Hidden divergence - page 61
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
"Calm" - low-volatility pairs as well as pairs strongly correlated with futures.
When the flat is going down, the losses will be unambiguous, and whether they will be compensated by profits from trend profits is a big-big question - one has to move stops and protect oneself somehow from bad entries.... all in all it comes to one, Hamletian: "trend or flat, that's the question" )
i.e. x-1 is 1, 2, 3, and 4, i.e. x+1 is 3. in a flat, the flat will be unambiguous, and whether it will be compensated by profit from trend profits is a big-big question - one has to move stops and protect oneself somehow from bad entries.... all in all to one, Hamletian: "a trend or a flat, that is the question" )
in a flat, it's always a loser. and this trend holding strategy without indicators - entries and exits based on analysis with other methods.
no.
in MQL: 0-current, incomplete, then countdown 1,2,3,4, etc.
i.e. x-1 is 1, x+1 is 3
can you count backwards from the 1st completed bar to avoid confusion ?
Can you countdown from the 1st completed bar to avoid confusion?
What do you mean...? are you suggesting it to the platform developers or me to experiment with the code? :)
Why? I don't see a problem in comparing three candles. Before there were five compared on the same principle.
Here's Kelasev+, it's much more interesting.
What do you mean...? are you suggesting it to the platform developers or me to experiment with the code? :)
Why? I don't see a problem in comparing three candles. Before there were five compared on the same principle.
Here's Kelasev+, it's much more interesting.
no - just mark 2 bar exactly as the second bar for convenience although it is not essential.
what is kelasev+ ? additional filters and strategies?
no - just mark 2 bar exactly as the second for convenience although it's not essential.
what is kelasev+ ? additional filters and strategies?
Technically there are no obstacles, but it will make the indicator a bit heavier. For now there is no need, especially when constructing/using MTS according to this algorithm, it would be more reasonable to transfer the indicator directly to the Expert Advisor's code.... and it will work exactly the same way there, we have to rewrite it all the same way :)
Kelasev+. What you suggest is a free paraphrase or some additions to Kelasev's article "Elementary particles" of price charts was published in "Foreign Currency Speculator" in 2002. Here is the link to the last republished edition http://www.forextimes.ru/article/a28160.htm
The question was addressed to your phrase:
But this strategy of trend-following without indicators - entry and exit based on analysis with other methods.
What "other" methods are used?
Kelasev+. What you suggest is a free paraphrase or already some additions to Kelasev's article "Elementary Particles" of price charts, which was published in "Currency Speculator" back in 2002. Here is the link to the last republished edition http://www.forextimes.ru/article/a28160.htm
The question was addressed to your phrase:
What "other" methods are used?
I gave this link on page 57. have you worked out the Formations in detail yet (and what potential have you analysed the Extension Formations? - You are a rocket strategist, aren't you)?
for example using a Compression Formation when working on low volatility pairs and D1 (better 2 days of compression - total 3 together with the first) and buy entry 10 pips above the last day and stop limit 10 pips below the nearest compression day, usually allows profits to grow to 4% (if you enter 2%).
something similar when trading in an established 20-day channel, if price is near the upper boundary before the news release (stop - under the upper boundary of the channel), etc. etc.
About standard methods with oscillators, MA, ... do not mention
About the strategies related to timing, interest differentials, treasuries and options (risk reversals, put-call indicators...) I don't write about them either.
The main thing - if there is the slightest suspicion of a reversal, on the basis of the above, we exit. Precise entering has already been discussed.
As Matroskin the Cat said: "Before you can buy something you need, you have to sell something you don't need.)
So. Before you analyse something, you need to understand everything, including "accurate entry". That's not what you said last time:
High[i+1]>High[i+2]&&Low[i+1]>Low[i+2] - Бычья Формация, и
High[i+1]<High[i+2]&&Low[i+1]<Low[i+2] - Медвежья Формация,
- далее Формации Пауз:
High[i+1]<High[i+2]&&Low[i+1]>Low[i+2] - Формация Сжатия, и
High[i+1]>High[i+2]&&Low[i+1]<Low[i+2] - Формация Расширения,
- далее Формации Коррекций или Разворотов:
High[i+1]<High[i+2]&&High[i+2]>High[i+3] или Low[i+1]>Low[i+2]&&Low[i+2]<Low[i+3] - Формации Экстремумов.
Координаты Close и Open не имеют значения.
Далее Анализ:
Каждый законченный бар рассматриваем вместе с предыдущим и определяем Формацию.
Чтобы войти в позицию нужно открыть ее в направлении Формации Движения.
Чтобы приостановить или закрыть позицию нужно, чтобы бары Формации Расширения
вышли за пределы предыдущей Формации
Low[i+2]<Low[i+3] для Бычьей Формации или High[i+2]>High[i+3] для Медвежьей Формации или
сменили Формацию на противоположную через Формацию Экстремума
High[i+1]<High[i+2]&&High[i+2]<High[i+3]&&High[i+3]>High[i+4] или Low[i+1]>Low[i+2]&&Low[i+2]>Low[i+3]&&Low[i+3]<Low[i+4].
Let's deal with it like human beings. Has the indicator got it right or not?
Or just write the conditions for entry and exit. Approximately like this, for example:
If H1>H2 and H3>H4 - Buy..... Stop level L2-5p......
If this and that Close Buy etc.
It's hard to make sense of your entry.
As Matroskin the Cat said: "Before you can buy something you need, you have to sell something you don't need.)
So. Before you analyse something, you need to understand everything, including "accurate entry". That's not what you said last time:
Let's deal with it like human beings. Has the indicator got it right or not?
Or just write the conditions for entry and exit. Approximately like this, for example:
If H1>H2 and H3>H4 - Buy..... Stop level L2-5p......
If this and that Close Buy etc.
It's hard to make sense of your post.
On p.58 there was a link to your indicator - the movement and fractals are coded correctly there, but the arrows do not show.
You yourself have made changes that are not consistent with the above
I have not yet found the exact entry from a totally different method - I will send you the link in my personal message.
the output is generally the basis of strategies and i really think it is worth sharing.
take two versions of your last indicator
i would like to ask you to implement one strictly according to the above strategy, the other with your changes and run it as an EA (i can't do that unfortunately) and we will see the difference.
or at least visualise EURGBP on D1, e.g. from 2000
but you cannot focus on a small number of methods
trading is just trading with the sum of traits (collected over years) which gives statistical advantage
including those on p.55 + volumes.
i am a proponent of working on very small movements
Why exactly female, there is already one community.
+1 )) you're right, "birds of a feather" .... I have already said it for 60 pages.
On p.58 there was a link to your indicator - the movement and fractals are coded correctly there, but it does not show arrows.
You yourself have made changes that are inconsistent with the above.
The indicator according to your conditions is attached and the picture it shows on the dailies is below
Who would tell me, unwise, what to do with all this wealth. Let me explain the thought: in those conditions, which were suggested by me, there was an idea, that follows from your post with conditions (I do not remember which page, but they are in the end of the text of both indicators):
- the change of a bearish (bullish) formation to the opposite one through the extremum + conditions of "truthfulness" of Williams' fractal were taken into account (whether to trust it or not is another question).
The conditions suggested by your indicator contain a scrappy version of a three-bar fractal or the Demark point of the first order, with incomplete conditions of formation. So it generates arrows, which do not reflect anything.
take two variants of your last indicator
I would like to show you one strictly according to the above strategy, the other with your changes and run it as an EA (unfortunately I am not able to) and we will see the difference
or at least visualise EURGBP on D1, for example since 2000.
.....
I am a supporter of working on very small movements
1. How do you imagine running the indicator as an EA? .... And what should it analyse after that, a picture? I had to ask you three times for entry-exit conditions. All I got in response was a link to your earlier posts. And visually, sorry - it's not an analysis, "your word against mine" - nothing more. In my opinion, my version of the conditions shows more reasonable arrows, and yours? :)
2. EURGBR.... With 2000..... while aiming for profit in units of pips per trade? I have the whole pre-2004 story completely deliberately cut out. It is too "white soft and fluffy" (roughly like myself) to "on very small movements" analyse anything on it.
3. to get the visualiser up and running properly, just read the manual for the platform you're using carefully.
And lastly.
The last point is that the accurate input comes from a completely different method - I will personally tell you where it comes from.
The output is the basis of strategies and I really think that it is worth sharing.
There is a card game called "preference". It usually has 3-4 players, but when one partner is not enough, then you can do it in pairs, but the cards are still in triplicate. So, the third one doesn't exist, it's called "dummy" ..... I really don't like this option, and I also hate it when they try to use living people for darker purposes. You can never have everything, not everything.
That's it. I am no longer interested in this topic.