Fibonacci levels: myth or reality? - page 9
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
You didn't investigate the Fibo manifestation in the market, you investigated the ZIGZAG. And that says it all. That is why I say that you have not proved anything with your research.
Can you distinguish a study of ZIGZAG properties, from a study of the manifestation of Fibo in the market? If you think they are one and the same, you are deeply mistaken.
Don't substitute one concept for the other.
===========================
Generally speaking - such arguments are unproductive. To change the minds of those who have successfully applied phoebes that phoebes are nothing. All the more so with such crude methods.
When applying graphical methods, a combination of various analysis tools is always used.
Fibs give reference points where to pay attention to what is happening on the market. In other words, they show a potential reversal point (to put it simply). And in this place we look at the dynamics of movements. At these levels in addition (yes, additionally) we can perform the analysis by candlestick (Steve Neeson). Candlestick analysis is also a graphical analysis.
When using fibs, it is important! to be able to find anchor points. Yes, these points are extrema. These points can also be called the fractals. The essence thereof does not change. This is not a random process - finding anchor points. It obeys the rules. Some of these rules have been announced in this thread.
It is not very easy to automate this process.
===========================
The public examples of successful automata trading given just above are not simple either. They all require optimization after a while. Read it as a tweak.
We are all in a tizzy here - Fibo advocates argue that everything works for them but they cannot show statistics (probably because they use fuzzi logic when searching for binding points and inflate Fibo levels until the price falls on them). It's hard to change my mind here, and I don't want to. If you successfully use Fibo, good. The ZigZag I use is based on low level fractals. You may use another algorithm and the result will be the same.
By the way, instead of reading Steve Neeson, read Candlestick Charting Explained by G. Morris. It contains statistics of different candlestick patterns. Almost all figures lead to 50-53% probability of profit. Some people still look at the candlesticks as something supernatural, not realizing that it is just a normal price movement in a smaller timeframe. The Doji Star may turn into something else if you move the beginning of the report of this smaller timeframe a little bit. But, no. Some people pray for those candles. They report how many candles were down and how many were up. Where the shadow falls from the cloud. It's bullshit.
Interesting statistics. I wanted to do something similar. The curve turned out to be a Gaussian probability distribution. It's sort of like the probability of an electron at its quantum level in an atom. :) If some kind of reversal takes place we can use 50% or 38% as the most reliable level and apply additional filters such as RSI-14 (it has probability levels like 40-60% for pullbacks depending on what dominates the current trend) and sequential demark at lower timeframes, grouping probability levels built from different impulse price movements and recognition of continuation models. Generally speaking, it's all about statistics. The main thing is that the number of correct entries must exceed the number of false ones.
The difference between the first and second tests is not clear. In the first case the most probable level of 80% is obtained for some reason, while in the second case it was 40%. The formulas for both cases are similar (ratio of the current zigzag segment to the previous one).
The same can be said about you. Several people have shown you how they have used Fibs in real trading, and you keep saying that "it can't be, because it can never be".
Similar arguments of the main skeptics:
I've written before that it's not about one 38 or 62 from one swing, it's about a cluster of levels. If you don't read it, don't. It has long been clear to me that the Fibs are about faith. But here's the interesting thing: there are people who successfully use these Fibs...
I see spears are being broken and new
--
I'll just give you screenshots of my semiautomatic again.
the semiautomatic calculates targets by Fibo
Some entries I convert to medium term and again set takeoffs by fibo
---
on the Canadian, I take the take at level 161
Now the semi-automated entry and exit targets
and it's Fibo again
Takei exactly match the Fibo targets from the 15th
---
working on this semiautomated machine - which I've been working on since 2006
I have long paid attention to fibo as a tool for calculating goals
I only use them for exits and entrances.
i think you should only use the fibo to calculate entry - exit points
for example every breakout from the rangeIt almost always bounces into the 161st bullet and makes a bounce
this has been seen for a long time and i have screenshots to show it
---
you may assert that the fibo doesn't work but you have to confirm it
with examples of statistics for example
---
here is an example of stats from the beginning of march - not much, but these stats are statistics of this system
with the calculation of exit entry points by Fibo
Trading on the breakout
the authors who claim that Fibo does not work have nothing, except bare objections
Yura, try to set not 138 and 162 levels in your semi-automatic EA, but 135 and 155 for example, and you'll see that the result may even get better.
Simply, any levels in the range of 135-165 will not work badly as shown in the statistics histogram. It shows that most often there is a movement to levels between 35 and 65 percents or 135-160 percents. It's not that Fibonacci levels don't work, it's just that your favourite levels fall within the most probable percentage ranges and the price does not always bounce at these levels as you've already noticed.
By the way, let's see what the ends of the impulses on the Canadian and the Aussie will be. Probably, the price will bounce around the levels of 162 and 138. Let's see
Yura, try to set not 138 and 162 levels in your semi-automatic EA, but 135 and 155 for example, and you'll see that the result may even get better.
Simply, any levels in the range of 135-165 will not work badly as shown in the statistics histogram. It shows that most often there is a movement to levels between 35 and 65 percents or 135-160 percents. It's not that Fibonacci levels don't work. It's just that your favorite levels fall into the most likely percentile ranges and price may not always bounce at these levels as you've already noticed.
By the way, on the Canadian and the Aussie we'll see where the ends of the impulses come to. Probably bounce clear off the 162 and 138 levels ... Let's see
yes - of course ... there is a spread and there is no claim that the bounces go straight into the bounces
I'm not saying it's going pip for pipI'm just talking about the statistics - they're high
--
AUD didn't get to 138, bounced back earlier
and the USDCAD was deleted at 261