Absorption versus distribution in one sitting
Side-by-side checks we use in the Volume Reading Intensive when heavy volume meets little progress.
Heavy volume with limited progress is the classic fork: is supply being absorbed by demand, or is distribution capping the advance? One bar rarely settles it.
Shared symptoms
Both stories show expanded volume and compressed net progress. Both can print near obvious levels. The difference appears in sequence and location of closes.
Checks we run in class
- Location in the swing — late in an extended rise favours distribution risk; early after a washout favours absorption tests.
- Close bias across several bars — repeated closes near highs on heavy volume while range stays tight lean toward absorption; repeated mid or low closes lean toward supply still in control.
- Next-session behaviour — does price accept above the zone on calmer volume, or does it fail quickly when participation returns?
Humility clause
We still mis-label zones. The curriculum’s falsification drill exists because participation clues conflict. Write both hypotheses when unsure; retire one when the abandon condition prints.