1
00:00:00,240 --> 00:00:02,800
How far to the left of the chart should
we look back?

2
00:00:03,800 --> 00:00:08,080
Sometimes, we find ourselves having to
look to the left of the chart to see

3
00:00:08,080 --> 00:00:12,260
reference in the price history,
especially when we want to identify old

4
00:00:12,260 --> 00:00:14,420
zones that could serve as potential
targets.

5
00:00:15,080 --> 00:00:18,720
How far back is it reasonable to look?
How many bars or days?

6
00:00:19,440 --> 00:00:22,260
Unfortunately, there is no objective
answer to this.

7
00:00:22,580 --> 00:00:27,020
Again, we need to apply common sense and
think of the rationale behind the

8
00:00:27,020 --> 00:00:28,020
market behavior.

9
00:00:28,330 --> 00:00:32,630
If our objective is to identify a
structure that reveals to us an area of

10
00:00:32,630 --> 00:00:36,830
equilibrium that might attract the price
back one more, based on auction theory,

11
00:00:37,030 --> 00:00:39,790
we must be clear that market conditions
are ever -changing.

12
00:00:40,110 --> 00:00:44,650
Therefore, the older the reversal, the
less importance it now has, having

13
00:00:44,650 --> 00:00:47,150
potentially lost its ability to attract
the price.

14
00:00:47,810 --> 00:00:51,750
The likelihood is that the conditions of
the market today differ greatly from

15
00:00:51,750 --> 00:00:54,850
the conditions of the same market weeks,
months, or years ago.

16
00:00:55,600 --> 00:00:59,660
The ranges that we work with under the
approach of the Wyckoff method are

17
00:00:59,660 --> 00:01:04,300
equilibrium zones, where the price
valuations of the participants are all

18
00:01:04,300 --> 00:01:08,920
similar and where the slight differences
give rise to sideways movements or

19
00:01:08,920 --> 00:01:11,780
uptrends and downtrends generating the
range.

20
00:01:12,100 --> 00:01:17,260
When market conditions change, the price
leaves the congestion zone and a new

21
00:01:17,260 --> 00:01:18,440
search for value begins.

22
00:01:18,720 --> 00:01:20,820
New participants to trade with.

23
00:01:21,900 --> 00:01:25,780
Equilibrium will be restored when the
valuations of all the participants more

24
00:01:25,780 --> 00:01:30,640
less converge once again, and this new
zone will most likely coincide with an

25
00:01:30,640 --> 00:01:34,620
old trading zone, where the conditions
at the time were very similar to the

26
00:01:34,620 --> 00:01:35,378
current ones.

27
00:01:35,380 --> 00:01:39,420
What happens when a lot of time has
passed and the conditions are not

28
00:01:39,420 --> 00:01:43,840
the current ones? Well, those old zones
will cease to be valid for this purpose,

29
00:01:43,980 --> 00:01:47,840
and the market will need to generate a
new zone with no previous reference

30
00:01:47,840 --> 00:01:52,420
point. From a trading perspective, we
should not take into account these very

31
00:01:52,420 --> 00:01:57,100
old zones in our analyses and scenario
forecasts, and simply focus on the

32
00:01:57,100 --> 00:02:01,340
current behavior and on the principles
offered by the methodology to detect

33
00:02:01,340 --> 00:02:02,920
the market context has changed.

34
00:02:03,600 --> 00:02:07,540
Looking at the chart shown in this
slide, let's imagine that the market

35
00:02:07,540 --> 00:02:10,780
an accumulation in 2023 and launches
upwards.

36
00:02:11,240 --> 00:02:14,940
Our aim here would be to look for the
structure that was developed two years

37
00:02:14,940 --> 00:02:17,520
ago. There is not much to interpret
here.

38
00:02:17,850 --> 00:02:19,070
It is a logical objective.

39
00:02:19,410 --> 00:02:24,330
Not too much time has passed, and it is
the first zone of sideways movement that

40
00:02:24,330 --> 00:02:25,510
we would see higher up.

41
00:02:26,110 --> 00:02:28,570
Would we look at the structure even
further up?

42
00:02:28,770 --> 00:02:31,270
From my point of view, that wouldn't
make much sense.

43
00:02:31,770 --> 00:02:35,750
I don't think expecting the market
conditions to be similar to those seen

44
00:02:35,750 --> 00:02:37,430
years ago is the correct approach.

45
00:02:37,950 --> 00:02:41,430
And what if the price shoots downward,
leaving a redistribution structure?

46
00:02:42,130 --> 00:02:44,530
This would be a somewhat more ambiguous
scenario.

47
00:02:44,990 --> 00:02:48,430
since the last structure that we see
below the current price is from seven

48
00:02:48,430 --> 00:02:49,430
ago.

49
00:02:49,510 --> 00:02:53,870
Personally, I would make that target the
end point, but I would actively manage

50
00:02:53,870 --> 00:02:57,730
the position so that the moment I notice
that the effect of the cause has been

51
00:02:57,730 --> 00:03:02,090
covered and that price is unlikely to
move much further, I would close my

52
00:03:02,090 --> 00:03:03,090
positions.

53
00:03:03,530 --> 00:03:06,090
Don't think of the number of years in
absolute terms.

54
00:03:06,310 --> 00:03:10,510
It is simply an example and will vary
depending on the time frame which you

55
00:03:10,510 --> 00:03:12,530
using to analyze the trade -in.

56
00:03:13,080 --> 00:03:17,780
This example could be valid for a very
long -term trade if, on the other hand,

57
00:03:17,860 --> 00:03:22,320
you are a day trader. We could be
talking about days or weeks instead of

58
00:03:23,000 --> 00:03:24,660
It is clearly very subjective.

59
00:03:24,920 --> 00:03:29,140
The key takeaway is that the recent
structures are more important than the

60
00:03:29,140 --> 00:03:30,140
ones.