⛏The hammer candle has a small body, little to no upper wick, and a long lower wick - resembling a ‘hammer’. (2/13)
Hammer Candlestick Pattern. 📈
How should you trade with this pattern to take entry at lowest levels?
A THREAD 🧵
(1/13)
#StockMarketindia #trading #StockMarket
⛏The hammer candle has a small body, little to no upper wick, and a long lower wick - resembling a ‘hammer’. (2/13)
🔨The lower shadow should be at least two times the height of the real body. (3/13)
This candle pattern indicates that the price dropped to new lows, but subsequent buying pressure forced the price to close higher, hinting at a potential reversal. The extended lower wick is indicative of the rejection of lower prices. (4/13)
When found in a downtrend it could signal the end of selling pressure and begin to trade sideways or reverse, after confirmation such pattern can give the best entey to play reversal. (5/13)
Entry in any trade should be taken only after the confirmation.
Fomo of entering into a trade without any confirmation can trap you in a wrong trade. (7/13)
Once entered into any trade after the confirmation, stoploss can be placed below the low of hammer candle. (8/13)
1) TECHM - Stock
•Here we can see the clear downtrend,
•Then formation of hammer candle,
•Next candle gives confirmation and the trend reverse. (9/13)
•Here we can see the clear downtrend,
•Then formation of hammer candle,
•Next candle gives confirmation and the trend reverse. (10/13)
•Here we can see the clear downtrend,
•Then formation of hammer candle,
•Next candle gives confirmation and the trend reverse. (11/13)
More from All
You May Also Like
I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
One of the oddest features of the Labour tax row is how raising allowances, which the media allowed the LDs to describe as progressive (in spite of evidence to contrary) through the coalition years, is now seen by everyone as very right wing
— Tom Clark (@prospect_clark) November 2, 2018
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".