It works OK for me now
I need help for this indi:
-Alert when changing colour : Popup alert, sound alert, email alert.
Dont forget info about current chart and time frame also where this indi attach.
That is just another version of solar wind. A lot of versions you can find here : https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/179650
If you look at the attached document by John Elhlers you can see (between the lines, of course ) that even he was aware of that problem. It is not a just a chance that he decided to use those values (page 5 of the document) for inverse fisher of cyber cycle (almost perfect 100 as a basis for cyber cycle calculation, as you can see, and for some reason, he decided not to use the same data as in RSI example at page 3:))
Absolutely spot on Mladen - as usual been looking at these dated posts (and reading all the books, technical papers, etc relevant) to pick up things I can learn and adapt in my project (which hopefully when concluded would enable useful sharing). I am currently reviewing JE and he is I think the most valid and probably most accurate thinker on the circuit by a million yards (outside of course of late Mandelbrot). My special interest is of course cycles and the cyclicality of markets but based on the IFS formalism of fractal geometry (which I hope to introduce in a shockingly simple way as the explanation for all market movement and therefore a more accurate basis for tool design). But love your insights here as elsewhere. One thing though I would love for you to help draw a line on this issue of repainting indicators (because I think you are authoritative at least here and can cause others to align more constructively) - e.g. the chaos semaphore tool - these things recalculate because by the way they measure price, the series "recalculates" - it is afterall dynamic. Indeed such indicators are incredibly informative for a true understanding of market dynamics - would you agree? I would be glad for your full thoughts on this - certainly my sense is that recalculating indicators are thought to somehow reflect instances of coding inability - but is that correct (my coding abilities are close to negligible)? Or is it the case that in fact they can be both desirable and necessary depending on the information one seeks from the market and that any coder would be justified to employ such algos to that kind of end or are we to assume for instance that for every tool that "recalculates" there is an alternative coding regimen that is more accurate in reproducing the same exact results without the "error" of recalculating (e.g. the cycleidentifier)? Cheers
A Conclusion on Roofing Filters:
From testing the available indicators based on this specific idea – results are a far cry from the idealized presentations of the author. It is possible that he employs this implementation differently and that specifically his MESA Cycle and MESA Momentum do combine to prove his points and or that they are easily more specific to stocks and such. But certainly nothing out here based on roofing filters would cause me to lose sleep in the realm of forex and commodities.
That said I do not think those are the key takeaways from his article on predictive indicators – in fact I think his article is a treasure trove and provides very crucial ideas that must not be allowed to disappear in the mist of an “unproven” application in terms of the “roofing filtered” stochastic.
a)He provides some very basic and important insights into the dynamic structure of oscillator read curve data.
b)He highlights and justifies the undependability of traditional tools and the most probable reasons for difficulties in using them effectively based on those insights.
c)He proffers a solution in the notion of a tool similar to his idealized “roofing filtered” stochastic in combination with (and this is the crucial point) anticipated entry/exit strategy as described in the article while debunking the traditional or conventional wisdom based approach to swing and or momentum trading based on oscillators.
d)So the practical goods from him on this score are in i) finding such an oscillator among his and other available tools ii) fine tuning a strategy around such a tool in fit with his insights about the effects of lag on potential profits and flow timing based on conventional wisdom driven strategies and developing a strategy around his notion of anticipated entry/exit.
e)These (i.e. “d”) are doable and pertinent to increasing efficiency in swing and momentum based trading especially when one has further been exposed to his articles on fisher and inverse fisher transform where he further describes the implications of price distributions and where he aptly likened price behaviour to that of a square wave. No one can miss the Gold in all of that.
f) His primary weakness overall (to my humble understanding) is in trying to “improve” technical (and fundamental)analysis rather than promoting the dumping of those fields entirely as outdated conceptually in the face of new findings in chaos mathematics and fractal geometry. He clearly is given to glossing over the implications of the fractal structure of markets and limits his views to the fact of self-affinity as evident in differently timed charts and their implications for so-called spectral dilatation. Indeed, like most people not yet grounded in the IFS formalism of fractal geometry (the chaology of markets) there is much that he misses out in his understanding of markets as a result. Clearly, DSP and the mathematics involved are pertinent to improved understanding of markets but unlike what he believes (as with so many others dabbling headlong into cycles and cycle theory without first understanding the primary mathematical formalism for markets) it is easily demonstrated that the entire scope of mathematics brought to bare in this approach is a secondary rather than the primary formalism by which to begin assessing markets and as such developing tools. My project will of course put an end to all that. But between now and when I am ready to spill the beans as they say I just need to point out that he has a lot – a huge, huge lot contributed to traders with the above points (and in his general work) and those with a good head on their shoulders can indeed run with these brilliant expositions of a truly creative mind profitably – with of course some work refining things in terms of what oscillator(s) to use and what settings best deliver results and why (hint: the traditional settings in my humble opinion are worse for trading than “roofing filtered” outcomes in general. It is of course a matter of reasoned trial and error to find those that actually work).
g)Now testing the Geortzel browser to see what if any merit in it and in comparison to the tools and techniques possible from this dude Ehler – could take a month or more to conclude. BTW: It would appear to me that no one has come even within a mile of Ehler in terms of positive ideas as to how to tackle the conundrum of markets - entry/exit.
has anyone got the ehler low pass filter, would like to replace my 20sma and 100 ema that i always use. Heard this was the ticket.
check out this one : https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/177732
This is an adaptive stand alone version of Cyber Cycle with alerts on the lines crossing.
I received this in my E-mail today from Stocks & Commodities magazine....
The first thing I did was look at the E-mini trading report. Slippage and commission are not accounted for ie they are zero. This is not realistic.
It would have been better if they allowed for one tick slippage and $2.50 per side (more or less). So how do the numbers workout?
Total trades were 272 so commissions + slippage would be (272 * 12.5) + (272 *2.50) = 4080. Trading costs would chop off 16% from net profit. With a win rate of 55%, ignoring trading costs is a form of smoke and mirrors. Win rate would have been much closer to random in the real world. Any profitability on long trades could easily be attributed to the natural bullish bias of the S&P.
Anyway, for $3000.00, I think I will pass.
Please enable the necessary setting in your browser, otherwise you will not be able to log in.