Volume, Volume Profile and TPO alongside Elliott waves
Compare trade and tick volume, a fixed baseline, volume POC and TPO using fictional tables and diagrams.
Published: (UTC+3)
Русский · English · Deutsch · Español · Français · Italiano · 繁體中文 · 日本語 · 한국어
Every number in this lab is invented. Activity measures add observations to a wave hypothesis; subdivisions, degree and price constraints require separate checks.
Executed volume and tick volume use different units
For six completed bars from one fictional venue, V={10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 30} counts executed units, totaling 100. The tick series{20, 18, 22, 17, 19, 15} counts price updates, totaling 111. On bar 6, the largest V=30 coincides with the fewest 15 updates. Updates are not an equivalent quantity of traded units; trade sizes can differ.
Before comparison, freeze instrument, venue/feed, units, session, bar duration and completion status. One venue is not the whole market; base and quote volume also need distinct definitions. Volume describes activity without checking an impulse’s subdivisions. The table is a counterexample: more executed volume need not mean more updates or establish a directional Elliott wave.
| Bar | Close | Executed volume V | Price updates |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 100 | 10 | 20 |
| 2 | 101 | 12 | 18 |
| 3 | 102 | 14 | 22 |
| 4 | 101 | 16 | 17 |
| 5 | 103 | 18 | 19 |
| 6 | 102 | 30 | 15 |
| Total | — | 100 | 111 |
Do 111 price updates imply 111 executed units?
No. They measure different quantities. Verify the field definition and source coverage rather than relying on the label “volume.”
Compare activity against a predefined baseline
The first five completed V bars sum 10+12+14+16+18=70, with mean 14. Before bar 6, choose V 6/mean(V 1…V 5)≥2. At V 6=30, 30/14=15/7≈2.14 triggers the conditional activity flag. Including bar 6 in its own baseline gives mean 100/6 and ratio 1.8, a different definition.
Retain baseline, threshold 2, session and cutoff; apply the frozen procedure to later cases, including non-events. This can be studied beside a fixed wave hypothesis without claiming a validated strategy. Bar 6 closes down from 103 to 102 despite its highest volume 30. Higher activity therefore does not confirm an upward impulse or override price rules. No prospective performance is measured here.
| Bar | Executed volume V | Close |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10 | 100 |
| 2 | 12 | 101 |
| 3 | 14 | 102 |
| 4 | 16 | 101 |
| 5 | 18 | 103 |
| 6 | 30 | 102 |
| Baseline 14 | 70/5=14 | — |
| Threshold 28 | 2×14=28 | — |
| Conditional flag | 30/14≈2.14≥2 | 103→102 |
Can the baseline be replaced after the outcome while retaining the original test label?
No. The comparison changed. Preserve the original record and identify a new version so the advance rule remains reproducible.
Volume Profile: executed quantity by price
A separate fictional sample has blocks A/B/C and price rows 100/101/102 with step 1. Row totals are 3/12/6, totaling 21 executed units. Define volume POC as the row with the largest sum:101 at 12 units. The inputs are assigned executions by price, not exact trade prices reconstructed from one OHLC candle.
Freeze window A–C and row step 1 before block D. The teaching context condition is close(D)>POC. At the supplied close(D)=101 it is false: equality is not greater. D is excluded from the profile. Another window or row size can change POC, so compare matched settings. Even a close above POC would establish neither wave structure nor a rise probability; this is concentration in a particular sample.
| Price | A | B | C | Executed volume V |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| 101 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 12 |
| 102 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Total | 1 | 7 | 13 | 21 |
Does volume POC 101 guarantee a later bounce?
No. It is a historical maximum of the chosen sums. The next close 101 does not even meet the strict condition; wave subdivisions still need independent review.
Market Profile/TPO: visits within time blocks
In the same grid, a price row receives one TPO per equal block A/B/C in which it is visited. Price 100 has A/B/C:3 TPO; 101 has B/C:2; 102 has only C:1. Total 6 TPO, with TPO POC 100. This counts block-price opportunities, neither contracts nor exact minutes spent at a price.
Fix block length, rows, session and window first. Another trade at 101 within B increases volume without adding a TPO. For future closeD=101, closeD>TPO POC 100 is true although the volume POC 101 comparison is false. This is a reproducible counterexample to treating the profiles as interchangeable. Agreement with a wave hypothesis remains context; no TPO shape establishes wave completion by itself.
| Price | A | B | C | TPO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| 101 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 102 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Total | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 |
Why do TPO POC 100 and volume POC 101 not contradict each other?
They maximize different measures: visited time blocks and executed quantity. Large volume inside one block can produce few TPOs.