didjeridoo: Dear Mladen
the McGinley Dynamic is not working in ADXm Averages 2_4, can you fix it? also can you build an MTF version?

didjeridoo

Yes, I have noticed it, but so far can not find why it does not work (since it works in all the other indicators, seems that some of the math is causing in this case - case of adxm - a problem). If I find a solution will post it

didjeridoo: Dear Mladen
the McGinley Dynamic is not working in ADXm Averages 2_4, can you fix it? also can you build an MTF version?

didjeridoo

McGinley Dynamic is a poor performer when the prices are repeating from bar to bar. In ADXm, there are periods when di+ and di- are repeating multiple times as a value and that prevents from getting reasonable results when the result smoothing is set to it. I am not sure that there is any solution in the case of ADXm

In order to avoid some problems (and explanations) and since McGinley Dynamic average can not handle ADXm calculation steps (it would need to be made a different math calculation in order to be able to do so, but then it would not be a McGinley Dynamic ma), here is this version : adxm_averages_2_5.ex4

______________________

PS: some more minor ADXm calculation changes done (not in the averages, but in the ADXm itself) - results are more logical in some cases

mladen: In order to avoid some problems (and explanations) and since McGinley Dynamic average can not handle ADXm calculation steps (it would need to be made a different math calculation in order to be able to do so, but then it would not be a McGinley Dynamic ma), here is this version : adxm_averages_2_5.ex4

______________________

PS: some more minor ADXm calculation changes done (not in the averages, but in the ADXm itself) - results are more logical in some cases

When a bug is planted in the head, then it does not leave it easily

Found a completely different formula for McGinley Dynamic average : metastock formula. And decided to give it a try. And even though the average itself is not too different, the adxm result appeared (finally ). So here is a version that can calculate ADXm using McGinley Dynamic : ADXm averages 2_6.ex4

_______________________

PS: results are sometimes strange, but I find it useful even in that strange format

PPS: even though John McGinley claims that his formula (which is different than the metastock formula) is worthless, I decided not to use his formula. Difference between values produced by his formula and metastock formula are marginal, but the metstock formula does not suffer from errors when there is a series of same values (in which case John McGinley's formula fails miserably), and I find it better. Assuming that there will be no repeated values is rather naive

mladen: When a bug is planted in the head, then it does not leave it easily

Found a completely different formula for McGinley Dynamic average : metastock formula. And decided to give it a try. And even though the average itself is not too different, the adxm result appeared (finally ). So here is a version that can calculate ADXm using McGinley Dynamic : ADXm averages 2_6.ex4

_______________________

PS: results are sometimes strange, but I find it useful even in that strange format

PPS: even though John McGinley claims that his formula (which is different than the metastock formula) is worthless, I decided not to use his formula. Difference between values produced by his formula and metastock formula are marginal, but the metstock formula does not suffer from errors when there is a series of same values (in which case John McGinley's formula fails miserably), and I find it better. Assuming that there will be no repeated values is rather naive

MLADEN,

so much thanks for taking so much serious headache to sort out some positive solutions.

This version of indicator is mainly made because of the McGinley Dynamic average. The John McGinley has some illogical parts (very poor when values are repeated, for one) and some things that are even less than illogical (for example he advises that the correction factor should be 60% of previous value for period 20, nn% of previous value for period mm, and so on), and that is why I decided to use metastock formula as a basis and to adjust it. So this version does that, and no, no manual % adjustment needed

Example bellow is the new McGinley Dynamic average

This version of indicator is mainly made because of the McGinley Dynamic average. The John McGinley has some illogical parts (very poor when values are repeated, for one) and some things that are even less than illogical (for example he advises that the correction factor should be 60% of previous value for period 20, nn% of previous value for period mm, and so on), and that is why I decided to use metastock formula as a basis and to adjust it. So this version does that, and no, no manual % adjustment needed

Example bellow is the new McGinley Dynamic average

Dearest MLADEN,

so thanks for updating the averages indicator,i am afraid of you taking too much headache for us traders by updating and altering too much that already done, .

didjeridoo:Dear Mladen the McGinley Dynamic is not working in ADXm Averages 2_4, can you fix it? also can you build an MTF version?

didjeridoo

Yes, I have noticed it, but so far can not find why it does not work (since it works in all the other indicators, seems that some of the math is causing in this case - case of adxm - a problem). If I find a solution will post it

didjeridoo:Dear Mladen the McGinley Dynamic is not working in ADXm Averages 2_4, can you fix it? also can you build an MTF version?

didjeridoo

McGinley Dynamic is a poor performer when the prices are repeating from bar to bar. In ADXm, there are periods when di+ and di- are repeating multiple times as a value and that prevents from getting reasonable results when the result smoothing is set to it. I am not sure that there is any solution in the case of ADXm

mladen:abel

Here is a version that supports custom time frames too (and some minor internal changes in the way it works) : averages_-_mtf__alerts_7.ex4Thank you very much for your help Mladen

techmac:What data source are you using for custom time frame?

Hi techmac

i want to use in non standard time frame

In order to avoid some problems (and explanations) and since McGinley Dynamic average can not handle ADXm calculation steps (it would need to be made a different math calculation in order to be able to do so, but then it would not be a McGinley Dynamic ma), here is this version : adxm_averages_2_5.ex4

______________________

PS: some more minor ADXm calculation changes done (not in the averages, but in the ADXm itself) - results are more logical in some cases

Files:mladen:In order to avoid some problems (and explanations) and since McGinley Dynamic average can not handle ADXm calculation steps (it would need to be made a different math calculation in order to be able to do so, but then it would not be a McGinley Dynamic ma), here is this version : adxm_averages_2_5.ex4

______________________

PS: some more minor ADXm calculation changes done (not in the averages, but in the ADXm itself) - results are more logical in some cases

Which settings did you use on the example?

When a bug is planted in the head, then it does not leave it easily

Found a completely different formula for McGinley Dynamic average : metastock formula. And decided to give it a try. And even though the average itself is not too different, the adxm result appeared (finally ). So here is a version that can calculate ADXm using McGinley Dynamic : ADXm averages 2_6.ex4

_______________________

PS: results are sometimes strange, but I find it useful even in that strange format

PPS: even though John McGinley claims that his formula (which is different than the metastock formula) is worthless, I decided not to use his formula. Difference between values produced by his formula and metastock formula are marginal, but the metstock formula does not suffer from errors when there is a series of same values (in which case John McGinley's formula fails miserably), and I find it better. Assuming that there will be no repeated values is rather naive

Files:mladen:When a bug is planted in the head, then it does not leave it easily

Found a completely different formula for McGinley Dynamic average : metastock formula. And decided to give it a try. And even though the average itself is not too different, the adxm result appeared (finally ). So here is a version that can calculate ADXm using McGinley Dynamic : ADXm averages 2_6.ex4

_______________________

PS: results are sometimes strange, but I find it useful even in that strange format

PPS: even though John McGinley claims that his formula (which is different than the metastock formula) is worthless, I decided not to use his formula. Difference between values produced by his formula and metastock formula are marginal, but the metstock formula does not suffer from errors when there is a series of same values (in which case John McGinley's formula fails miserably), and I find it better. Assuming that there will be no repeated values is rather naive

MLADEN,

so much thanks for taking so much serious headache to sort out some positive solutions.

regards

And as a consequence, a new averages indicator : averages_-_mtf__alerts_7_1.ex4

________________________

This version of indicator is mainly made because of the McGinley Dynamic average. The John McGinley has some illogical parts (very poor when values are repeated, for one) and some things that are even less than illogical (for example he advises that the correction factor should be 60% of previous value for period 20, nn% of previous value for period mm, and so on), and that is why I decided to use metastock formula as a basis and to adjust it. So this version does that, and no, no manual % adjustment needed

Example bellow is the new McGinley Dynamic average

Files:mladen:And as a consequence, a new averages indicator : averages_-_mtf__alerts_7_1.ex4

________________________

This version of indicator is mainly made because of the McGinley Dynamic average. The John McGinley has some illogical parts (very poor when values are repeated, for one) and some things that are even less than illogical (for example he advises that the correction factor should be 60% of previous value for period 20, nn% of previous value for period mm, and so on), and that is why I decided to use metastock formula as a basis and to adjust it. So this version does that, and no, no manual % adjustment needed

Example bellow is the new McGinley Dynamic average

Dearest MLADEN,

so thanks for updating the averages indicator,i am afraid of you taking too much headache for us traders by updating and altering too much that already done, .

regards