Original subtitles

Very long -term structures.

What happens when we observe structures that have taken a long time to develop?

Those ranging from months to years.

Are there traders who are building positions across all that time?

Well, this is the fundamental principle of the Wyckoff method.

So, from a theoretical point of view, the answer would be yes.

But we already know it's action, not theory, that generates a profit.

It is time then to draw an operational conclusion from this idea.

My point of view is that the idea that there are traders who could be building

their position for months or years seems unlikely, although anything is possible

in the market.

If we think logically, in really liquid markets, these large traders shouldn't

find too many problems in meeting their liquidity requirements.

Assets for which the participation is low might be a different matter.

This is where an inexplicable aspect of the methodology emerges.

Even applying logic, we may continue to see very long -term structures that meet

all the analytical characteristics of price and volume, as in the following

-US dollar monthly futures chart.

Is it really possible that highly skilled traders might have been

distribution structure from 2008 to 2015 or so?

It's almost unfathomable. But the distribution structure is there, and it

to be following the roadmap proposed by the methodology.

Astounding. Let each person draw their own conclusions.

I think a more logical point of view is that the market went through different

phases of control throughout the development of its structure, as we

when talking about the context of the dynamic nature of the markets,

when said structure encompasses such a long period of time, a period of time

during which the fundamental conditions of the particular asset were probably

changing.

Looking at this example, we can propose the hypothesis that the macroeconomic

conditions of the currencies have been skewed with policies that favored the

weakening of the euro and or the strengthening of the US dollar.

Conditions that have developed as a result of economic policies implemented

precise moments where again, at an aggregate level, these have allowed the

development of said behavior in the market.

Here we see another example, this time a weekly chart for Bitcoin.

As we see, During what appears to be a distribution structure given the effect

it is currently having, multiple smaller structures can be observed within it

which have their corresponding effects.

A much more logical approach to be sure.

Has someone been selling through the entire range?

Perhaps. But it seems more sensible to me to think that the participants have

entered and exited the market in accordance with the changes that were

place in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

and that all their interaction at the aggregate level has definitively shaped

the structure.

So, if at an aggregate level it is considered unlikely that accumulation or

distribution campaigns are being built, why analyze these structures?

Why take them into account?

This is when we have to give the issue some meaning from a trading point of

view. The structures, however long -term they may be, identify potential

liquidity areas which can be found at the extremes.

It is in those trading zones where we want to enter or exit the market or

our trades.

They also help us to establish the market bias.

If we are below a structure, we will assume that what we see above is the

distribution, and if we are above the structure, we will assume that control

on the long side and we will look to take up buying positions.

But in addition, they also help us to identify areas where the price is likely

to go again in the future, thus establishing very interesting profit

zones.