a trading strategy based on Elliott Wave Theory - page 43
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
Linear regression removes only the linear component of the raw data, i.e., simplistically, reduces the overall RMS by the RMS of the linear regression. If a non-linear component was present, the lack of time dependence of the RMS of the detrended series is not obvious. As an illustration, we can look at GBPCHF W1 from 2002.03.31 to today. On the final interval here the RMS seems to be decreasing.
I won't argue, you are probably right. It does not matter now though. :-)
The controversy has flared up about calculating the Hurst index. But now, after Vladislav and solandr explain that it's not so much the Hearst ratio but the value they use as a criterion of channel efficiency - it doesn't matter. If this value really allows selecting suitable channels, then we only have to thank Vladislav for his know-how.
Regarding the indicator - we should discard all intermediate extrema, the ones that do not fall within the confidence interval, e.g. 60-80%.
Then the swings plotted for the higher channel will indicate the sampling boundaries for the lower - nested ones.
Good luck and hitchhiking trends.
Rosh, if the support level you see by eye is 1.2823, then 1.2817 might be a better fit.
This is one of the intermediate Murray levels. It's better for soft trading than by eye.
By the way, according to my broker, the set low is 1.2818. So Murray levels work, although it is not clear why. :-)
I think it is not worth it at all. You are unlikely to get better parameters. Your formulas are correct. I've already made an approximation using your methodology today. It works more reliably than the ANG3110 indicator. When the indicator ANG3110 calculates the parabola correctly then both parabolas are identical. But there are times when the indicator ANG3110 fails while the method of MNC indicator, refined only for the parabola, the problem with the calculation is not observed. Here is a screenshot. The white line is according to the ANC formulas for the parabola.
https://c.mql5.com/mql4/forum/2006/06/MNK.zip
Unfortunately PNG files too on site stubbornly not fit. I tried with 2 different computers at work and at home. I guess my system is special :o). To my mind I am the only one who constantly have some problems with loading the pictures while everyone else is doing it correctly. I dont understand what the problem may be. But all my previous downloads were ok and I have not changed the technology of pictures download ;o). Probably need someone to write a step by step instructions on how to prepare the images and insert into the forum for a particularly clueless type of click on the left mouse button, etc. ;o)
Of course there is definitely some support in that area (the probability of going up is slightly higher than the probability of going down about 60/40 - only based on linear regression channels, though if I already had a parabola, the chances of going up would be a bit higher). I had the shortest channels drawing a reversal zone in that area during yesterday. And a slight upward correction from this level is possible. But more serious EUR buying I think will be lower somewhere around 1.2760-1.2695
Between the level of 1.2817, around which the Euro is now treading, and the level of 1.2695 (very strong), there is another intermediate-term Murray level, 1.2756. And it proved its importance more than once. So, the opinion is justified.
IMHO. A break-down of 1.2817 has taken place. Going straight to 1.2695 is hardly possible. If it is possible, then only after a serious break near 1.2756. Since the ECB meeting is due tomorrow, a break-up to 1.2695 or below might be the result of a negative decision for the Euro. It is hard to imagine that this is possible. Even if there is only a 0.25% rate hike and the market takes it negatively, still the first reaction and I think a significant one will be up.
I've never made any predictions. Let's see how the market embarrasses me. :-)
Between 1.2817, around which the Euro is now treading, and 1.2695 (a very strong level), there is another intermediate-term Murray level, 1.2756. And it has already proved its importance more than once. So, the opinion is justified.
IMHO. A break-down of 1.2817 has taken place. Going straight to 1.2695 is hardly possible. If it is possible, then only after a serious break near 1.2756. Since the ECB meeting is due tomorrow, a break-down to 1.2695 or below might be the result of a negative decision for the Euro. It is hard to imagine that this is possible. Even if there is only a 0.25% rate hike and the market takes it negatively, still the first reaction and I think a significant one will be up.
I've never made any predictions. Let's see how the market embarrasses me. :-)
And nevertheless 1.2695 is a stronger level, and it may well be the target, if only to prevent stops of those who jump before the train reversal or to carelessly place limit orders. Therefore, the Expert Advisor chose the level 1.2634 as a target - it is unlikely, but possible, and the stops are pulled up anyway. By the way, for the pound the target is 1,8433 (it is another account and in the other brokerage company (Alpari) - I try to compare 3 pieces at once (also Infobank) :) - Lites had this pose knocked out by the stop and it's still holding there :) ). Anyway, as they say - we'll see.
Good luck and good trends.
PS: So far, trying to count the length of the segments using the formula L_segment^2 = (Price1-Price2)^2. That is, I don't take into account the time between bars, which is certainly not correct. In my subjective opinion, based on logical conclusions, correct calculation of the length of the central line of regression must bring certain profit to calculation of the Hurst index. And perhaps it will lead to a consensus on the way of calculating the Hearst index for regression channels. That is, the R/S ratio will then determine the ratio between the RMS calculated according to Vladislava's methodology and the path taken by the central line of the regression channel (of any type). Very simple and will be clear to everyone without further explanation!
I think you are making a mistake.
1. The Hurst figure refers to a statistical series of numbers. It has nothing to do with LR or parabola.
2. Price is USD/EUR and Time is in terms of seconds, minutes, hours, etc. What you will add to what. The R/S ratio in the Hearst figure is dimensionless because R and S have the same dimensionality. And that is the only reason it makes sense.
3. In the formula H=Log(R/S)/Log(N/2), the value N is not time, as you might think. N is the number of elements in the sample. The fact that we do not take all events, but only a part of them (counting by Close, for example), dividing the process into equal time intervals, is our problem and it has nothing to do with Hirst.
IMHO