Support Board
Date/Time: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 17:54:10 +0000
Post From: Feature Request - Market Depth Historical Graph: Relative-to-Baseline Display Mode
| [2026-08-07 05:26:17] |
| User823887 - Posts: 5 |
|
Thank you for the response and for logging this as a Feature Request. I want to clarify the use case, since I suspect the two suggested tools may be aimed at a shorter-timeframe (scalping) use case rather than mine. I hold positions for 1+ hours, and I use the Historical Graph to infer where actual support/resistance is forming based on changes in large resting orders - this is often 200+ ticks away from the current market price, not near it. Given that: Maximum Quantity for Coloring (as % of max) operates on magnitude. The persistent liquidity wall is itself the largest value in the dataset, so it will anchor the top of the color scale regardless of where the percentage threshold is set - it does not distinguish "persistently present" from "transient," only "large" from "small." Limiting the number of Market Depth levels operates on price-distance from the market. In my case this is actually counterproductive: the support/resistance I'm tracking is often 200 ticks out, so a level limit tight enough to filter near-market noise would also filter out the far-out liquidity I actually want to see, while a level limit wide enough to include it does nothing to suppress the near-market persistent liquidity that's dominating the color scale. What I actually care about is liquidity that stays fixed at an absolute price level over time - that's a real support/resistance signal. What I want filtered out is liquidity that continuously repositions to maintain a roughly constant distance from the moving mid price, since that's typically market-making/algorithmic quoting rather than a price level the market itself respects. Neither existing Input distinguishes between these two cases. Thanks again for considering this. |