To you. Okay, nowadays, companies, most of the companies encountering the problem that they need to accelerate the development process. The average time of a sprint is about two weeks. Because of that, most of the companies use open source more often. Actually, this number is under approximation to the real use of open source in some domain is much higher than that. And this is basically great, because open source is there, it's for us to use. In most cases, the license is okay, and it solves our problem very quickly. The main problem is that open source, like basically any other program, contains problems among our other things. It contains security vulnerabilities, and we must remediate those security vulnerabilities in order to make sure that those security vulnerabilities will not put our application at risk. In ideal work, we will remediate all the problems and fix them immediately. But in real life, we need to prioritize the work, because we have some limited number of resources and we cannot remediate all the problems at once. So we need to decide which vulnerability to work first, and which we can postpone to later sprints. Without knowing anything, without any special technology, the standard prioritization techniques is just looking at the severity. The severity is not enough. There are many examples that vulnerability is high severity and does not put the application at risk at all, and a medium severity CVE, for example, can put the application in a very serious risk. So because of that, we need more than that in order to prioritize the work and decide which CVE we will work now, and which we will postpone to later sprint. What if we will have some special technology that can say that some of the vulnerability does not put the application at risk at all, even if they have some high severity regarding the marking. So if we know that, we can postpone the work on those CVE to future sprint, or we cannot work on them at all. It doesn't matter because they are not hurting the application. The main idea is to look at the library, to look at the CVE, to look basically CVE or vulnerability is just a piece of code in the application. So what we need to do, we need to check basically if this piece of code is accessible by the application. If we know that this piece of code, the vulnerable code, cannot be accessible to the application, so it's perfectly safe to use that open source, regardless of the fact that it contains some security vulnerability, and this leads us to the main observation of vulnerability effectiveness. What is vulnerability effectiveness? We will say that a CVE in some open source component is effective if it contains some execution path from the application, from the proprietary code to that piece of code. In that case, we know that the attacker can take advantage of that CVE and can cause some input that will lead the program to there and can do something harmful, so it can put our application at risk. On the other end, if we know that some piece of code regarding this CVE is unreachable, on every input, it's basically a dead code, we cannot reach that vulnerability at all, nevertheless, what will be the input or what will be the use case, so we can safely say that this CVE is ineffective, and it can be there, but it will not cause any problem to our application. Okay, so this is the technology that we want to develop, technology that will take the application, it will take all the open source component and will decide which CVE are harmful, which CVE can be reached, and more important than that, which CVE cannot be reached. For doing that, let's for a moment look at this illustration. This illustration describes the ratio between dependency and proprietary code, and when the proprietary code uses some dependency, it has a small amount of dependency, those dependencies are called the direct dependency, those are the dependencies that we are using using our dependency manager, but those dependencies is a program, so those dependency uses also the direct dependency for them, but for the proprietary code this will be a second level dependency, and we have the third level dependency and so on. So obviously most of the code lies on the indirect dependency, and therefore also most of the CVE, most of the vulnerability at open source will come from an indirect dependency. Therefore if we want to analyze the program and understand which CVE can make some damage to our application, we need to analyze everything, not just the proprietary code as we are doing in some SAS tools, and not just the direct dependency as we are doing in some SCA tools, we need to analyze everything, the proprietary code, the direct dependency, and also the indirect dependency, and then only then we can come into conclusion if we have some ineffective vulnerabilities. Okay, so let's examine these in a bit more detail using that illustration, this idea. Suppose we have some application, proprietary code, and this application uses some libraries as a direct and indirect dependencies, and one of the dependencies is G function that uses another library, that uses another library with a reported vulnerability, CVE1 and CVE2, and suppose that G function is the only connection from the proprietary code to this library, and G function uses only two APIs, API1 and API3. So we know that API1 call the code of CVE1, so we'll say that CVE is effective because we have a trace from the proprietary code to that vulnerable code, the trace that go to G and therefore API1 and then to the CVE, but what is more important, CVE2 is ineffective because regardless of the input, we cannot reach CVE2 because it will be reached by some other API of the library but not API1 and no API3. So it's perfectly safe from the application point of view to use that library regarding the CVE2. So this is the main idea to give those marks to CVE. So standard SCI tools will say those are the dependencies and some of them can put the application at risk because they contain some security vulnerabilities. With this technology, we'll get again the list of the library with those marks of the CVE, but each CVE will get additional mark whether or not it's effective or ineffective, if something is ineffective, it will be enrichable in every execution part, including some reflective call to the library if we have some reflection or something in Java or something similar in other languages. So we want to develop a technology like that and please notice that the important mark is the ineffective and not the effective because without this technology we are assuming that everything is effective. With this technology, the library will stay effective, but we succeeded to prove that some of them or hopefully most of them will be ineffective. It means that there cannot be armed application in any execution part and actually in any practical use we can use that open source safely regarding those CVEs. Okay, so we want to develop technology that will calculate that, how we can do that. So this is not a scope of the presentation to explain deeply how we are doing that but I will try to give you some intuition and if you have questions, just stop me and ask as we go or at the Q&A session. So let's look at this low-word Python program. At this program we have some proprietary code that main function, we have also some two dependency, there is an enemy library that contains, for example, monkey class and some food library that contains, for example, implementation to banana, carrot and worm. And so we have a proprietary code, we have two dependencies. And we want to understand what are the connection, what are the relationship between the components in the program. So we start analyzing the program and we understand, for example, that at that location we are calling a constructor. So the location when we are calling some function is called a call site and the function that we are calling is called the target of the call site. So at that location, at that call site the target is the constructor of monkey and in that location, the target of the call site is the banana constructor. In this location we are calling put but if we will examine the program we will see that we are calling again we have another call to put and another call to, and a new call to worm constructor and now we are calling it. Inside it we are calling food.it. If we will examine the program we will see that at that location the only function that can be called is banana it or worm it. Those are the only two functions that can be called using on that location. So this is basically the relationship that we need in order to understand which element is reachable and which element is not reachable. We need to understand what are all the call sites in the program and in each call site we need to understand what is the exact target and we need to do it for all the program to the open source, the indirect dependency and to the application and that's all basically and if we will have this relationship we can using that will solve the vulnerability effectiveness problem. Lucky us we have some data structure that will help us to build that. The data structure is called call graph. So call graph is this graph is just a standard graph in computer science the edges of the graph are the functions in the program and the nodes of the graph are the functions in the program and we have two nodes an edge between two nodes if there is a potential call from that function to the target function after to the hello world python program we saw in the previous slides we see that we have an edge from main to monkey constructor or from main to monkey put or from main to monkey eat and so on and so forth if we will examine the monkey eat we see that monkey eat as an edge to banana eat or to worm it and if we will continue to look at that program we see that the current constructor is not reachable from the main so basically if we will have this call graph we can reduce the problem of calculating the vulnerability effectiveness to the problem of building that call graph because if we know that carot eat as some vulnerability we just need to build that call graph to do some kind of reachability BFS, DFS whatever from the proprietary code function we will see if the vulnerable element is reachable from one of the proprietary code functions if so we know that this vulnerability may be effective otherwise we for sure know that this function cannot be reachable therefore this is not effective it's ineffective and we can safely live without vulnerability in our code all of these in some assumption that we have an accurate call graph if we are misengaged that the call graph this will not be true so we need an accurate call graph okay so this is what we want to do and this is the problem we want to solve so how we can do that we say just build the call graph so it sounds very easy the problem is that building a accurate call graph it's undecidable problem it's impossible to build undecidable call graph not today, not tomorrow and not in 1000 years in some in some machine that is equivalent to modern computer so it's impossible to do it like that so we cannot build the call graph so what we can do we can approximate the call graph so we can use some approximation techniques and there are several approximation techniques for building a call graph one of the approximation techniques produces a call graph which will be under approximations to the original call graph does a kind of techniques called complete so if we have a complete algorithm for building the call graph we know that we have an under approximation and for understand that let's look on this tiny program on the bottom left so we say that complete is a part of the original call graph so the original call graph in this tiny example needs to suppose that all of this is inside main function so this tiny program contains two edges at the call graph yes we have an edge from main to F and from main to H and G is not reachable in that example but the algorithm produce a call graph with just one edge from main to F so if the algorithm will produce such graph for every program this algorithm is called complete and the graph that it generated is under approximation each missing edge for example this graph as missing edge from main to H is called false negative so if we have complete algorithm complete algorithm contains false negative and the missing data from the original graph because it's under approximation it's called false negative okay so this is complete graph and let's think a moment if this is good for our use case of course not because what we want to do we want to calculate the vulnerability effectiveness and we say that the important thing is the ineffective vulnerability so if we have complete call graph we know that we are missing some of the edges so if we are missing some of the edges and we see that something is not reachable maybe it's not reachable because one of the missing edges so we cannot use complete call graph to solve our problem although complete call graph is very easy to build we just need to run the program and record what's happened during the execution and then we can see what is the relationship between the functions so dynamic tools basically are based on that approach and generating an under approximation and this is not good for us because it's because we cannot calculate the ineffective vulnerability and in addition we need a good approximation at the indirect dependency as we talk and even if we have a great test that covered the application even if in 100% testing coverage we are checking the testing coverage just on the proprietary code not on the open source for getting test that will cover the open source not all the open source but the reachable open source in 100% it's almost impossible and very difficult to achieve especially when we are looking on the indirect dependencies so for all of those reasons the dynamic algorithm is not fit to our problems okay so let's see what we can do so we cannot use under approximation maybe we can use an over approximation yes we can generate a graph that will contain the actual graph but maybe contain some more edges so the extra edges that are not true are called false positive if we are generating a graph that contains all the information that we need additional information so the additional information is called false positive and algorithm that produce all the information that we need with some false positive is called sound algorithm so basically sound algorithm is better because if something is not reachable in a sound call graph we know that it's not reachable also in the reality in the actual call graph so this is a very good to us and may solve our problem to illustrate that let's see again our tiny program this we can see that this graph is an over approximation to the actual graph we have an edge from main to h and from main to f and this is great because this is the actual call graph but we have some false positive edges we have an unnecessary edges from main to t this is just an edge that we don't need and from main to g for example because the algorithm didn't notice that this is an infinite loop and we cannot call g function so those those kind of algorithm is good and and basically we can use them to our problem but we need to make sure that we don't have too much edges because it's very easy to build a sound call graph it's trivial problem at any location we can say everything is reachable so even if at every location we say everything is reachable we have a great sound call graph but not so accurate with a lot of false positive everything is false positive and everything will be reachable and in that case everything will be effective and we will not have any ineffective data our assumption our thesis that we want to prove that most of the vulnerability are ineffective because we are using a fraction of some API of the libraries and intuitively it looks like most of the CV does not need to affect the application so if everything will be effective it's not good for us so this is we need to build a sound call graph but with a very good accuracy designed to our problem to understand that most of the code is ineffective there are some tools that neither sound nor complete just generating some graph with a false positive false negative those obviously not good for us for example this graph that may contain a call from main to F so this is the real edge but missing the edge from main to H and as some extra edge from main to G for example so those tools are obviously not good okay so we want to build a sound call graph and this is not an easy task let's see what are the trivial way to build a good approximation to the call graph so if we have a strongly type language like Java there is some very easy and trivial way to build a call graph for example we want to know who can call from that location we know that it just can be all the E that came from the inheritance of that type so it can be that type if it's not an interface of course and all the descendants of that type so this could be a good sound approximation to the call graph but the problem is that this approach will lead to a lot of false positive and will not go to our task because almost everything will be effective for example imagine that you have some interface in some library and many other libraries that implements that interface hundreds of implementation then every use of that interface will jump to every implementation so it's not good and eventually most of the code will be reachable with that approach so it's also not good but this is a nice way and very efficient so if someone can live with that approximation so it can be a good way to approximate the call graph and in addition this does not deal with reflective call like reflection in Java so this is also not good and in some languages we don't have type at all like Python so in Python we don't have type at all so we cannot use that in Python we have some other approximation some of the IDE usually doing something like that when we press jump to declaration so what they are doing they just looking at the it's called name based approaches there is set of algorithm that very similar to that so they are looking on some function they are looking the signature of the function the name, the arguments and everything and they are assuming that every function with the same signature for example the monkey eat call the eat function and the eat function as the same signature of the eat of monkey then we make the algorithm by mistake things that there is a recursion error so this obviously also not good for us it will cause even it does not deal with reflection again reflective call but even if do it will cause too much edges in the call graph and will have a lot of false positive and everything again will become effective okay this is the actual call graph that we need for this tiny program okay so those are the method we talk so far so beside the one entry that we will talk about it in a moment so there is the dynamic method we say that the dynamic method is good from the fact that it does not contain false positive but it's complete and under approximation so it's not good to our use case because we cannot calculate the vulnerability effectiveness using that because if something is not effective we don't know if we are missing something or it's really ineffective and in addition it's very complex to deploy such tool because it requires an input to execute the program it requires execution environment we cannot just point the tool to some report and say scan it we need to execute the code and we need to generate some data that will execute the code with a good coverage to the open source which is more difficult to so this dynamic method are not good for us as we say we say that static method are better if we have sound approximation to the call graph and we say that there are some simple static method and we give just for illustration a class hierarchy method if we have a strongly typed language and the name based if we don't have type and we say that also those are not good because they are not deal with reflective call and they are generating too much edges at the call graph so everything eventually become effective there is another known method at the literature this method is great basically which is called under zone analysis or point to analysis this method is very good it's basically does not also deal with reflective call but easily can be extended to deal with reflective call so it's not so difficult to do that but the problem with that method is that but it's very precise and good for our use case and there are a lot of open source that implementing this basically but the problem with that method is that it's not scale if we will try to apply this method to even thousands of lines of code not talking about millions or hundreds of millions lines of code as we have in our use case because we are analyzing everything the application and also the dependencies so it will not scale it will not stop and we can not use that method so basically at the literature as is there isn't any good way to approximate the call graph for that use case because of scalability because we want to analyze the application and the dependencies and we are talking on millions of lines of code when counting the dependencies because of that in our company we develop new approach to do that basically what we did we succeeded to develop new algorithm designed for this problem for security vulnerability problem that is from our evaluation that we will see in a moment it proven to be almost precise as the as the pointer analysis from one end and also almost fast as the class hierarchy analysis when we check compare them it was almost the same regarding scalability comparing to the simple static and almost precise as a pointer analysis okay so this is what we did we will not describe the algorithm here but we will try to give you the intuition basically the class hierarchy method is great method so it can give us the types it gives us all the information basically but we cannot use that because most of the languages does not have type like python this is one reason another reason it gets too many types too many false positive there and it also does not deal with reflective call but let us leave it for a moment so we want to improve the class hierarchy so what we are doing basically we are calculating the type but we are calculating the dynamic type not the static type basically if we have some implementation of some interface with hundreds of decedents and we have one factory that generate one instance so we know that the type is these instances and not all other decedents so what we did we built abstract interpreter to the program that can very efficient interpreter the program and understand what is the dynamic type each location of the program and I will not go into detail but I will try to give you intuition using this running example okay so here on the top right you will see the type that we are calculating and on the top left you will see the interpreter location in that case the interpreter location is basically basically here I will see the time is basically here so we want to analyze that program so we know we have a call site we are calling in a monkey constructor so the interpreter on the fly build the call graph and understand that there is a call to the monkey constructor so we have the first edge of the call graph and when we are jumping a method we are looking at the type that we know so far and we are binding the types and adding the type that already calculated till this point and in that location when we are jumping till this look to this we know that the self is bind to the monkey type because this is a constructor so this is what we understand and now we know that a food a field of that class is bind to basically to non yes to no type because we assign it non in python and this is interpreter so the interpreter know to return to the call site and know that we call a constructor is the type of constructor is the class so it know to assign m variable the dynamic type of the monkey so the type of m will be the monkey now there is some integer operation now we are calling put so again as before we are jumping to the banana and we are returning from the constructor again the entire type is banana and then we want to jump to put but what put what is put which function is put we don't know the type of n is monkey so we know that at that location we are basically jumping monkey put so we are jumping monkey put and at the jump point we are binding the type that we know so we know that m type is monkey so we will bind safe to monkey and then we know that we just return from the constructor and the return type is banana so we bind the first argument to banana and basically we are jumping that location and we bound bind those two variable to those two types and now then we have assignment of food local variable with the type banana to full field so when we do that we know that at that location full field is banana previously it was none but currently is banana and then we will go to the warm we will do the same scenario again and again go to food but now food local variable is bound to warm and not to banana so in that case we are assigning again and we know that basically the food can be non-banana or warm during the execution okay so the interpreter will continue to the eat eat method and now we want to jump to eat so what is it we look at the type of m m belong to the type monkey then we know what is it, it belongs to monkey so we are jumping monkey and now we want to jump food eat what is food eat we look at the type of food the type of food is banana or warm so we know that we are calling it of banana or warm so we will call that location and by this this is just a very high level but by this by calculating the dynamic type during the execution we know how to deal and build the call graph and we know how to deal even reflective call okay so but how accurate is it and how fast is it so if it's scale to our problem so let's see the evaluation okay so first we want to have measurement for different metrics the first metric is to see if it's accurate if it's build the right call graph it's very difficult to measure that because we don't have the actual call graph for a real application so what we did we did something a bit tricky we took many projects we ignore all the open source of that projects but we choose projects with a very good testing coverage assume close to 100 testing coverage in that case we assume so this is assumption we assume that when we run the application with those tests so the call graph but in the scope of the application or the open source is close to the actual call graph because the test the test basically cover all the execution part of the application so if we are ignoring the open source we cannot do it in our use case we must analyze the open source but just for measurement we ignore the open source we build the dynamic call graph we build the static call graph and then compare them and the assumption is that the dynamic call graph on those project is close to the actual call graph because we choose a test with good coverage and this table is from the evaluation we did for Python so we can see that for a moment what is precision precision is a way to measure the false positive so if we have 90% of precision it means that we have 10% of false positive and recall is for false negative if we have 80% of recall it means that we have 20% of false negative so this is a good way to measure the false positive and false negative ratio so we saw that the precision is almost 90% it means that we have only 10% of false positive so we have a very accurate call graph and we saw also that the recall is great but this is a bit different than what I told you earlier I told you that we have a sound algorithm so if the algorithm sound the recall must be 100% so what we have missing edges what we don't have 100% here this is because in this evaluation we didn't use the reflective call feature so algorithm support reflection but we didn't implement that in this evaluation therefore we missed all the edges that came from a reflective call and those edges we see them now as a false negative okay so we saw the graph is really accurate but what about performance and what about the ability to calculate the ineffectiveness so we did a test in .NET in Java let's see a piece of .NET evaluation let's look in more detail in Java okay so this is part of .NET evaluation we took many public projects from Github and those projects contain vulnerabilities we run our analysis and check what is effective and what is ineffective and we saw that 63% were ineffective we did the same in Java in Java we did it on hundreds or even thousands of projects we had automation that scan basically Github offline so here we see just a piece of this evaluation basically the average was more than 70% of the vulnerability that the application is using those application in Github that they are using their dependencies more than 70% were ineffective and here we can see the running time comparing the line of code so we can see that the line of code is huge because each one of those application even if it was a tiny application it used a lot of open source and here we are counting everything the open source and everything so we saw that most of it is ineffective okay so let's see a small demo now so basically we talked about JavaScript we talked about Java, Python we talked about .NET, Python and Java we didn't talk about JavaScript so let's do the demo JavaScript basically just for this demo I just downloaded I downloaded a project from Github just a arbitrary project with the vulnerability and scan it, this is the link of the project so let's scan that project so what we are doing when we scanning what we are doing when we scanning a project we are analyzing the project we are seeing the dependencies we are seeing what dependency has vulnerability and we basically see that basically this project it took 27 seconds to scan and it contains three vulnerabilities those are the vulnerability of the project sorry four vulnerabilities this contains two CVE we see this green arrow it means that those are not effective also this CVE is not effective on the other end this CVE is effective and we can see here the trace of that CVE I think that you are almost out of time so I cannot see the trace but if you want you can come at a break and we will look at that in more details but we have also all the traces that from the application those are the traces from the application to the vulnerable element and you can see that the scanning time took about 27 seconds basically this is not a huge project this project contains almost 28,000 lines of code small project but still it took 27 seconds to scan it and we saw the evolution that even a huge project took a minute to scan okay so this is the summary we saw that this this technique help us to prioritize the work we can perform most of the work to later sprint what about that work at all we saw the algorithm is scaled to real life scenario and basically it's implemented in the company tool meant company and that's all basically so now if you have some questions I will be happy to answer so no question at this late time sorry I don't what is the vulnerable function okay so the question was when we have a vulnerability and when we have open source and the open source contains CVE how do you know what is the vulnerable element okay so this is a different lecture we also develop automation for that basically we have a research group that are doing that and we also develop automation tool for automatically calculate that and in our database for HDV we know exactly which is the vulnerable element yes no this is part of our sort of meant company we have some community addition but it's not open source no we are doing code analysis basically it's very similar technique that what's happening in SAS tool and we are building a call graph and then for when we have the call graph for generating the trace it's trivial it's just reachability on the graph so when we have a vulnerable element and we have the proprietary function we just see the trace of the call graph and building the call graph so this is the algorithm that we have developed that we talked about we didn't describe the algorithm but we tried to give the intuition behind that so so I think that that's all yes okay so now if if you have more questions you are welcome to come and ask


streaming, try again here, just go. That should be working now on the live stream. Should be working now, there it goes, there it goes. I don't know why it was adjusting like that, so cool, now we're good to go, so you're on Twitter, so it's there. Okay, good, have all I done. So we're at a pretty big level here on ES, we're gonna go over quite a few things. I really wanna track from the morning, give you a better visual zoom out a little bit more so we can see those levels here. Again, if you have questions on Discord, go ahead and ask whenever you need to. I'll definitely be going in and out of Discord and YouTube chat to see everything that I can. So anyways, let me make sure I start this event. Well, let me start it, so I guess that's it. That's all I need to do, cool. All right, so from this morning, we saw some interesting behaviors specifically on futures and again, if you are new to the live stream or new to watching any of my stuff specifically, a major thing we watch here is gonna be futures and then going into equities, right? We're looking at bigger names as far as the largest holdings in spy, NASDAQ, et cetera. I'm not really interested in penny stocks. Wanna make my money and have enough time on contracts so I don't have to sit and stress out about stuff. So today, big trade that we got in today and yesterday really was Tesla we're gonna look a little bit at the chain today on Tesla, but obviously Tesla's showing nothing but weakness. You can continue to see this, very similar to what we saw last week when we looked at, I think, AMD. I think it was the name we looked at, possible. It was AMD or Tesla we looked at last week. Very similar structure. You see us getting rejected, minimal sellers up here to I-182, they reset their position as well. BCB has broke down through each level over and over and over. These walls also weren't that big in my opinion, pretty minuscule in comparison to what we've had here in the past here, pushed down through 177, bouncing a little bit here, found support at 176. But you're also gonna notice too, big level here on Tesla is gonna come back into, I believe, the 200 SMA on the weekly, which we go over to the, turn this to the weekly, turn that on. You're gonna see that it's gonna be pretty close here, I believe, go to the two hour timeframe, yeah. So it's gonna be down here around 173. So that's what I anticipate going into futures of where I see you're really finding supports. It'd be down here at 173. I wanna see the liquidity start to stack up there. You're seeing 175, obviously, these 175s, 180s, 170s, always gonna be a pretty decent wall as well, but right now, this in me, my focus is to the downside of retesting that 200 SMA on the weekly. But you are getting a little bit of support here, a little bit of a balance on ES3840, worth mentioning as well that even though we don't have crazy liquidity down here, even though we don't have a crazy buy wall or massive buying pressure coming in there, it is worth mentioning that when you come in and we look at what's happening on ES and exactly where we're at on these futures, look at how we're responding here, right? Look at how we're responding. We're right there at the back of that bottom where we started to get that support. You can also see too, it lines right up with our supply and demand as well, which what do we know?  Basically 3860 all the way down to 3800, 3790 is massive, massive, massive demand. When it comes to ES, we sat here literally for one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, almost three weeks of trading days, right? That's three weeks of trading days. Pretty insane when you take that into consideration and that's kind of where we're at right now. So again, targets, if we break below this, in my opinion, you start to look at new lows, new 52 week lows on ES. As well as looking at the day and why I anticipate more downside, it really comes back down to fundamentals of why I anticipate there's more downside. It's you have your credit suites, that's the big news across the board today of expecting that drop, expecting the credit suites to go under today. That's the big thing for me. And so I do think that's gonna encourage more weakness on the markets. Now we've seen some decent pressure when it comes to liquidity and what's happening here on the book when you look at some of the upside that we've had. And personally, I'm not a believer in the upside that we've had. Gonna tell you that right now. I am a firm believer in continued downside, but just the pressure that we've seen from both ways, and you can even see there's just no walls here. There's no real underlying pressure. I mean, you're just not seeing any. You see minuscule walls again, trying to hold you up if you will, but you're not getting any continued fall there. I wanna go back to that bullish pressure we had this morning. It's just trash. I need to get their futures contracts ruled over as well. These are still for March, but that's still primary source for all the volume is. This in-between day of when futures roll over is generally in my opinion, one of the tougher times to chart futures. But yeah, that's why TradingView, if you look at, if you're charting on TradingView, we go to the ES, there's a difference here is because they've already rolled over into the next futures. These are still for March. That's why TrendSpire shows more accurate data because it's locked into what's happening with BookMap. Make sure you understand that. Going into, trying to make sure. Again, if you wanna ask questions and discord, please feel free to ask. But yeah, so I'm kinda just gonna be going over what I'm looking at on the day, what I'm looking out for the continued breakdown. But yeah, let me see. I'm really curious to see if they're gonna set up any walls. Like you see men, like I say, like I'm gonna keep saying the same thing. Very minuscule type of price action trying to hold you up whatsoever here, very, very weak. Tesla continues to print, it's the only trade them. I know I'm not. I'm actually in PacW as well, which is a smaller bank. Started shorting them at highs earlier today, but still feel good about them. I think you're just in immediate roll over effect from Credit Suisse and some of these other banks when they start to roll over and let's say get a bailout, which even if they get a bailout, still see downside potential coming into play there. But yeah, so that's what I'm looking at there. Once again, message Bruce, you're getting a little bit of love there, a little bit of volume, a little bit of an uptick right there. It's also bringing up too, so we can see just a visual of the numbers while on Yahoo, pull this up for you guys. All I really care about is that direct number. So yeah, we're back at 83 million, what time is it, 12 o'clock midday. You are behind the curve on volume coming in right now, just so you know, you're definitely behind the past two days. So I don't know if you're gonna get as much as we had the past two days, which is pretty a strong indicator of the pressure towards the downside and the weakness of the buying when you try to push up. But you can still see, we're finding a little bit of resistance at that 38, 62. It's been a pretty big level as well, which again comes right back down into key levels as well. So let me pull up ES. I'm curious if you're gonna see any more action on the new futures on ES M3. Let's pull those up too. Because you're just not seeing any orders like stacking there, but I'm almost positive you're not gonna see too much on the ES M3 either. Just curious, load that up real quick while it's waiting, go to NQ. You look at NQ is becoming really dry as well. I don't wanna see these pop up real quick. Seeing a little bit more. Yeah, you're seeing a little bit more. I don't wanna see where these levels start to pop up. But you're not gonna see, it's tough because you're not gonna see the futures line up with the futures numbers so far. 3900 for sure is maybe a big level here. But it's not gonna line up with where futures actually were and how they are progressing because futures obviously continue to making those lower highs since then. So they're not 3900 even right now. It's also important to realize where the daily 200 SMA is when we look at ES has been a monster level when we need to continue to watch, right? Boom, triple quad top, whatever you're gonna call that, right? Just continuous rejection at that level. And also really important to realize that this lines up with SPI which tells us which futures I believe like the number you need to be paying more attention to as far as finding these key levels as well. And so as we look at SPI you can see as well one, two, three, four, almost four right here touches of that 200 SMA which lines right back into the ES futures from March and not the ones that have rolled over yet. But again, like I said, this is gonna be one of the trickier times when you're using book map and looking at futures data because you're kind of trading on two contracts. There's gonna be a little bit of a mix there. So that is definitely one of the harder parts to be watching out for. Timmy G, what can you expect in the future if during the day you can see a CVD continually going negative while stock price continues going up? Okay, so good question. So CVD going adjacent to or opposite to what's happening with the market. So this is why I always personally, in my opinion I don't like looking at CVD on equities. I think it can be a little bit misleading, especially in the day trading aspect of it of trading just intraday. I think CVD can push you in the wrong direction, right? I think it's dangerous. I think it's just, yeah, not my fair thing to look at. But when we look at futures you tend to get the same type of direction of the overall movement. Sometimes you'll get a little bit of divergence to where you're pushing up but you're not really making higher highs. You're still kind of pushing down and not really getting as much love on CVD as in comparison to the move up, which is something that I always kind of take into account with volume. So it's really interesting, right? Look right here. So we can see pretty decent volume from 930 into 11 o'clock as we were pushing up here. Now granted, CVD was really pushing up. We had some sideways movement here kind of triple topping at that 200 a May. Like hitting that level. Or the 3,900 level here, not the 200 a May. 3,900 here on futures for the next rollout. But you can see you're pushing up and you kind of top out here but you can see it's not aligning with. We're not making higher highs on the chart just here on CVD. And as you start to take out you start pushing back down. And now we're pushing back down and we're making higher highs here getting out of this little downtrend structure. But it's not nearly as strong as what we saw back here. So again, as I look here you can get a better viewpoint of what's happening with volume and CVD kind of just takes into account what's happening with volume and the options chain there as well. So when I'm looking at that volume you can see it's obviously going down. It's in a descending pattern. You can see just, I mean, it's very, very easy to see, right? Just lower, lower, lower on this push up. What's typically on price action based trading of how we trade, how I trade, how J trades is if you're getting declining volume on a push up typically it's like a retracement. It's a very, it's an opposite move of what you'd be looking for, right? You wanna see increasing volume in the direction that you're looking for. So if I'm looking for a downside I wanna see increased volume to the downside which I think CVD helps you get a better view of that. But I think on equities is where you're gonna have the most trouble looking at that overall. Good question though, really good question. Just making sure there's no questions in Discord either. Also, if you're in Discord, please meet your mic, please. I'll just meet it, but yeah. Go to NASDAQ. NASDAQ as well. I'm not really getting any walls up here either. NASDAQ obviously been holding up so much better than ES. I mean, totally better. See Tesla 177. Nice bounce of 176, just kinda chilling, pushing up a little bit more there. Have a wall finally coming in here on ES at 3,900 there. Nice flat route number. But again too, what you would wanna be looking for too is that you got a little bit of a increase volume right there, see there you go finally a little bit more. Especially if you're coming into a level with any type of resistance, any type of lot sitting there, you're gonna wanna see increased volume coming into that to have any confidence of a breakthrough or continuation through it. And so if you start to decline here or you start to get increased selling volume here, I would just look at this as a rejection most likely incoming here. That's what you gotta be watching. But over the past few days, you're definitely getting more volatility across the board. Like Tesla gives you a really good example of this as well. You're seeing that all the increased volume has been sell aside today, just I mean every bit of it. You've had a little bit of buying back here at like 10 o'clock, a little bit at 830 at open. But essentially every, I mean, you can count on one hand the volume that you're trying to get increased here. And even on this bounce here, minimal buying, right? There's no walls holding you down. Your first ones here at 179, they even set a wall at 178, there's letting you go here. But you can just see the volume across the board has been predominantly to the downside, to the short side. And you can see CBD definitely represents that. So that's like what I usually look for with CBD is to, but again, I think with equities, it can just be misleading, it really can. Because with equities, you don't necessarily need crazy volume to continue up, especially if indexes are pushing you in that direction. So I think like right now, it gives you a really good visual of since 12 o'clock, you're getting a little bit of a bounce. But you might say when I look at Tesla, oh, what's happening here? We're bouncing or, you know, this maybe it's invalidating my trade or whatever it may be, right? But you're not getting any increased volume, you're just kind of moving.  And that's why I think indexes are crucial to every bit of trading that I do. And not to say it's all that matters, but it's about 90% of what matters when it comes to trading anything and everything. I was understanding what's happening with indexes and futures over equities. Because if you understand how they move, you're gonna understand how to trade in general. NQ, NQ's still getting some love. Definitely more volume on the buy side here throughout the day, definitely. You saw some shorting coming in there as well. It's pretty small, nothing major. I didn't see any on ES. I don't know why ES is not showing stops. That's weird. It's not gonna show the back data on here on ES either. That's depressing. I believe it going. You definitely saw a lot of that shorting coming in yesterday. If you go watch yesterday's video, you can see all of it on YouTube. I tracked all, I should have taken a picture which I could have showed y'all today, but it's all on YouTube as well from yesterday's video posted. You can also see here on ES, looking for NQ. When you start to see NQ roll over too, then it's a big thing of what I've been saying as far as ETFs. When we look at what's happening with banks and obviously banks are one of the biggest impacts of what's happening to the S&P. It's like once you start to see, I think semi-conductors roll over and I've been talking about this for like days. It might sound like a broken record. But yeah, so once that starts to happen, I think you're gonna start seeing NQ really start to lose that weakness or lose that strength and start showing that weakness if you will. And that's what you gotta be looking for. So you can actually see a wall here on NQ, down at 12-1s, 12-1s, and 100 lots for NQ. It's quite a bit more than ES. So yeah, that's a big level. We start making new lows on the day here on NQ, we're gonna get ugly. You can already see that forming out there. You can see a few walls they have down here. But see how they're just moving those orders around? So you're not gonna really have anything down to like 38, 70. But yeah, go back into Discord, make sure you can see here. And guys, if you're in Discord and have questions, you can just use the open chat to ask those questions. I don't mind answering anything or going over anything. Surprised no one's asked, do I crude? What's happening there? Crude's pretty weak. But again, we wanna see increased volume here to the sell side. Getting a little bit of a lunchtime balance, 12, 12-30, interesting. It's kind of shaping up with what happened yesterday as well. Yesterday had a little bit more upside at the beginning of the day, but still. With PPI, you should have had more continued upside today. There's no reason unless there's just weakness across the board from investors. Just continued weakness, trying to break over. Tesla, yeah, Tesla. See, this is what you're looking for too is people always ask me about equities when I'm looking to go shorter than anything or when I'm looking for weakness in general. This is a prime example, right? So we constantly wanna focus on, if we're playing the downside, we wanna focus on those weak names, the ones that have the most potential for continuation obviously, right? And so Tesla gave us a great example. And so you can see here of like, gives you such a good visual on book map and looking at that level too of, is there walls, is there anything holding you down? And really there's nothing holding you down here, right? Your next level is at 179. You can see that sellers have actually reduced their wall here. If not, they're trying to get in a little bit more here to be a little bit more aggressive here on the play. But nothing's really holding you down here. Very, very small positions, right? Now, if we go look at what's happening on the chart to give you a better visual, first of all, if we look at Tesla, it's pretty disgusting. So we can see that we had that really nasty breakdown that we've been talking about. Leah talked about it the last time I was alive here. You can also see this is our key level I've been watching around 181. And so we see that we tried to push above it yesterday. You try to hold above and you got right back below and start holding below that level and you go to the 15 minute to get a better visual. And then you can start to see what's really happening here. So we're still on top of your mount to your mounted. You're like, screw it, you get below it. And then once that happens, you're just kind of trending down. It's just just inherent weakness. And so what I'm looking at here is if I look at the market in general from yesterday and getting any type of bounce, I look at like semiconductors and they're getting the most love, obviously. Even right now, past 15 minutes, you've been up from past 30 minutes, right? From 134.5 to 138 over $3 of upside. I go into Tesla and I look what's happening. And yeah, you got a little bit of a bounce from the lows of 176 to 178 almost. NVIDIA lows, if I like it, NVIDIA lows from absolute lows in the day from 233, so you're even up almost $5 there. But giving you just an overall visual here is you're seeing that Tesla's inherently way weaker. You can see you're grinding below the 90 MA on the 15, the five minute you're getting above it just a little bit, you're still below VLOP as well there. So as I look at that, I can still see the inherent weakness on the market is definitely on the side of a name like Tesla as against a semiconductor, like what's happening with AMD and NVIDIA, which are getting a lot more love out there. So you definitely want to see like which stocks are just showing that weakness then. And definitely just putting in the side of making more money over time. Yeah, Credit Suisse is supposedly about to be going under. News is going to be breaking all day. I would definitely be keeping all your news alerts on. Charles Gasparino, a lot of the meme investors hate this guy, breaking Credit Suisse employees, panic, mild guns, people crying. Yeah, so that's starting out there. Pretty disgusting. This definitely will have a roll over effect to America in my opinion. It won't have a direct effect, but the contagion effect will directly impact our markets and futures overall. So I think it's interesting that you're pushing up during this time, but it's worth mentioning that there's no buyers right now. That's really worth mentioning. So you can see the weakness in my opinion is clearly to the downside. Just like we talked about during the last time I was here was you're looking for the path of, you're looking for the path of least resistance when it comes to trading in my opinion, right? I'm always setting myself up for the expectation of losing, which sounds kind of bizarre. People don't really like that mentality, but I'm prepared to lose what they need to trade that I get into, right? If I go into it with, you know, say $10,000 into a trade and my risk in that trade is $2,000, in my head the $2,000 is most likely already gone, right? But I definitely want to have a path that the path to making money is far easier than the path of losing that money in that trade. So when I look at something like what's happening with ES, we can see there's no liquidity to the downside to get back down to that support, right? Very minimal. As we zoom in, still very, very minimal. As to the upside, resistance clearly. As we look back, I mean this is your best bounce that you've had, but we can see just continued strength to the downside over the past few days and weeks, just like we've been talking about every time I come here. So that's why this is the most important thing to be watching what's happening there. And it's gonna roll right back into that news and the fundamentals here, but you can just tell just by the price action what's happening as well. So Tesla, you're slowly just chomping, chomping, chomping. You have a little bit of a wall coming in at $177, but we'll see. The big thing too to be watching is see how they set these walls and they just take them off. We'll set them and they'll take them off, as we gotta be watching these big round numbers here on Tessie and these other big names, ES. We'll see. I'm trying to monitor news, talking the live, answer any potential questions as well. Someone said, what an interesting way to trade. So it's not that I'm necessarily just trying to short inherent weak names on the market. It's not really what I'm trying to do. My overall goal is to understand the trend in which we're trading and then focus on trading that trend, right? So if I look at something like, it's hard to get too much time here on book map, but if I go to something like ES, obviously we're watching here and I zoom out really quick to, let's go to, let's look at the, let's look at the, really you should be looking at the daily chart to get an overall view of the trend. You know, I've been inherently short since around 4100 just continuing to bet the downside. And as we look at this, it's really clear, like what constitutes a downtrend, right? Simply put or being bearish, whatever you want to call it, lower highs and lower lows. That is the definition of constituting a downtrend or being bearish or being inherently weak. So you have your trend clear here and as long as you continue this trend on a higher timeframe, you continue to have that thesis, right? Now, this is that point of confidence when you come into these major, major levels and that's why obviously we're watching them. But as we look here, I think you got to keep this on your board of watching. So that's, this is really the foundation of how I trade, understanding futures, understanding where they're going, understanding the trend and then finding trades that map that trend. And Tesla was just one of them. It was very weak, showing a lot of weakness up here and then I've continued to write it down. I closed out, got back into it as we touched 90 million in the four hour and the one day. And I, you know, that's obviously where we're at right now. So good question though or a good statement, I guess. Very curious how we're responding here. Pretty interesting though, you're getting, you're getting leveled the market. Well, credit sweeps is actively collapsing. Four eyes, fun. Tom Lee is bearish now. Geez. I get it. I want to see, was I going to look at, I was going to look at, I want to see what's happened with the flow as well and options. Let's see what's happening here. It's the SPX. So let's see some calls come in. Interesting. Let's go see what's happening. Again, if you have questions, guys, I can only answer questions that you guys ask. So if you don't ask questions, obviously, we're going to be sitting here chilling. Only so much I can say or do, but you guys ask your questions if you want to be answered. This is on Plash from Craig, doesn't link to TradingView, Tom Lee's bearish finally. So no, this, yeah, this is its own platform. This is Bookmap. Link should be obviously down below. And that if you're new to watching me at all, the GS strategies, obviously on my, I think my Twitter should be down below as well in the link, but I go live every day at 10, 30 AM central on my YouTube channel with Jay. And then obviously we go, we post videos every day as well on our channel, on my channel. So yeah, it's giving you a better visual. And then I kind of give you like a little bit of a recap every single day on the daily videos about what I'm looking at with liquidity and what I'm watching, right? It's never a try to sell you want anything. It's just to give you a better visual of what's happening there on level two. That's what Bookmap is. It's just a visual of level two data. So yeah, so you can really see what's happening. But see, you come right up to that level. I mean, you don't even make it there. Sellers don't even allow you to make it there. Sellers like, they just look what's happening there.  You push up, sellers don't even allow you to get to that level. They have two walls here at 178.9. And then 179 and pushing back down. Pretty interesting. But again, we need to be watching news in my opinion. That's the most important thing in the world right now. By far, see all this. This 12 o'clock time is usually some of the most inactive times of the market.  It's worth in the 10, 30, 11, 30 time slot. But I imagine around 130, you'll start picking up quicker to the downside. And you don't have any more good news that can be released this week. We've already gone over PPI, CPI. I mean, honestly, CPI and PPI came out as good as they could have came out. Core CPI was terrible. But yeah, core CPI was atrocious. Core CPI was so bad. But CPI in general made some people happy. Go over to YouTube comments. Appreciate the questions, GS. Does Bookmap show dark pool orders? So it does not show, nothing's gonna give you the best visual of showing you everything. But you do have the icebergs down here, which are orders that will not show up on level two. So some of these will be dark pool orders that come in. And these only work for futures. They will not work on equities. So Tesla, Google, it won't work on those. It won't give you that information. But again, I think it's almost more helpful. If I had to pick one of them to work on, I would rather it show me the information on futures than I would have wanted to show me on equities. Equities are cool, like understanding some dark pool and money that's flowing into them. But like I said, if you understand what's happening with futures, then you kind of know how you should be trading the market. Anyone that's actively trading and not watching futures all day long, I don't know what you're trading based on. And you're trading like on palm reading at that point because futures are what's moving everything. If futures are going down, there's like a 95% chance your stock is gonna follow. So that's why I think that, yeah, it'd be cool if I could have icebergs on Tesla and I tell Bruce all the time every time I talked to him. I'm like, hey, when's the next one? When do we add an icebergs to equities? And he's like, we can't do it yet. I still have it, but yeah, that's the biggest thing for me. Let's hear you getting that weakness now. And this is what you wanna see. They're keeping that wall there. They moved some of the liquidity down to 38.95 to try to keep them down, keep pressuring, keep pushing back down. Seeing a little bit of a wall come here at 38.80. Small, 146 lots on ES, it's pretty minuscule. The contract comparison from ES and NQ is pretty drastic. They said I've been trading a long time. Never heard of Bookmap, great content, fellow YouTuber, hey, great to have you, man. Bookmap's been around for a while. I used to use them back when I would only trade futures and crypto. Crypto's like where I heard about them. Back in like 2000, man, 19, it's been a while. It's been a while. Awesome product. Yeah, everyone's talking. So the same thing of what you were seeing that happened with SVB in that bank and how everyone was basically saying how exposed they were to that bank and how much money they had deposited in there. You're starting to see similar things roll out with Credit Suisse. Not ideal, not ideal. You have the US Treasury as well come out today and what they say, I just posted on Twitter. Yeah, the Treasury Department's reviewing the US bank exposure to Credit Suisse. Yeah, pretty gnarly. I mean, honestly, these start to roll over. Powell might have to pause rates for a second, but I mean, I don't know what's worse. Powell pausing rates and inflation spiking back up or keeping rates going, lending the banks get destroyed. It's gonna be tough. It's gonna be tough. I thought, can we see the MOB data on large caps, docs? MOB, I don't know what MOB is on book map. Only thing I'm using on book map, I can move my face so you can see that number right there. I'll move it to the left-hand side that makes you feel better. You get a little bit of pressure. You might've had some decent news there. Let me see if we have any news. But yeah, so all I use on book map is I use CBD, the icebergs and stops, and that's essentially it. Like I say though, I am open to looking at more indicators for you guys, but if you want me to look at more indicators, what you're gonna have to do is you're gonna have to join the book map discord and I have a section in here right here. It's stock features, Tyler.  You can ask me, hey, Tyler, just make sure you tag me, please, like just at and then Tyler Wilson. But yeah, and you can tell me what indicator you want me to look at or take a better look at it for you guys so I can go over in the next live stream. I'm gonna be here every Wednesday. But yeah, so again, I'm not a mind reader so you guys have to do, I know, asking people to do a little bit of work is difficult sometimes. But you're gonna have to do some work, go into Discord and say, hey, Tyler, can you take a look at this and then I generally will look at it in my own free time. By the way, if your mic is open in Discord, I meet you so I don't server meet you, but I'm not gonna be able to hear you if you ask anything. So I'm just continuing to meet people like on my side of the mic. So you know. So Casey, yeah, so if you ask me about that, like I can get it done for the next live stream so I can have it for you guys. But yeah, I don't wanna bring something up and then just look at it and then not have any idea what I'm looking at and then give you guys like a bad answer to your questions. Curious if you think much about power players dropping and manipulating news for investment plays, thief, et cetera, on SIVB sometimes, even Ukraine. It's possible. I don't get caught up in conspiracies though. That's my personal opinion. I think it's a very dangerous game. Look how they added all that liquidity right there. So you start pushing up, they started dropping it and you can see they added all the sellers right there. So yeah, I think getting to the side of thinking of the conspiracies and like everything's, you can see how this is the part that's interesting. So you saw they had a lot of sellers and they just took them all off. So they're actually moving their orders right there. So I wanna see, there has to be news that's dropping right now. There's gotta be, there's no way there's not. Once I gotta post this real quick. Weird, weird news drop. Okay, but yeah, I wanna see these questions as well. Yeah, so I just stay away from like any conspiracy, the things that I can't prove or implement. I'm a very factual trader when it comes to anything that I'm looking at. I'm looking at things that are in front of me, things I can not control, but things that I know that I can get information to. I don't like to do a lot of guessing. I'm not in this for, you know, 1000% gains. I mean, obviously like if 1000% gains comes to me overnight and something just drops, then awesome. I'm not gonna deny that money. But I think it's a very dangerous habit to get into. That's why I don't touch penny stocks. That's why I don't touch really small caps because a lot of that, like you can see a lot, that you can see a lot of manipulation there and things that you can't necessarily expect or plan for. So that's why I stay away from them. Not say you can't make money in small caps, but I definitely think that that's why I'm able to consistently give reliable viewpoints and different tips on how to expect futures to move and equity, large equities to move, right? I try to be as transparent as possible as well in what I'm doing. So really interesting. So someone asked about CVD, about how it moves.  Now as we look as well, look what happened on the downside. You're seeing aggressive downside on CVD. Very, very aggressive here. And look at that volume. It's all based on your volume. Well, it gets all your volume. The volume does not lie. Volume is the one indicator we love to see. It's the best indicator there is. Can you look at CL, is that crude? It has to be crude. It's gotta be crude. I don't think I'm gonna get crude futures. Yeah, I'm not gonna get crude futures. I'm almost positive I won't. I should have requested permission from Bruce today because I saw what happened to crude futures. But yeah, sorry. Market order, the stops and icebergs. I think you answered the, we can't see stops on an iceberg on stocks. You cannot see stops and icebergs on stocks, no. You can only see the stops and icebergs on futures. So like, you'd be able to see them on crude. I would assume gold, everything like commodities, those futures, VIX futures and everything like that. But yeah, I think you're about to break through this little flag, you can see it forming out there. Should start breaking down. Pretty disgusting, if you ask me. Like I'm saying, a lot of this comes back down to fundamentals, like even though you're pushing up there, it was clear as day, there's no reason to be going long on anything today. One of the easiest days to go short, in my opinion of all time. Literally like free money day. Where's Tesla? I wanna see Tesla get back down. Yeah, see, this is what I'm talking about. Great example, like, I'm happy that we're getting some examples live here. Thank God, I was kind of worried. Sorry, I'm also looking at, okay. Sorry, I was pulling up something else. I had that on the news, I'm pulling up. Trying to go back and forth between Discord messages in this, and YouTube. It's kind of tough. Not gonna lie, trying to see where we're at, go back. Super newbie, did the cell wall get absorbed or did sellers just get scared and remove their wall? Okay, so on ES, I'm pretty sure that's what you're asking about right here, back here. So you'll actually see those orders get filled, right? So you're not even touching, that's why Bookmap is cool, so you can actually see where that wall is. So if you zoom out, you can see there was a lot. You can see it reduced a little bit and then obviously it takes them off. So what I think that they were doing here is that you had a wall here at 3,900 flat on futures rolling out here. You see kind of double topped here. And so what I believe that they did is you can see right here. So they took a lot of their order off, they left some here, like about 193 lots. And then I think they started, I assume, there's no way of factually proving this. I think they just moved those to market orders and started slapping the ask towards the downside. And that's why you saw that immediate selling. And then you also saw that equate right back into volume, right? So we're seeing that aggressive sell volume kicking in here. Buyers though are trying to hold you up. You can see them trying to hold you up. But whenever you hit a wall, like I'm trying to find an example of you hitting a wall, you're not hitting any walls today, to be honest. Like right here, maybe this is a better example. So you can see there's a little bit of a gap, but you see right there, you see all the liquidity is there? You actually fill right into it, and you get rejected and pop back up. So you'll actually go into that level and see it. This is like two of the decimal take down here. So this is like 398 point, 0.88, right? You're not even there yet, you didn't even get to that level. You can actually see where that order is at too, when you hover right over it, that's the cool thing. And then when you hover over the bubble, it'll show you where that order got filled at as well. So it gives you a lot of information. Like right down here, you're seeing some of this wall get absorbed by sellers and you're buying down into it, or selling down into it. I wish I could set alert, you probably can set alert some book map, to be honest. Yeah, in queue, pushing down. But yeah, good question though. Next one, news has the whole waves effect or whatever, two minutes, 20 minutes, new few days, few weeks, people digest. Got any features? Yeah, yep, only features for the ICs. What's going on Heath? Good to have you. Probably about 20 more minutes live. If you guys have questions, feel free to ask. Again, love to go over questions. If you have questions or something you wanna see in the next live stream, again, every Wednesday I'll be here. Just go over to Discord. The link should be down below for book maps, Discord is 100% free. Just go over to my channel, Stock Features Tyler, and just ask your questions that you wanna see. So if you want me to cover an indicator that's on book maps website, I'll probably spend some time over the weekend, go over it, and then I'll have it ready or giving you my understanding of that tool and giving you a better representation here in the stream.  I only wanna go over things that you guys ask about and use my time here to hopefully answer your guys' questions as efficiently and as quickly as possible since I'm only here an hour a week. But yeah. Someone just asked, I just hopped in. Zack, sorry, I just saw your question. I just hopped in, can you explain to us again what is your strategy, scalping? So as of lately, I have not been doing that much scalping. I think scalping right now is probably one of the worst times in the market to be scalping just with the inconsistency of how we're moving. A lot of my trades have been focused on swings, which is kind of wild as of lately, but definitely been playing out in my favor. Like only swinging how open right now is Tesla. I've been in it since like 183 to this downside. So $6 a downside right now, which is awesome. No complaints there. So like ES though, essentially my strategy, giving, getting out of book map to give you a better visual. As we look at ES, what I'm doing here, and if you have been following my YouTube channel for any time at all, then you know I am very much so into reacting to what the market's giving me and following the current trend and the structure that's out there. So what I do is I focus typically on ES and NQ. So basically from January into the beginning of February, it was a clear up trend. We came right to our key level of 4,200 on NQ. It was even simpler to see. I mean, honestly, this was the trade here on NQ with all the tech names. You can see NVIDIA, Tesla, I mean, everything ran like crazy, big tech names went crazy. And all you're looking at here to get, to see the structure, the market structure is higher lows and lower highs to get you in that bull trend, which sounds super easy to say out loud, but when you start to have that on a daily four hour or weekly structure, obviously it gets really easy to trade. And so when I'm in this type of structure, I'm only looking to take trade calls. I'm only looking to take trade to the upside. I have no interest on trading the scalps to the downside. You can do that if you want. I just have no real need for that. As we start to flat line and we start to break trend back to the downside. And as you can see here, you're making lower highs and lower lows. That's when you try to trade to the downside. Now, where you use book map and my opinion for this and what I'm looking at is all these levels and what you're looking at here. So like we talked about last week, it's all about finding the path of least resistance, right? I think book map gives you the best visual of that, right? So I think besides this bounce you had right here at 3872, basically up to like 3900 right there. You can really argue that the path of least resistance continually over the past two to three weeks has been to the downside, very, very easy. Every time I've come on live and I like to, I do a little bit of daily reviews of book map and that price action that we got throughout the day on the YouTube channel. YouTube channel's option drops. You'll find us every single day we post a video on the market Monday through Friday. And so you can actually see that the downside has just been easily to play. We get more volume to the downside. It's been easier, right? And so book map is gonna give you a better view of where those big levels are. If you're not very good at finding supply and demand or finding key levels, book map is gonna really point you down with the level two data. And it's overall gonna give you more confirmation of those levels as well. So you can even see like, we start to double top around 3900, but we don't even make it there. Sellers get back aggressive, they lower their wall here and just are aggressively slapping puts, or slapping shorts, not puts. So they're shortening the market back down. And so you're seeing that happen there. And you're even seeing the weakness roll over to NQ, which NQ has been inherently strong for the day to say the least. Probably the most aggressive selling that we've seen right here on the day so far. Man, yeah, a little bit of selling back here, but pretty aggressive compared to what we were seeing here. Good question. Does book map or similar work on Bitcoin looks nuts just playing with lower, long-term larger than your channel? Can you show BTC on book map? So I, again, that's where I started was using Bitcoin. That was like kind of the foundation of how I got started with everything, was using Bitcoin futures. I don't know the Bitcoin. Let me message Bruce for the Bitcoin ticker.  I just sent a message real quick. But yeah, so like I was saying, like when I filmed, so before I ever got sponsored by book map, I used them back in 2019, probably a little bit in 18 as well, for looking at usually gold. Jesus. Yeah, I'm just gonna go ahead and meet everyone in Discord. Wild. Anyways, yeah, so I used book map back in 2018 and 19 when I was trading heavily crypto futures and oil and commodities in general. That was like my primary focus of trading, right? And so I used book map a lot then. And so that's really, really started, was like crypto and then futures and they're slowly adding more and more and more. Like when I found out, when they approached me and they told me that they had equities, I was like, wow, game changer. But yeah, so yeah, you can use Bitcoin. I just got the ticker real quick, one second's coming up. Bruce should be messaging me here in a second. But I will say Bitcoin is, if you trade Bitcoin and you're trading like leveraged Bitcoin on brokers, I don't know who you may use. I used Margex for a while. I used Bitmex back in the glory days. I used Bybit. Now if I trade anything, I use Margex still. But what I will say is Bitcoin has the most information of anything that I've seen on book map is because there's just so much happening on Bitcoin and constantly and the flow is crazy. So yeah, understand that. Bitcoin is a, I think Bitcoin, if you trade Bitcoin, I think I'm not gonna say, I don't think I've ever said book map is necessary for any type of trader when it comes to equities. But when it comes to trading crypto, I think Bitcoin, I mean, having book map is pretty awesome. FTSE, is that a ticker? I don't know if that's a ticker or not. I don't know what this is. I don't know what that is, dude. The sign pop, book map won't even show. Book map said no sir. Yeah, they said no sir. An ETF or something? Was that a UK index or something? Getting hammered? I mean, credit sweeps is going under, should be getting hammered, rightfully so. Rightfully so. Yeah, everything's getting hammered. Yeah, UK. Yeah, it's getting hammered. You're gonna continue to get hammered too. What kind of material about how to learn trading future would you suggest beginner's books, YouTube channels? People always ask me this question. I have some educational videos on my channel. I'm trying to upload more every single Saturday. Like I said, for me, the biggest thing for 2023, I don't know, I always get my years confused actually now, pretty wild. But the biggest thing for me looking at 2023, it was creating the most free content possible and definitely trying to get you guys the most content possible without having to pay for anything. So every Saturday on my channel, I do release an educational video on trading, different tips, whether it's trading spy, whether it's trading futures, what I'm looking at, different indicators, what I'm looking at, how I trade every single day. So yeah, but my partner as well, Jay Reem, you can find his channel on my channel on Option Drops. And yeah, he posts a lot of educational stuff as well. But to give you like a one-stop shop to learn everything, it's just like, for me, it didn't come across finding one YouTube channel. It came with me just spending endless hours like just doing it, right? It was just, yeah, a little bit of an obsession for a while. I wish there wasn't easy like answer to that though. I don't really think a course, like someone, one person's course is gonna make you a super successful either. That's why I don't like wanna offer a course. That's why I don't wanna do anything like that is because everyone's gonna be different and it just depends how you are with learning. And I don't think there's gonna be one course that fits everyone. So it's just like, yeah, never wanted to do that for myself. Got about 10 minutes left. If anyone has any last questions, would love to answer them. Again, like I said, next week I'll go over all of the new indicator, don't mind, but yeah. FESC 100, I don't know what the ticker is on. I can pull it up on BookMap real quick. BookMap has on their side, I believe. Let me go. More resource-based symbol table. So if you use BookMap, by the way, Bruce showed me this a long time ago. They made it far easier. But you can see all their tickers here as well. You just gotta know what the month emblem is. So let's find, I'm looking for the UK index. I may have passed it up, or they may not have it. Kind of while they have the 10-year notes on there. It's a while. I don't think they have it. They have it on BookMap. UK fee, oh, they do, they do. I'm lying, okay, here it is. So, FTSEMY, what's that? I'm assuming that's on rhythmic as well. I'm just not positive. So we'll go FTSEM3? Yeah, it's not popping up. Unless I'm typing it wrong, which I don't think I am. Yeah, I'm not typing it wrong. So that should be FTSEM3, unless someone else has a different ticker for it. Oil dropping, bullish for Qs? No, I don't think so. If banks are collapsing, I don't think anything's bullish for Aztec. London Stock Exchange? Yeah, I just, it's not popping up. Any last few questions before we hop out of here? Making sure? A little bit of chop here, coming back into third down.  That is crazy with the volatility. Bounce support off that area. Let's see, I see there's the news coming out. There's so much news coming out right now. The big thing today, though, you need to be watching. I'm telling you right now, the big thing is this right here, the Fed, you're seeing continuous, they're saying it over and over today. The Fed, we're in the Treasury, are reviewing credit sui exposures. And this is like, I'm telling you, this is like the ticking time bomb right here. That is it.  I think the numbers that came out where SVB was around $150 billion total, like exposure, credit sui is over 700 billion. It's gonna be big, it's gonna be big. Even though it's in the UK, the reaction effects to America will definitely happen. I'll try to get it figured out for the next one, Heath. Every Wednesday I'm gonna be here at 12 central, so I will be here for an hour. And also two of my streams, if you have questions, I'm not going to read the UK on my channel either, so yeah. Yeah, you're just not getting any data on that side. NQ'd not really getting any love too. Made a higher high there, not bad. Not on the day though. It's Tessie, Tessie's trying to get back over 178. Again, I think you get more sell off near the end of the day. Going into one next 30 minutes, next 45 minutes, you're gonna see a selling kick in my opinion. Investors aren't gonna wanna be exposed overnight with this. I mean, you can see it too, like even on a name like Tessie, there's not that much inherent sellers above you or any risk, right?  It's kind of crazy if you look at it.  Ridiculous. Trying to see the last few questions, no questions in here. It's almost gonna wrap it up guys. That's pretty much it for today. There's not too much. But you can even see here, again, this is why I love looking at it with CVD. Again, good question who ever asked it earlier. So you can see here on ES, you can see CVD was higher back here. Obviously when you were taking up to 3rd and 100 the first time, we saw that big drop here. I can actually get rid of this so you can see a little bit clearer that the ICs. You can see how you moved back down on that dip, that small dip from 1230 to 1245. CVD got hit. You push back up a little bit but CVD, what's it doing? It's getting weaker. CVD's continually getting weaker here. Why? What's the determining factor? As you pushed up, pretty minimal volume followed by increased selling volume coming back in. On this push back up here, where's the volume guys? There's no volume to push CVD up. All the volume's still to the sell side. Very minimal. Very, very minimal. The only thing that you don't love is that you're not getting continuation to the sell side. But again, I see no reason to go long here for myself. I just can't do it. I can't do it. Did you open a BTC Unbook map? I can rewind. I did not. I did not look at a BTC Unbook map. I'll have it for next stream. I'll have it all ready for the next stream. I'll say for a little bit longer if you guys have any remaining questions. I really want to watch how this plays out and see if you get to push both 3,900. Really curious now. I don't think you're going to. And like the fact that matters, you should be easily pushing through this. Today was, today should have been a bullish day for the market. It should have been. And you look at what happened with PPI. But you're not getting it. And when you start seeing weakness on days, if you, when you start seeing weakness on the market, on days that should be bullish, that's typically some of the biggest signs you need to see there. Trying. Also too, if we get the move obviously after this, I'll have all the updates in the YouTube video today going over bookpamps. So make sure you check it out there. But yeah, you're not getting nothing here. Finally, it's going to be a little bit. We're just waiting for news to be released as well. That's all you're waiting for. And the only news that's pushing up right now is the expectation of Fed rates being paused, which is a joke. Absolutely a joke. All right guys, I'm going to hop out of here. There was no more questions. It was a good live stream. Again, I'll have the other indicator you asked someone requested. I forgot your name who requested it. Bitcoin on here as well. You're getting a little bit of that dropped now, but again, you have no resistance over top here. You have some small levels, but they're not even, with no effort at all, it would take you to push up. But look at that volume. Weak, it's all selling volume. It's all selling volume. CBD, I can say CBD turning red with ease but before power hour. So we have a whole hour before then, so easily it's turning red. And if that turns red before power hour, it's going to get gross. Have a good one guys, appreciate it. See you guys next Wednesday.