Dynamic zone indicators ... - page 146

New comment
 
sebastianK:
Do we have it for mt5?
Not yet. Slowly we shall convert all to mt5, but as time passes by. Trying not to rush (and make mistakes) too much ;(
 

In case someone is wondering why there are no new dynamic zone indicators ...

The thing is simple : actually there are, and a lot of them.

To clarify it : dynamic zones and floating levels are very similar in results. So similar (difference exists but it can be neglected) that I decided to use floating levels instead - for multiple reasons :

  • floating levels are much faster to calculate
  • no need for a dll (because of the above point)
  • no need for different precision settings for floating levels (as it is needed for dynamic zones)
  • floating levels are not limited to 0 and 100% range - no practical use of that probably, but for some extreme cases, why not (it can easily be used for some fibo levels in that form)

So, all the floating level version that were posted lately can be as easily named dynamic zone versions.

 
mladen:

In case someone is wondering why there are no new dynamic zone indicators ...

The thing is simple : actually there are, and a lot of them.

To clarify it : dynamic zones and floating levels are very similar in results. So similar (difference exists but it can be neglected) that I decided to use floating levels instead - for multiple reasons :

  • floating levels are much faster to calculate
  • no need for a dll (because of the above point)
  • no need for different precision settings for floating levels (as it is needed for dynamic zones)
  • floating levels are not limited to 0 and 100% range - no practical use of that probably, but for some extreme cases, why not (it can easily be used for some fibo levels in that form)

So, all the floating level version that were posted lately can be as easily named dynamic zone versions.

Dearest MLADEN

So all in all fl are far better than dz/ddz due to multiple reasons.

regards

 
I still prefer DZ. It's like between EMA and SMA, where I prefer EMA.
 
krelian99:
I still prefer DZ. It's like between EMA and SMA, where I prefer EMA.
Though EMA is my favorite one too but what you say about other logical attractive features of FL comparing to DZ,and dont forget i love DZ too :)
 
...hold on...I'm getting dz...
 
mntiwana:

Dearest MLADEN

So all in all fl are far better than dz/ddz due to multiple reasons.

regards

They are having results so similar, then, due to the reasons I stated in that post, it is easier and much more efficient to use floating levels

Being the results are so similar, we can not say that one way is better than the other - we can say that the results are usable in the same manner

 

The results are very similar, but you must fine tune it to get the same results. (Example is not tuned to the market.)

It's just a personal preference, nothing logical behind it. DZ look a bit cooler ;)



Pava:

...hold on...I'm getting dz...

Got spanked?
 
krelian99:

The results are very similar, but you must fine tune it to get the same results. (Example is not tuned to the market.)

It's just a personal preference, nothing logical behind it. DZ look a bit cooler ;)



Got spanked?

To make it completely transparent and clear ...

Here are two versions that can be compared to the dynamic zones smoothed rsi from the first page of this thread. One is floating levels version and the other is a quantile bands version


As it can be seen, quantile bands is almost identical to dz version, Floating levels version has more differences, but frankly, I can not decide which one is better (out of the 3). Floating levels version is very, very fast. Quantile bands also. Dz is having that issue with speed for longer periods and precision that needs to be adjusted but apart from that, results are acceptable. So, it seems to be up to personal preference

 
mladen:

To make it completely transparent and clear ...

Here are two versions that can be compared to the dynamic zones smoothed rsi from the first page of this thread. One is floating levels version and the other is a quantile bands version


As it can be seen, quantile bands is almost identical to dz version, Floating levels version has more differences, but frankly, I can not decide which one is better (out of the 3). Floating levels version is very, very fast. Quantile bands also. Dz is having that issue with speed for longer periods and precision that needs to be adjusted but apart from that, results are acceptable. So, it seems to be up to personal preference

I do not see some notable difference if there is bit so parameters are there, traders can adjust according to their needs to make cool eyes :)
1...139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153...159
New comment