[PYenner]

Walter and Sundowner
Posted the wrong indicator, I have pulled ComplexBalance, don't know what that thing was.
Here is Complex_pairs1.mq4 which is the one I was talking about.
Runs in an oscillator window and works like a divergence indicator.

Running 3 versions of MT4 and getting confused about which is doing which.
Sorry again
Argh

[sundowner]

Hi PYenner,

Thanks for the taking the time to present the banking information and new indicators. It's much appreciated. I'll try the new indicators this week.

When all was said and done, I managed 176 pips last week so all of what you and Walter have presented here has great potential.

Regards

[walterw]

Originally Posted by sundowner »

Hi PYenner,

Thanks for the taking the time to present the banking information and new indicators. It's much appreciated. I'll try the new indicators this week.

When all was said and done, I managed 176 pips last week so all of what you and Walter have presented here has great potential.

Regards

Nice to hear that Sundowner... I asume it was using high timeframes... could we see some charts of that ? it would be inspiring to see it... thanks Walter.

[sundowner]

Hi Walter,

Here is a chart showing a couple of successful trades this week.

Cheers.

[sundowner]

Hi PYenner,

I have spent some time tweaking the use of your indicators this week...no luck with new ones. Please have a look at these charts and this indicator I have attached and see what you think. Here’s the thread for the indicator:

http://www.forex-tsd.com/suggestions...ba-thesis.html

I think the poster is looking for input/guidance.

Here’s my template if you want to spend some time scrolling back and forth to see what I have been looking at recently. I have been impressed with how well your indicators work with Walter’s trading strategy. I have been watching the returns to the blue vma (12) green (6) yellow (4) and the subsequent bounces on the 60 minute chart.

…still trading in the direction indicated by the 60 minute chart, taking trades from the 15 minute chart.

If you are still interested in working with mt4, I would really like to see the adxvma 7.

The other thing I’m wondering about is support and resistance. Hand drawing the lines is a pain but seems particularly good for the longer tfs. I have explored the use of numerous s/r indicators, but none really fit the bill. Any ideas?

No worries if you’re otherwise occupied.

Have a nice weekend.

Regards

[PYenner]

Originally Posted by sundowner »

The other thing I’m wondering about is support and resistance. Hand drawing the lines is a pain but seems particularly good for the longer tfs. I have explored the use of numerous s/r indicators, but none really fit the bill. Any ideas?

Have not got into s/r yet.
One by Coders Guru http://www.xpworx.com/ZigZag_Channels.htm
Still looking at the rest...
My own approach is that bid and ask volumes can be monitored separately and can be added for average volume or compared for strength comparisons.
Differences in bid and ask volumes come thru as margin spread, something which I see happening most often in EURJPY but also in GBPUSD and in both cases that spread comes thru magnified in GBPJPY. That aspect is one of my current interests as it may signal which way the price will break.

[PYenner]

Sundowner
Thesis is an interesting thread and my impression is that the critical observations have obvious truth to them, macd and rsi do not have a compatible basis in their forex forms for combining as Thesis did. This is likely to be a translation defect not a defect in the original thesis. Also agree that the ranges of the two are incompatible and may only be compatible when used on a pair where they happen to be almost compatible. So the bias favouring long does not surprise me. These problems are probably fixable.
What also worries me is the dogs breakfast in the formula (Stochastic*(MACD+RSI)/Momentum). If this really was an MBA thesis then the maths behind that should be sound... but from memory (only) Macd may be one of those "big swingers" that makes no attempt to calibrate itself to the pair in use, ADX also makes this most basic mistake, no attempt made to ensure they work in one pip units on any pair.
So along the lines that others have said, before macd and rsi can be combined, they must both calibrate themselves to 1 pip steps on any pair (non standard versions of both may be needed), they both have to be in forms that swing about a zero line (non-standard for at least one of them) and they have to have compatible swing ranges.... otherwise it is all total cr*p and a waste of time. The short way of saying the same thing in my own way of saying it... all four variables may need to be normalized to a +1 to -1 range before combining them is mathematically sound, so I expect MBA used them in a normalized form in his original version, mathematical types think in normalized terms, its an essential basic to their thinking, the alternative is just not an option.
The formula looks less suspicious to me if it is rearranged as (MACD+RSI)*(Stochastic/Momentum) but everything then depends on the "periods" that are used particularly in Stochastic/Momentum which is the seriously interesting concept because it may be attempting to get an early warning signal out of an ordinary stochastic signal. Really need to hunt down an online version of the guys thesis which most likely does not exist online. Without that you are shooting in the dark.
The observation that it works on 1hr charts but not on 1min charts bothers me, it may be because of the "big swing" problem that comes from the instruments not being calibrated to work in pip units.
So there is not just one issue here but many, dogs breakfast, not a pretty sight. That Stoch/Momentum step is interesting and I would like to understand that part. But there are so many things that would need to be fixed first, its a big project, unfortunately the lack of a common systematic scientific approach to the design of "standard" instruments like adx macd and rsi turns it into a witches brew not sound chemistry.

Thanks for the interesting thread but the instruments need to be redesigned on a common systematic basis before they have a chance of being used in the Plug'nPlay way being attempted. That is the first step to turning indicators into science but I won't be making that step, I must get on with more pressing things unfortunately.
Regards
Bruce

[sundowner]

Hi PYenner,

Thanks very much for spending the time to look at the indicator and supplying such a detailed explanation of it's inner workings.

Sorry to have wasted your time with it though.

Regards