Thanks Tomasz,
I'll look into it a bit more.

Can you tell me though are there two separate sets of information coming from 
eSignal? One for bar/volume data and one for Time & Sales?

Regards,
Julian.


--- In [email protected], "Tomasz Janeczko" <gro...@...> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> 
> Most probably because of tick corrections/insertions/deletions:
> 
> http://forum.esignalcentral.com/showthread.php?threadid=24502
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Tomasz Janeczko
> amibroker.com
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Julian" <juliangoods...@...>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 11:14 AM
> Subject: [amibroker] Time & Sales vs Volume difference
> 
> 
> > Studying the Time & Sales data vs the tick data from eSignal, I get 
> > different values for ticks and volumes.
> >
> > For the SPI on the 14/7/09, I get the following volumes from these sources:
> > 30411 - ASX website
> > 30310 - T&S from AB
> > 28876 - AB daily volume
> > 28926 - eSignal daily volume
> >
> > The Time & Sales matches fairly well with that from the ASX, and AB and 
> > eSignals match well also which makes sense.
> >
> > My question is why the volume in AB and eSignal doesn't match the Time and 
> > Sales volume also coming from eSignal? Is the 
> > price/volume data feed from eSignal separate to the Time & Sales feed? So 
> > AB doesn't create ticks/bars from the Time & Sales data?
> >
> > This isn't of any major importance, just curious.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Julian.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > **** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
> > This group is for the discussion between users only.
> > This is *NOT* technical support channel.
> >
> > TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
> > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
> >
> > TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
> > http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
> > (submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
> >
> > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>


Reply via email to