Hidden divergence - page 21
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
usefulness of feddings" spins)))
Well here's my unrelatedness (red line), but what is fedding I don't know. Enlightenment.
And that petting has been satisfying for many years.
to Prival
1. "A Billion to the End of the World" by A and B. Strugacius.
.... Engineer to whom the wanderers found a ready-made cub for getting the copyright on "Useful Use of Feddings".
Fedding: the spontaneous periodic attenuation of a SW radio signal at the receiving point.
2. and there's also a phase shift...
P.S.s.s.s.s. The sense in the figure where the incoherence is there is also the phase shift.
it's so fast and unexpected :)
To me, when it goes off the scale, the arrow goes to the right and doesn't even go anywhere by tapping, but here it's different somewhat....
The indicator value is proportional to the speed. And the speed on the 5th wave decreases as compared to the 3rd wave, therefore the extremum value is lower. So it is not an oversteer.
Ultimately, the question is, I asked the author of 9-21-6, a question on 'Hateful Pipsing.': let him try to attach elementary zz to history and show on the chart how his diverters-covers work...... zz has nothing to do with it, it just clearly shows the basic movements, but the divergences are really a problem..... I have the feeling, looking at the H1 chart, that it, with these parameters, works on H4......
Author and Discussion Initiator, help clarify the issue...... it's not hard, right?
If that applies to me, I was not the author and initiator of the discussion. In a parallel thread, Geronimo said that I was wrong and that the "right" question is being addressed here. So I went in.
There appeared to be many inaccuracies, which I said (and I did not say everything, but no more is required here). That's all.
I work with the same parameters of the divergence indicator (9,21,5) absolutely on all frames. At the same time I control 7 frames - Daily....M1. I look less frequently at W and MN because the situation changes there slowly.
I have warned about the "Pivot". I have warned "Pivot" - to understand the theme we can ignore everything on the charts, except the price chart, divergence indicator and wave analysis.
The D/C signals are generated equally (in type, form and properties) both at the end of a wave structure and inside (during a correction), while the significance of the signals is different.
The solution is to use trend indicators. But any trend indicator on the price chart contains the constant component of the price signal. For this reason any multi-period indicators on the price chart are displaced relative to each other vertically. If we remove the constant component, the accuracy will greatly improve. This can be done by placing the trend indicators in the indicator window (and not only MA). (This also has some peculiarities).
In this case, the indicator lines are not shifted and the reversal (of a trend or a correction) is generated by convergence of indicator lines in the reversal zone at the top/bottom of the indicator window at any frame, and the moment of the reversal is generated by the divergence indicator. (See "Pivot Indication...").
In my reply to khorosh I said that I was waiting for the confirmation of the signal but I was waiting for it successively on the lower frames from the major one to the minor one.
For example, the signal generation has started on Daily. It does not mean that its execution will start now, i.e. we should work in the same direction (and the signal is still forming). It will be 2-5 days before the execution. 2-5 bars before the execution the signal will start to form on H4 (continue to work in the same direction), then on H1, M30, etc. Eventually the signals will be formed on all the frames simultaneously, this is the exact moment of reversal (as I demonstrated in example 1 (and others) of the article "Pivot"). So there is more than enough confirmation with consistent clarification. But it is very difficult (and impossible for many people) to work only on divergence (convergence) signals. Therefore, the system applies a complex analysis (wave, oscillatory and trend analysis) that visualizes the market situation, where we can see where the wave structure or correction begins/ends on the "small to large" frames.
From the answer we can see that the beginning of D/C signal formation is not a reversal signal. The conditions for a reversal are formulated in the article "Connection Frames" and its practical implementation is described in the article "Pivot".
In any case, we must look for a reversal (no matter which one, trend or counter-trend) and use the one appropriate to the situation. It may be a trend reversal, or a reversal to a correction, or a trend reversal after a correction ends. Either reversal is looked for in the same way. And the significance of a reversal needs to be distinguished. And Geronimo's ardent promotion of looking for entries only by trend signals will lead to "losses". He does it out of misunderstanding. You can see that in most cases, the trend signals will continue to move against the trend. The reason is not the false signals of the D/C. You should also be aware of the peculiarities.
Therefore I had to introduce the concepts of general and local L/R in my research in order to ensure the accuracy of the signals. A local L/R signal is always an accurate (within-frame) signal on any frame.
It's all in the articles, only you have an obvious aversion to reading. I'm not arguing with anyone at all and don't intend to, but someone starts opposing at the first glance at the titles of the articles, as if everything I've laid out needs me.
P.S. When sell, buy, - look in the articles. I can't spell it all out here.
Consider MACD(9,21,5). A fast EMA is an LPF with a relatively high cut-off frequency F=1/9; a slow EMA is the same but with a lower f=1/21. The AFC difference is the difference in AFC, i.e. a bandpass filter that selects frequencies between two fixed frequencies, roughly in the interval [f, F]. And now this filter is smoothed by another LPF whose cut-off frequency is the highest, FF=1/5. This still leaves a bandpass filter.
So, MACD extracts a certain narrow band from the whole signal. And the trader decides on the entry/exit by the signal amplitude at the output of this bandpass filter.
P.S. I certainly missed the point about linearity of response response of signals - you also need to take phase delay into account. All the same it looks like nonsense - even if you take into account very roughness of the picture...
Divergence (conv) signals are always executed in any frame and are never false. What can be false is their illiterate interpretation.
..
But it is very difficult (and even impossible for many people) to work only on divergence (convergence) signals.
You'd better make up your mind...
--
In the same way anything can be drawn. MA crossing, for example.
Just like this and say: "MA crossings work too and are never false".
(moreover, it is not difficult to show probable supporting pictures).
And then add: "But it is very difficult to work with them (and for many people it is even impossible)...".
--
Correctly said rider:
"... an elementary zz to attach to history and show on the chart how ... diverters-covers work...".
Indeed, what prevents you from making an elementary indicator (not even MTS) on the principle of ZigZag, but without peeking into the future? Put into it the underlying criteria that are "never false", let it show how they are "always fulfilled on any frame". And then present to the community a picture of a div/con indicator and a line of that indicator (like zz) displayed in the main chart window. The most convincing would be to present the code of such indicator openly, so that everyone could judge for himself whether one can get some benefit from it or not.
to Mathemat
Sum-difference filter aka integral-differential, first deduction gives something similar to velocity, second deduction something similar to acceleration.
OsMa = result of two differences = acceleration for traders)))
acceleration may not be physical, but it is salo e.
Lard. You got me there, Korey, I love lard. OK, let's keep trying. What's EMA? Nisho, except for discrete Laplace transform from step function Close[i]. Integration goes all the way down through the history from zero bar, the exponent is natural. If there is enough history, integration can be considered to go on to infinity (the beginning of history). Also, multiplication of this integral is subject to the transformation parameter. The difference of two EMAs with different p (by Laplace) is already something peculiar, and precisely because of this stuff. And then there is simple integration. Eh, there is some interesting mathematics here, if you think about it...