Okay, so check this out—I’ve been staring at candlesticks longer than I care to admit. Wow. My first reaction was pure curiosity, then mild obsession. Hmm… something felt off about most “holy grail” strategies I read online. Really?
Here’s the thing. Price tells stories. Short moves, long moves, fakeouts and everything in between. And charts are just transcripts of that drama. At first I thought more indicators meant better clarity, but then realized clutter just hides the signal. Actually, wait—let me rephrase that: indicators help when they simplify, not when they sophisticate for the sake of looking smart.
I started with price action and volume. Simple. Then I layered moving averages for trend context. That was fine until I traded a morning gap and the averages lied to me. On one hand averages smooth noise, though actually they lag, and that lag can tax your P&L. My instinct said cut the lag with a faster filter, but that introduced whipsaws. Initially I thought the solution was algorithmic perfection, but real markets punish perfect models fast.
So I built a workflow that favors context over complexity. Short term structure gives the entry. Medium-term trend gives bias. A single long-term trend line gives guardrails. This triage is my mental checklist. It reduces paralysis. It also keeps me honest.
Why chart choice matters more than indicator choice
Most traders obsess over crossovers and fancy oscillators. Seriously? Those are fine, but chart layout and the right timeframes matter more. My rule: align three timeframes before pulling the trigger. Short. Clear. Relentless. The higher timeframe says yes, the middle confirms, the lower times the entry. If they disagree, I step back. Sounds dull. But it keeps losses small and lets winners run.
Here’s a small practical tip—use stacking panels for multiple timeframes rather than switching tabs constantly. It saves cognitive load. I set up a primary panel with price and volume, a second with trend bands, and a compact lower panel for momentum. That layout fits my screen and thought process. I’m biased toward legible layouts; clutter bugs me. Oh, and by the way… save your templates. Please save them.
How the TradingView app fits into my routine
I’ve tried a handful of platforms. TradingView stood out for speed and community scripts. My workflow is local, but I often scout ideas in the app. The mobile alerts keep me honest during the day. If you want to grab it, try tradingview—that link goes to their download hub. Shortcuts matter. Templates matter. Alerts matter. They all matter.
When I’m prepping pre-market, I run a 30-minute sweep across my watchlist. I mark levels where liquidity pools cluster—previous lows, highs, VWAP. Then I look for confluence: a level that aligns across timeframes and aligns with a volume spike. If the setup has volume with price rejection, that raises my confidence. If it doesn’t, I file it as “watch only.” This keeps me out of dumb trades.
I’m not algorithm-first. I’m pattern-first. That said, I do use lightweight scripts to highlight structures—breaking levels, trendline touches, and divergence. Nothing fancy. No robot that trades my lunch money. Too many people trust black-box indicators without understanding why they’re triggered. That part bugs me.
And yes, I have a bias toward price and volume. This bias grew from losing money to noise. My experience taught me that crude rules with discipline beat perfect systems with no discipline. So my setups are intentionally simple. They require patience, not constant tinkering.
Concrete setups I use (and why)
1) Pullback into a confluence zone. Short timeframe entry after higher timeframe trend confirms. Tight stop. Manage size. Simple. Effective.
2) Momentum breakout with institutional volume. Entry on a retest, scale in on confirmation. I avoid entries on the initial spike alone. My gut usually hates chasing breaks without confirmation.
3) Range play with evidence—rejection at the top or bottom confirmed by volume divergence. These are steady profit contributors for me when the market isn’t trending.
Initially I thought I needed many rules. But then I trimmed. The goal is to reduce decision points. Fewer choices, better execution. I’m not 100% sure this scales to high-frequency work. I’m not an HFT operator. But for discretionary traders, this discipline helps.
One more practical thing—use annotations religiously. Mark the why for each trade: level, thesis, stop, target. Later review becomes painless. The review is where most edge is earned. Seriously, the review beats live trading for improvement. And be honest with your notes.
FAQ — quick answers from my routine
How many indicators should I use?
Minimal. Price + volume + one trend tool is my sweet spot. Too many indicators give conflicting signals and slow you down. If an indicator doesn’t change my action, remove it.
Which timeframes should I watch?
Align three: higher timeframe for bias (daily), middle for structure (4H or 1H), lower for execution (15m or 5m). Adjust for your trading horizon. I’m biased toward multi-timeframe alignment—it reduces bad entries.
Is TradingView good for beginners?
Yes. It has a gentle learning curve and a huge library of community scripts. The interface helps you learn by doing, which matters more than reading. But beware—community scripts vary in quality. Vet them before trusting them with real trades.
Okay, final little note—markets change. Your method should adapt. That doesn’t mean chase every new shiny strategy. It means keep the framework and test adjustments. I’m still learning. I make mistakes. I double-book sometimes. somethin’ slips through. But the process of marking levels, testing setups, reviewing outcomes, and iterating slowly is where real progress happens.
Want a simple start? Build one template. Trade one setup. Review weekly. Rinse and repeat. It sounds almost boring, but boring builds consistency. And consistency builds edge. Here’s the thing. Be patient. Trade small. Learn faster than you lose. Really.
