Grail. The puzzle is an interesting theme. - page 13
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
When I opened the branch I placed a demo of 10 currencies for an initial order of 0.1. The result in 3 days +$3400. And if only also an entry point....
The whole report is just huge and does not attach. The DC is Alpari.
Summary:
I need to insert a good trend indicator, preferably long and short, which will give good entry (position opening) and exit points (position closing).
Who has thoughts? WHO CAN SOLVE THE PUZZLE?
position closing on currency pairs for H4 is effectively filtered by macd for years, and a little less effective in H1 and D1. In pure form it is a plivator, but if you open a timeframe pore (for n4 it's n1) the same mcd can check itself and here the number of correct checks confidently passes 50%.how to check. If the signal line graphically is ready to cross the small dot (equator of the main (greater than zero or less)) before the time of the next main candle (H4), then the signal is correct in the higher time frame (4H for 1H), But if a mcd in a lower timeframe is not graphically aimed at crossing the signal mcd line of a smacd before the end of a candle's life in the higher timeframe - a mcd signal, applied in an older timeframe, is (statistically) more than 50-70% likely to be false. HOWEVER, this method is true not every 12 calendar months in a row, and there are failures, not counting the fact that the concept is about to cross is determined visually, and in programming it generates the original failures (individual for this bet) statistically, this check increases the accuracy of the signal mcd in H4 about a change in trend (the need to close rates) from 50% to 70%, and for certain periods, pairs, timeframes, even more than 70%. I checked it with a trading robot. For myself I decided that the original failures, even if half of them are in the + is worse than takeprofit. I believe that if the basis for your mts as well as the concept of -<crossing the line mcd signal through the line of smqd> pure logic without hard numbers like from,, to,,,... Then such an exit point may be useful on long timeframes. e.g. pound/bucks 2010,02,02 12,00 for H4, it looks like a macd change in trend.... It means that the change has been checked with this filter - yes, there will be a change. After a while, a mod in H1 has crossed the signal one via sma, and then the trend in H4 has changed (the candle bodies were walking in a corridor 650 points wide, and then they went to the same corridor but on the other floor). But glitches happen here and most often they are due to the fact that the main macd may be higher/lower than the sma in different timeframes and so on.
closing a position on currency pairs for H4 is effectively filtered by macd for years, and a little less effective in H1 and D1. the following way. any macd (well... 12,26,9 - fast, slow, smart macd) when the main macd line starts descending stepwise (every 4 hours) to the signal and then remains below it is a classic signal that the trend is changing. In pure form it is a plivator, but if you open a timeframe pore (for n4 it's n1) the same poppy can check itself and then the number of correct checks confidently passes 50%.how to check. If the signal line graphically is ready to cross the small dot (equator of the main (greater than zero or less)) before the time of the next main candle (H4), then the signal is correct in the higher time frame (4H for 1H), But if a mcd in a lower timeframe is not graphically aimed at crossing the signal mcd line of a smacd before the end of a candle's life in the higher timeframe - a mcd signal, applied in an older timeframe, is (statistically) more than 50-70% likely to be false. HOWEVER, this method is true not every 12 calendar months in a row, and there are failures, not counting the fact that the concept is about to cross is determined visually, and in programming it generates the original failures (individual for this bet) statistically, this check increases the accuracy of the signal mcd in H4 about a change in the trend (the need to close rates) from 50% to 70%, and for individual periods, pairs, timeframes, even more than 70%. I checked it with a trading robot. For myself I decided that the original failures, even if half of them are in the + is worse than TakeProfit. I believe that if the basis for your MTS as well as the concept of -<crossing the line mcd signal through the line of smacd> pure logic without hard numbers like from,,, to,,,,. Then such an exit point may be useful on long timeframes. e.g. pound/bucks 2010,02,02 12,00 for H4, it looks like a macd change in trend.... It means that the change has been checked with this filter - yes, there will be a change. After a while, a mod in H1 has crossed the signal one via sma, and then the trend in H4 has changed (the candle bodies were walking in a corridor 650 points wide, and then they went to the same corridor but on the other floor). But there are glitches here and most often they are due to the fact that the main macd may be higher/lower than the sma in different timeframes, etc.