Home >> Support Board

Support Board

Date/Time: Sun, 19 May 2024 03:15:35 +0000

How to Post a Message for Support

Discrepancy between Volume Profile & Market Profile based ValueArea High/Low for $AMD

View Count: 133

[2024-04-11 19:31:02] #1 [Go To First Post]
User763335 - Posts: 49
Hello Am noticing a discrepancy between the Value Area High and Low values, calculated by Volume Profile & Market Profiles , for ticker $AMD_MBO. This issue is seen only for this symbol , other tickers are fine. Also , noticing this issue only today,usually they align. Both are set to calculate based on 70% value area... + TPO VAH/VAL as well POC are set based on Volume , not on time ..so they align. Both are calculated only for Day session. I have deleted and redownloaded data for $AMD_MBO , but issue persists. pls advise

[2024-04-11 21:48:21] #2 [Go To First Post]
John - SC Support - Posts: 31704
We just took a look at this and we are not seeing any difference at all between the TPO and Volume at Price profiles for the Value Area, when everything is set to be equivalent. If you are still having an issue with this, then please get us a Chartbook so we can take a look at your setup. Follow these instructions to get us a Chartbook: Support Board Posting Information: Providing Chartbook with Only a Single Chart For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing

[2024-04-11 21:57:30] #3 [Go To First Post]
User763335 - Posts: 49
Thanks for looking ,but not sure how its a chartbook issue, when the Value areas match , between TPO/Volume profiles for all symbols, other than $AMD. Also , even for $AMD, everything aligned/matched, until today.

[2024-04-11 22:13:07] #4 [Go To First Post]
John - SC Support - Posts: 31704
There has to be something you have set differently to have these items be different. By reviewing your chartbook and how you have this setup, we could determine where the issue is. We are not able to reproduce it ourselves, so it must be something with your setup. For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing

[2024-04-12 13:31:45] #5 [Go To First Post]
User763335 - Posts: 49
Chartbook with relevant charts attached, for your review. I checked again today with different tickers(eg $TSLA_MBO, $SOXL, $SPY etc).., they all match. Not able to reproduce the issue. Discrepancy exists only for $AMD_MBO


Private File Attachment Deleted.

[2024-04-12 15:15:48] #6 [Go To First Post]
John - SC Support - Posts: 31704
The "Price Increment in Ticks" is different between the two studies. This will result in slightly different Value Area values. The TPO study has the "Letter/Price Increment in Ticks" set to "10" and the "Volume by Price" has the "Ticks per Volume Bar" set to 1. For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing

[2024-04-12 15:45:37] #7 [Go To First Post]
User763335 - Posts: 49
aah, that was it! Thank you. I had adjusted the price increment in ticks to 10 on the TPO chart, to be able to read the letters clearly, or else they were crushed/unreadable. But this was a change I had made a while back and did not really notice any significant difference between the value areas for all tickers including $AMD until yesterday, so never bothered to doubt that. Looks like I need to maintain another TPO chart with a different price increment to be clearly reading the letters. On a different note,on the candlestick chart I had uploaded, you'll notice the VolumeValue Area Lines study.I had to set the Volume Value Area% to 0.7 to get the correct VAH/VAL lines. The documentation for this study refers to 70% as the default, as is consistent with all other studies. where I've set 70%. So why 0.7 instead of 70%, for this particular study. Looks like setting 70% resets the value back to 1 and gives incorrect values. I'm fine with setting it to 0.7 and get the right values,but thought I'd ask. Thanks

[2024-04-12 16:37:25] #8 [Go To First Post]
John - SC Support - Posts: 31704
It's just the way that particular study was programmed. 0.7 is the same as 70%, so in this case the system is looking for values between 0 and 1. For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing

To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: