Support
About This Reference
A reference for volume-based technical analysis: what each indicator measures, how it is calculated, and the situations in which it misleads. The last of those is the part most sources leave out, and it is the reason this site is organised the way it is.
What the site is about
The subject here is market volume, and the reason it is worth a site of its own is simple: large orders cannot be executed quietly, so participation leaves a trace that price alone does not show. A one-per-cent advance on triple the usual volume and the same advance on half of it are different events wearing the same shape, and almost everything here is a way of telling them apart.
That focus decides the structure. The indicator library is grouped by what each measure reads — price, volume, or a count of issues — rather than by when it was invented, because that grouping exposes the redundancy: three momentum oscillators on one chart are three views of the same closing prices and will agree with each other for reasons that have nothing to do with the market. A reading is worth more when two different inputs agree than when three members of one family do.
What every page has to contain
Each indicator page is held to the same shape, which is a deliberate constraint rather than a template:
- The calculation, stated as its author published it, including the details platforms disagree about. Wilder's smoothing uses a multiplier that is not the conventional exponential one; Swenlin's PMO uses 2 ÷ n rather than 2 ÷ (n + 1). These are the reasons two charts of the same indicator differ, and they belong in the definition, not in a footnote.
- What the number actually claims: usually narrower than its reputation. RSI compares an instrument only with itself, despite its name. MACD values carry the instrument's price level, so they never compare between stocks.
- Where it misleads, as a table of specific situations rather than a disclaimer. Trending markets, illiquid instruments, unadjusted prices, rolling windows, and thresholds borrowed from an indicator that is not the one on screen.
- What volume adds, where it adds something. Most oscillators read the closing price and nothing else; naming the specific gap is more useful than asserting that volume confirms things.
How the figures are produced
Charts on this site are either schematic or computed, and each says which. Schematic charts use illustrative data written to make a shape legible; they are never presented as a record of a real market. Computed charts are generated at build time by the same formula the page documents, on a short series so the shape fits on screen, which means the picture cannot contradict the text, because the picture is the arithmetic.
Historical statistics are rounded, attributed to the index they describe, and stated on a single consistent basis. Where a figure could be quoted three ways (nominal, total return, inflation-adjusted) the page says which one it uses and why the others differ.
What the site does not do
It does not sell anything: no subscription, no signal service, no alerts, no course, no software, and no affiliate arrangements. It sets no cookies and runs no analytics, which the privacy page sets out in detail. It publishes no recommendations, because a reference that starts telling you what to buy has stopped being a reference, and the limits described on every page here apply to the site itself as much as to the indicators it documents.
Frequently asked questions
Why does every indicator page have a "where it misleads" section?
Because it is the section that is usually missing, and its absence is what makes most indicator writing useless. An indicator compresses price or volume history into one number per bar, and every compression discards something. Knowing what a given indicator cannot see is more useful than another paragraph on how to read a crossing, and a page that lists no failure modes is selling the method rather than describing it.
Where do the charts come from?
Two kinds, and each says which it is. Charts labelled schematic use illustrative data written to show the shape of a behaviour clearly; they are never a record of a real market. Indicator charts are computed at build time from the formula that same page documents, using a short series so the shape fits on screen, which means the picture and the text cannot drift apart, because the picture is produced by the arithmetic being described.
Are the historical figures reliable?
They are widely documented public statistics, rounded, and each attributed to the specific index it describes: which matters more than it sounds. The 2000–02 decline was about 78 per cent on the Nasdaq Composite and about 49 per cent on the S&P 500; quoting one figure without the index is how the same episode acquires two different reputations. Recovery times are stated as nominal price recovery on the same basis throughout, because mixing nominal, total-return and inflation-adjusted numbers in one table is worse than publishing no table.
Does the site recommend anything?
No. There is nothing for sale here, no subscription, no alerts, no course, no software, and no affiliate arrangements with brokers or data vendors. The pages describe how methods are calculated and where they fail; what to do with that is outside the scope of a reference, and the moment a page starts answering it, it stops being one.