Direct answer: a worked example of Marubozu
A worked example of a Marubozu candlestick means you pick an OHLC (open, high, low, close) dataset, apply explicit rules for “minimal wick,” and compute the body and wick sizes to verify whether the candle qualifies. Below is one fully numerical example with stated assumptions.
Definition and mechanics (what you measure)
A Marubozu candlestick is commonly described as a candle with a very large real body and very small (or absent) upper and lower wicks.
To work with it transparently, measure these quantities from OHLC:
- Candle body size (absolute): Body = |Close − Open|
- Upper wick size: UpperWick = High − max(Open, Close)
- Lower wick size: LowerWick = min(Open, Close) − Low
Assumption for this worked example (definition choice):
- A candle is treated as Marubozu if both wick sizes are “small relative to the body.”
- Use a fixed threshold: UpperWick ≤ 0.10 × Body and LowerWick ≤ 0.10 × Body.
This is a practical rule for verification. Another source might use different thresholds (for example, “exactly zero” wicks), so results can vary.
Worked numerical example (verify by calculation)
Assume the following OHLC values for a single candle:
- Open = 100.00
- Close = 104.00
- High = 104.20
- Low = 99.90
Step 1: Compute the body.
- Body = |104.00 − 100.00| = 4.00
Step 2: Compute upper wick.
- max(Open, Close) = max(100.00, 104.00) = 104.00
- UpperWick = High − 104.00 = 104.20 − 104.00 = 0.20
Step 3: Compute lower wick.
- min(Open, Close) = min(100.00, 104.00) = 100.00
- LowerWick = 100.00 − Low = 100.00 − 99.90 = 0.10
Step 4: Apply the “minimal wick relative to body” rule.
- 0.10 × Body = 0.10 × 4.00 = 0.40
- Check upper wick: 0.20 ≤ 0.40 ✅
- Check lower wick: 0.10 ≤ 0.40 ✅
Conclusion for this example: the candle qualifies as a Marubozu under the explicit assumption that wicks must be at most 10% of the body size.
Evidence limits, failure modes, and risks of over-reading
- Definition mismatch: If you use a stricter rule (e.g., require zero wicks) or a different threshold than 10%, this same candle could be classified differently.
- Timeframe and data granularity: OHLC values depend on the timeframe and the data feed’s resolution; a candle can look “nearly wickless” on one setup and not on another.
- No predictive guarantee: Even if a candle matches Marubozu mechanics, it does not establish that future price will move in a particular direction. Future outcomes depend on broader market context.
- Costs and execution uncertainty: Real trading involves spreads, slippage, and latency; these can affect results even when chart patterns appear similar.
- Ambiguous “near zero” wicks: When wick sizes are small, tiny changes in OHLC (rounding, bid/ask representation, or data adjustments) can flip classification.
How to verify independently (and what to ask next)
To independently verify a Marubozu claim on any chart, you can:
- Extract the candle’s OHLC values from the same timeframe and data source.
- Compute Body, UpperWick, and LowerWick exactly as above.
- State your wick threshold assumption (like the 10% rule) and check inequalities.
Next question to resolve for yourself: which “Marubozu” rule definition are you using—relative wick thresholds, absolute tick thresholds, or “zero wick” strictness? Consistent definitions are essential for comparing how often candles qualify.