Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

pipsaholic

Divergance Without Indicator

Recommended Posts

:haha: ... that is an excellent stupid question (if I understand it correctly) …

 

After considerable screentime and experience with simultatneous price charts and (any) oscillator, one can develop an eye for which retracement angles and durations will almost inevitably result in standard ‘divergence’ btwn price extent and indicator extent on the next ‘with trend’ thrust…

...ie and more generally, the formation (or not) of divergences of all types is literally in the math of the oscillator…

...can further the discovery of strengths and weaknesses of a particular oscillator and its parameters and also help with understanding the potential and limitations of conventional ‘stochastics’ processes in trading in general. hth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

 

Is it possible to know divergance through pure price action without using any indicators?

 

Thanks.

 

Not really. Divergence must always be between two things, ie one is 'diverging' from the other. If you were just looking at price but no metric, then what could the price be divergin from. The prices of two seperate markets can, of course, diverge from each other, although 'divergence' probably isn't the term that would be used in that instance.

 

Having said that, it may be possible to estimate what the reading of an indicator would be, and to identify where divergence is most likely occuring that way. I can't see why you'd want to do this though - surely it would always be easier and more reliable just to use the indicator?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really. Divergence must always be between two things, ie one is 'diverging' from the other. If you were just looking at price but no metric, then what could the price be divergin from. The prices of two seperate markets can, of course, diverge from each other, although 'divergence' probably isn't the term that would be used in that instance.

 

Having said that, it may be possible to estimate what the reading of an indicator would be, and to identify where divergence is most likely occuring that way. I can't see why you'd want to do this though - surely it would always be easier and more reliable just to use the indicator?

 

BTW, BlueHorseShoe loves Anacott Steel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks :) I knew BHS was from something,just couldn't remember what it was

 

Ha! I've been signed up to TL for nearly a month now but nobody has made that remark yet! I was very suprised when I registered that the name hadn't already been taken. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Can someone correct the spelling of this thread's title? It's embarrassing.

 

2. Of course you can perceive divergence without an indicator. Divergence is typically between some so called measure of strength or acceleration and price. So, if you can see price and mentally differentiate it then you can see divergence. Just look for more bars to get the same price difference for macd/rsi and pay a bit of attention to closes at the highs (up = strong) for stoch divergence..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

 

Is it possible to know divergance through pure price action without using any indicators?

 

Thanks.

 

Been thinking on this question.I like the fact that you are looking for something outside the box,even if it leads nowhere.Keep doing that and you may surprise yourself.

The only thing that is in the ball park that occurs to me (if i'm guessing correctly that you are looking for signs of strength/weakness purely based on price) is maybe looking at a simple idea of measuring rallies/declines.How many points in a rally compared with points in a decline.Measuring the length of time in a rally compared to time in a decline.Maybe run 2 or more time frames say,daily and hourly and see if you can spot patterns that give probability plays.Or maybe the angle of a trend- steeper or more shallow than the previous trend?

The other thing that occurred was maybe divergence btw indicies say dax/ftse where one is slightly stronger ,so sell the stronger buy the weaker type idea.Never researched or done any of that type of trading myself,just thinking out loud on these ideas.

Main point though is don't be afraid to ask yourself "stupid" type questions,because sometimes,one thing leads to another..........

Edited by mitsubishi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I look at divergance between indices, sectors and bonds.

eg. Dax vs eurostoxx50, es vs dow\nq, es vs sectors, es vs bonds..

 

so if you see a intraday double top on the dax, you want to see a lower

high in the eurostoxx50.

 

or if you see a intraday double bottom on the es, you want to see a double top

on the 10yr bond.

 

or if you see a intraday double top on the es, you want to see a lower high

on the dow\nq..

 

also you can have divergance between indices and market internals ( tick, advancers\decliners, up\down volume at an intraday level.

Edited by david22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • $ETSY stock with a nice breakout follow through above 116.38, from Stocks To Watch , see https://stockconsultant.com/?ETSY
    • $CRHM CRHM Medical stock strong close with a breakout above 2.38, volume 40% above normal , see https://stockconsultant.com/?CRHM
    • yep, if we were serious about  actual conversation we wouldn't be posting here...     https://blog.argonautcapital.co.uk/articles/2020/07/27/the-biggest-fraud-part-1-the-hocus-science-behind-lockdown/ https://blog.argonautcapital.co.uk/articles/2020/07/27/the-biggest-fraud-part-2-the-vaccine-swindle/ Links to pretty good rundown on ‘plandemic’, lockdowns, vaccines... I would add quite a bit to regarding the unspoken agenda behind the lockdown policies...* if only it was just money to be made by selling vaccines... anyways... Snippets -  “At the end of May there was a significant breakthrough in understanding of COVID antibodies which was not widely reported: a Swiss study from Zurich led by Professor Onur Boyman74 demonstrated that a large proportion of the population had a natural immunity through existing antibodies on the mucous membrane (IgA) or cellular immunity (T cells), likely to have been acquired through previous exposure to coronaviruses such as influenza or the common cold ... The study found that that the presence of (IgG and IgM) antibodies generated on infection which tests had previously focused on, were NOT in fact required to defeat the virus and that existing (IgA and T cell) antibodies that gave a natural immunity. Moreover, the population with this natural immunity was demonstrated to be five times greater than those with the IgG and IgM antibodies on which tests had hitherto focused. If this could be substantiated, then the population already exposed to COVID would also be five times greater than previously assumed76. In other words, if a population sample showed 10% had IgG and IgM antibodies (which might be subject to decay) then it was likely that at least half of the population had already been exposed to COVID. It followed that antibody studies that measured only IgG and IgM that were now predicting population-based mortality risk of 0.1% to 0.5%77 (lower than the 1% in the elderly population aboard the Diamond Princess) could be even further reduced by a factor of five to 0.02% to 0.1% and the level of symptomatic exposure from 20% to below 5% (consistent with the flu season ironically predicted by Fauci in March). Not only would this mean a further similar reduction in the estimated true mortality rate 78 but it meant that there were far fewer people in the population who had never had exposure to the virus ...“  btw, that little tidbit of  ‘science’ didn’t go just "widely" unreported... it is actively suppressed by msm , social media, and search engines The material on the Levitt’s “Gompertz curve” and the ‘second wave’ is also salient... (PS and fwiw, there is no such thing as herd immunity)   * examples https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/one_nation_under_house_arrest_how_do_covid_19_mandates_impact_our_freedoms https://dailyreckoning.com/anarchy-from-above/  
    • $CODX Co-Diagnostics stock with a nice breakout follow through above 23.56 , see https://stockconsultant.com/?CODX
    • $ESTC Elastic stock with a top of range breakout watch above 97.86 , see https://stockconsultant.com/?ESTC
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.