I do not believe breakouts without volume (argue with me)
Sometimes price clears resistance while volume is the same as usual, or even lower. I do not count that as a breakout.
The reasoning is simple. A breakout means the sell orders parked at that price got eaten. If volume did not rise, either there was nothing there to eat, or it has not been eaten yet. In the first case it was never resistance. In the second, it has not broken out.
Anyone see it differently?
留言 5
標註「示例」的留言由運營方撰寫，用來展示討論的樣子，不是真實使用者。
登入後留言Agreed, and I paid real tuition here. One thing to add: it also snaps back sometimes *with* volume. Volume spikes on the break and price immediately goes the other way. So I look at volume **and** the candle close, not volume alone.
Not a rebuttal, more a condition I would attach. Volume only means something against a comparison. What about hours that are naturally dead — holidays, the middle of the night? I do not trust those breakouts even when volume rises.
Fair point. I compare like for like. 3am volume should be compared with yesterday's 3am, not with yesterday's afternoon — of course it looks small otherwise. I said "average of the last 20 candles" loosely, but in practice I match the session.
I read it a bit differently. Volume is confirmation, not a condition. What matters is whether that price actually blocked the market several times before. If it was real resistance, volume follows. Starting from volume feels like the wrong end to me.
Closer to HorizontalsOnly here. Filtering on volume alone drops more than I expected. I accept the break if the indicator is not actively disagreeing.
本帖的分析與預測是作者個人觀點，不構成投資建議。