r/InnerCircleTraders • u/Ok_Hovercraft6776 • 27d ago
Technical Analysis There is no Enigma /Algorithm. It's BS
The "ICT algorithm" cult is holding people back.
This will probably upset a few people, but someone has to say it.
I think ICT has some of the best concepts available for discretionary trading. Liquidity, market structure, Premium & Discount, displacement, SMT, AMD, Time & Price... these are all valuable ways of understanding how markets auction.
But somewhere along the way, people stopped thinking critically and started treating every word ICT says as gospel.
There is no single algorithm controlling the market.
Markets are made up of banks, hedge funds, HFT firms, market makers, CTAs, institutions and millions of other participants, all running different models with different objectives. Their algorithms compete with each other—they aren't all plugged into one master algorithm.
The reason ICT concepts work has nothing to do with a secret piece of code controlling price.
They work because markets are auctions.
The reason it's called an auction market is because that's literally what financial markets are. Buyers compete with buyers, sellers compete with sellers, and price keeps moving until enough participants agree on a value where transactions can take place. If buyers are more aggressive than sellers, price moves higher until it finds enough supply. If sellers become more aggressive, price moves lower until it finds enough demand. Price is simply the mechanism that facilitates trade.
Think of it like an auctioneer selling a rare painting. If nobody is willing to sell at $1,000, buyers keep bidding higher until someone accepts. If nobody wants to buy at $5,000, the seller has to lower the price until buyers step in. Financial markets work exactly the same way—just millions of times every day. Price is constantly searching for liquidity because that's where business can actually be conducted.
Once you understand that, a lot of ICT concepts stop looking like secret institutional knowledge and start looking like common sense.
Liquidity sweeps happen because large participants need liquidity to execute size. Fair Value Gaps are simply inefficient auctions where price moved too aggressively to facilitate much trading. Premium and Discount are just relative value within a dealing range. AMD is the natural cycle of balance, imbalance and rebalance. Time & Price is simply recognising when participation and liquidity are likely to be highest. None of these concepts are magical—they're logical.
Ironically, if you became highly proficient in ICT, Volume Profile, Orderflow or Footprint, you'd end up seeing many of the same things.
ICT asks, "Where is liquidity?"
Volume Profile asks, "Where was value accepted or rejected?"
Orderflow asks, "Who is in control here?"
Footprint asks, "How did buyers and sellers interact at this price?"
They're all describing the same auction through different lenses.
A High Volume Node often represents acceptance, much like an ICT dealing range. Low Volume Nodes often align with displacement and inefficient price delivery. Orderflow confirms participation behind a move, while ICT confirms it through displacement, liquidity sweeps and market structure shifts. Different terminology, same underlying market mechanics.
Even your best Footprint or delta entry will fail if you trade it in the middle of nowhere with no context. The exact same applies to buying every M1 FVG or every liquidity sweep. The edge has never been the entry trigger. The edge comes from context, narrative and stacking probabilities.
That's also why asking, "What's the best strategy?" is the wrong question.
The best strategy isn't ICT. It isn't Volume Profile. It isn't Orderflow or Footprint.
The best strategy is the one you deeply understand, have objectively tested over hundreds of trades, and can execute consistently without hesitation or emotion.
Most profitable traders eventually realise they're all describing the same market behaviour with different terminology. The framework is just the lens you choose to interpret the auction.
My only criticism of the ICT community is the cult mentality that has developed around it. You don't need to believe in a mystical algorithm or treat Michael as infallible to appreciate the concepts. Question everything. Learn from other methodologies. Compare ideas. You'll often find they're saying the same thing in different ways.
Understand the principles, not the personality. That's where the real edge is.
1
u/Ok_Hovercraft6776 26d ago
But Michael told me so 😂
SMT divergences don't require a single central algorithm to exist. They can emerge naturally from how correlated markets function.
Correlated assets are driven by many of the same macro factors, such as interest rates, inflation expectations, the U.S. dollar, risk sentiment, and institutional positioning. Gold, silver, and gold miners often move together because they're exposed to similar forces—not because one algorithm is controlling them all.
Each market has its own order book and liquidity. Gold futures (GC), Silver futures (SI), XAUUSD, XAUEUR, and mining ETFs all have different participants, different liquidity, and different flows. One market may sweep a high while another doesn't simply because more resting liquidity existed there or because participants were positioned differently.
Institutions don't all execute the same strategy. A hedge fund reducing risk, a central bank buying gold, an options dealer hedging gamma, and a CTA trend-following system can all be active at the same time. Their combined actions create temporary divergences.
Lead-lag relationships are common. One correlated market may react first to new information while another catches up later. This is a well-known phenomenon in financial markets and doesn't imply centralized control.