trading strategies.
A larger implication of the shift to electronic brokers, however, is that it
suggests a future for spot FX trading that is more centralized, electronic, and—
this is the crucial part—open to customers. Major markets will shift toward a
structure with open, electronic limit-order books that are accessible to a large
number of market participants.13 Under this scenario, institutions I have been
calling “customers” would be able to provide liquidity to one another, rather than
having to depend wholly on dealers. At that point, they would cease being
customers—in the sense of always demanding liquidity—transformed instead into
both liquidity demander and supplier.
How can one be confident that the market is going in this direction? Three
pieces of evidence support this view. First, in June of 2000, three investment
banks (Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter) announced
that they will be launching an electronic system of this kind for the US
bond markets (government and corporate bonds). The past structure of the US
bond market shares many characteristics with FX markets. Though several equity
and derivatives markets have already shifted to a centralized-electronic structure,
those markets do not share the same FX-market characteristics that the
bond markets share, and are therefore not as appropriate as models. Second, in
the last year, new companies have introduced forms of centralized FX trading for
customers (e.g., FXall.com, FXchange, FXconnect, Atriax, Gain.com,
MatchbookFX.com, among others). These new companies typically promote
themselves as operating at the fringes of the dealer-market structure, coexisting
with it. But there is nothing obvious that prevents one of them from growing to a
scale that captures the network externalities inherent in concentrating liquidity
into a single pool.14
The third piece of evidence that, in my judgment, points to more centralized
FX trading in the future is that existing interdealer systems like EBS can be
opened to customer-companies quite easily. (EBS is an electronic trading system—
a limit-order book—that is available only to dealers.) The customer relationships
are there: banks that own EBS are the same banks that have customer
relationships via their dealing services. The technology is not a major hurdle; the
switch could be flipped in much the same way as it promises to be flipped in the
US bond markets. What might the catalyst be? A natural catalyst would be
significant growth in market share by one of the new electronic entrants. If EBS
decided to open its system to customers, it would be difficult for any competitor
to beat it. From the EBS perspective, it is essential to maintain the threshold
effects of network externalities in its favor—if the market is going in the direction
of centralized customer trading, EBS cannot afford to wait.
Does immanent market-structure change threaten the relevance of the order-
flow analysis? My answer should not surprise anyone who has read this far.
Order-flow analysis is not concerned only with whether the market is organized
with a single dealer, multiple dealers, or a limit-order book. The role of order
flow in conveying information transcends market structure. And the types of
information that order flow conveys—particularly the types with persistent price
effects—are not likely to change radically when (if) the FX market structure
changes in the future. Put another way, the underlying information structure of
this market has more to do with the properties of the asset being traded—foreign
exchange—than it does with the market structure per se. Order flow will continue
to tell us something about people’s view on how public information should
be mapped into price. It will continue to tell us something about current risk
preferences and endowments. In short, it will continue to convey dispersed
information that needs to be aggregated. And that is what the FX market is all
about. - page 12

See screenshot:
The top panel illustrates the connection between fundamentals and price in macro-fundamental
analysis: information about fundamentals is public, and so is the mapping to price, so price adjustment
is direct and immediate. The middle panel illustrates order-flow analysis. The focus in that case is
information that is not publicly known. This type of information is first transformed into order flow

☛ "The technical analyst sees only a small part of the total picture. Price charts show HOW price behaves (the EFFECT -- above the water in the image), while the underlying drivers combine in tug-of-war fashion to determine WHY (the CAUSE -- beneath the water in the image). Because the cause always precedes the effect, TA/PA is lagging.
☛ All Technical Analysis (TA) / Price Action (PA) is derived from price data that has already occurred. Some folk believes that PA is leading. But (for example) by the time a pin-bar on a 1-hour chart has formed/closed, its extreme price has been left behind -- and even an indicator-based crossover (on a shorter TF) might have given an earlier signal. Perhaps the best chart-based tool you'll found is S&R (or S&D zones, if you prefer). Now, the reason: it is caused by institutional order flow, that seeks to exploit vagaries in liquidity.
☛ Is it possible to profit from TA alone? Absolutely YES.
☛ Most money manager uses TA... But TA practitioners are nonetheless at a disadvantage, in that TA/PA lags price, and price itself lags its drivers, in an industry where the speed of access to quality info can provide a competitive advantage. Some of the tools used by institutions are available to retail traders. For example, charts like Order Flow Analytics (OFA), footprint and bookmap it can get the trader one step nearer the action, by providing a liquidity map.
☛ A lot of algo-based trading is based around liquidity imbalances, for the obvious reason that heavyweights seek best-price fills with the least slippage. And if many large institutions trade according to the same principles, then their actions will likely have a cumulative effect, creating repetitive and potentially exploitable patterns." — by Hanover —

...other explanations below :

☛ “Technicals move only with fundamentals behind it. And at times... Technicals move ahead of Fundamentals. Market buys (or sells) on anticipation of profit. Always, it is an intuition for profit. And whatever fears there are — political, social or economic — are calculated risks in business.” — by Harry G. Liu —

☛ Why Technicals move ahead of Fundamentals? “Sometimes, too much speculation drives the price and added with some greed, the technical will lead too much ahead of its fundamentals that will cause the price to correct, consolidate...then either it breaks out to start, resume or end a trend.”

☛ It affects the price as an example... The price movement in terms of correlation, wherein positive & negative between pairs or crosses exist. This can turn to “normal” at any time, making though a pair to fall and the other to fall slower or to go sideways. There is also the possibility for a pair to rally in order to “reach” the other pair in terms of their prevalent correlation (positive or negative).

☛ Then on charts, you'll notice a price divergence and/or convergence and other times a price consolidation occurs before a break-out or respect to certain price inflection points (S&D or S&R or Pivot levels, Fibs... etc.).

“Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.” ― by John Maynard Keynes ―

☛ Markets aren't efficient and that they are subject to herd behavior.

☛ If you're smart and rational you'll see the irrationality long before the market does.

☛ That is, even if you are right that the market should go up (or down), the weight of opinion can keep that from happening for an unpredictable length of time. And during that time the market may go opposite to the 'right' direction.

☛ “Markets can remain irrational” - this implies contrary to old school economics that markets are sometimes irrational. Old school economics asserts that markets are always rational because they are stable and self-correcting due to the fact the participants are rational. Unfortunately, with masses of people there are manias of optimistic greed and pessimistic fear. This is because people observe their peers, both optimists and fear are contagious. Often times this contagion becomes universal. Old school ECONOMICS or even algo based systems FAILS to account for this HUMAN REALITY. Though there are Artificial Intelligence systems that collectively read news and sentiments via rss feeds, tweets, headlines, API services, etc... that may sum up as some type of human behavior.

☛ “longer than you can remain solvent” - old school economics assumes that an economic collapse cannot exist when supply and demand relentlessly spiral downwards to zero. That is because when everyone cuts back on consumption in response to uncertainty the paradox of thrift begins. Demand falls which induces further cuts in consumption. This was most recently evidenced in the depression of the 30's and for a brief period in late 2008 / early 2009. The modern policy response is to stimulate demand by government stimulus. What is logical for a single person, a cutback in consumption is fatal when implemented by all people. The key factor here is confidence. The economy cannot survive without the rational assurance of confidence which has to be guaranteed by the government as a last resort if the market fails to create it.
Quoted from: https://www.forexfactory.com/showthr...3#post11614533