Wed 5 Mar 2008
The Initial Balance: Two or Three 30-Minute Periods?
Posted by ray under Written Plan
Before I delve into today’s topic, I’d like to tell you of a great bonus to my readers. From time-to-time, I’ll post the Camtasia file of my trading diary in order to illustrate a point. The idea of using Camtasia as part of my journal came from Dr. Brett Steenbarger (http://traderfeed.blogspot.com/). Thanks Dr. Brett, this is one of the best ideas that have come across my desk.
How do I use this idea? I record my thoughts on Camtasia as I trade and then review the day and create a written summary. That way, my record of the trade is not influenced by the vagaries of memory.
You can view my Cam file for March 04 2008 at http://www.tradingsuccess.com
As you will hear in the Cam file, I was concerned at the lack of thrust down on the breach of 1310 and the failure to develop a trend day range. When in the K period, the market started to rally, I decided firstly to exit the shorts executed 1319. And when it was clear that the market would close above 1310, I closed out all shorts at 1323.25
———————————————–
Most books on the Market Profile state that the Initial Balance is the first two 30-minute periods. The authors calculate these periods from the start of the session. I take the view that this practice does not achieve the outcome for which the Initial Balance was designed.
To understand why this is so, we need to go back to the original ideas of Peter Steidlmayer.
When he first wrote about the Profile, all markets opened at a half hour either at the ‘30′ or at ‘00′, Peter took the view that the range of the first 60 minutes was set by the day timeframe trader i.e. those that initiated and closed out trades on the same day. The range after the first 60 minutes was set by the other timeframe trader (anyone not a day trader). He then based the Day Type, Open type, etc around this distinction.
The Initial Balance for the ES was always one surrounded by controversy. Initially it was set at the K period - recognizing the schizophrenic nature of the ES. Often the market changes its nature in the ‘K’ period. Dalton published research in his newsletter that showed the superiority of using the first 90 minutes of ES trading as the Initial Balance; the K period was a period to watch for reversal of the intra-day trend or an acceleration of the intra-day trend.
Prior to this research being published, the financial markets started opening minutes before 7:30 (CT); for example Bonds opened at 7:20 am (CT). The question that arose was whether the 60 minutes should be measured from 7:20 or would it be better to treat the 7:20 to 7:30 as a 30-minute period. Most publications opted for 7:20.
I took a different tack. I asked myself if the other timeframe trader came in because 60 minutes had expired or because of the time e.g. in the Bonds, did he come in because it was now 8:20 (because it was 60 minutes from the open) or did he come in after 8:30 (because it was 8:30 - whatever the reason). Using Peter’s ideas that Range Extension and Extremes are created by the other timeframe trader and that by measuring these parameters we could derive an idea of future direction, we tested the two time periods for robustness.
We found that treating a time period i.e. 8:30 am (CT) as the time the other timeframe trader commenced his activities was a more robust indicator of a market’s direction.
So for this reason, I use the first three 30-minutes for the ES and where the market does not open at the ‘30′ or ‘00′. Using the correct Initial Balance is not a matter of academic interest. You will have very different results e.g. whether or not you have a 3i Day depending on what standard you use. In turn, the differences have a material impact on your bottom line.
—————————————————————————————
BTW: a 3i Day is a Free Exposure trade i.e. a trade where the worst result is usually a scratch trade if you act in the Initial Balance of the day following the 3i day.
Another free exposure trade is the Neutral day closing in the Upper or Lower quartile of the range. For example, the March 4 day ended up being a Neutral Day closing in the upper quartile. This gives us a free exposure to the long side in the 1st 90 minutes of trading today.



























March 5th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Comment on your short trade on Mar 4th
1) This day doesnt seem likely to be a trend day because we dont really have a strong opening drive down from the open. In fact, i thought it will have have opening drive up at the end of 1st 30 min.
2) The market didn’t attract selling activities as they made new lows at 13:00 - 14:30 EST and the day’s profile is not elongated and is developing more of a “b” shape setup - Longterm buyers buying from short term sellers. Furthurmore, the market took out an important bracket low and all the short term players are likely to be short (that’s a guess), when the laggard shorts doesnt get rewarded, they will need to cover into the close because they are not likely gotta take the position home.
As Dalton says in markets in profile, this setup a asymetric risk/reward trade to the upside. But it is a hard trade because it goes against human nature to get long on a breakdown of a bracket low.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Hi
I couldn’t agree more.
At the end of the day, we don’t have a trend day down.
But this turn of events only became obvious in the J period - on the break to new lows with no increase in momentum. Had the momentum increased at the point, we’d probably have a different day type to the one we ended up with.
It was this lack of momentum that caused me to exit shorts when in the K period the market started to rally.
On the other hand, I would not go long. I don’t trade against the trend of the timeframe I am trading. Since I perceive that as a downtrend, I’ll cover shorts and take profits but won’t initiate long positions.
Thanks for your comments.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Sharing this link following the interview by Jennifer Alejandro of Channel NewsAsia at:
http://jenniferalejandro.com/2008/02/29/the-leap-year-phenomenon.aspx
on the Leap Year Phenomenon.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:19 am
ISM’s Service index report came in at 49.3 and above economists’ 47.3 consensus estimate. This reading is marked improvement over January’s 44.6 reading.
Gold, the traditional barometer of inflation, has the clearest direction for me.
I just monitored my GC, selling as it went up and close to the high of the day ie $991.9. I am flat now and look to buy when it pulls back today.
The other evil twin, Crude, put in a new intraday high of $104.95 per barrel on the NYMEX. Eventually it closed at $104.45, in spite of OPEC announcing it will keep production levels unchanged.
Quote
Ambac released its plan for saving itself…again…and the upside reversal we saw based on anticipation of the plan…again…has disintegrated…again.
Unquote
With such rumours circulating AGAIN,it was a fake breakdown yesterday.
March 6th, 2008 at 2:33 am
Sharing:
Comment following link to CNA on Presidential & Leap Year Phenomenon:
3/5/2008 10:49 PM Ana wrote:
I concur that this Presidential Year and Leap Year Phenomenon will pose a different scenario due to the 3 Bubbles facing us which will have a trickle down effect globally.
Reply to this
Leave a comment