Prediction on "accelerator" and "fibo" - page 12
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
The problem arises in identifying whether the wave is corrective or impulsive. If the extremum belongs to the beginning of a corrective wave, the price may not reach the target of 100.
It is easy to identify a corrective wave on history, but it is difficult when the 38.2 level has just been passed. It turns out that one should be very good at wave analysis, but not everyone is able to do it and it is not 100% successful. If you can give an algorithm for determining the type of the current wave (corrective or impulsive) at the moment of reaching the level 38.2 or earlier, the Expert Advisor may be done.
... That is the point I wanted to solve with the display of targets in the lower TF ... That is, a wave is a wave and I don't plan to divide waves into basic and corrective ones - it is too complicated and too far from real life ... Let the "indicator" display the goals of the current timeframe and the lower one, then we won't have to deal with identification ... That is, the trader and the filter would have a choice, either to use current targets or from a junior TF.
Here is another part of correspondence on another forum:
>i.e. you need to know what's happening on the lower timeframe by watching the higher one.
>Let's say 15/60 timeframes
>For example on a smaller timeframe a zero crossing occurred. and it happened on the second quarter hour.
>Naturally the hourly doesn't show it yet. But you want to know.
>Then you can show on the hourly candlestick with a horizontal line or a price marker the closing value on a smaller timeframe.
... that's an interesting idea ... i.e. the anticipated reversal from M15 ... probably ... probably ...
but that's not what I was talking about... we were talking about the difficulty of identifying "zero" when measuring acceleration on a "zero" bar, the 1st and 2nd bar on the current TF give too coarse a gradation of values ... In general, I would hang the developer by the balls for the development of the bar structure, and the "kitchens" should give him a monument in his lifetime ... if he survives the balls being ripped off ... the current system with the price-time axis is flawed ... and my suggestion was to consider acceleration in the current timeframe ... we have no way to get a normal "zero" acceleration on the "zero" bar ...
Actually, the dream is to get away from being bound by time ...
range-bars with a set of number of price changes ...
i.e. one bar has 10 ticks (for example) ...
Another, fairly good quality signal :
Yes, it might work but look closely ... 38% has not yet been broken ...
The "turkey" and I have so far agreed, although he is a little ... on the bar a little late:
It's always like this. :) If you could get a signal from the mashes just one bar earlier, the balance would grow like bamboo under the tarmac.
Example not the point ... it's about a technical solution... that is, it's a matter of technique, not the limits of MQL and strategy ... It's OK Ilya, don't worry.
Let's remember what acceleration is in our turkey. It is the change in velocity between the last two bars, (v1-v2)/bar, bar equals one and the sign will not be affected exactly.
Let's look further: a=PP1-P2-P2+P3=P1-2P2+P3, where Pn is price n bars ago. So, it should be equal to zero:
P1-2P2+P3=a=0
P2 and P3 we know. From this we can easily find the required level P1, at which the slope has crossed zero.
Let's remember what acceleration is in our turkey. It is the change in velocity between the last two bars, (v1-v2)/bar, bar is equal to one and the sign will not be affected exactly.
Let's look further: a=PP1-P2-P2+P3=P1-2P2+P3, where Pn is price n bars ago. So, it should be equal to zero:
P1-2P2+P3=a=0
P2 and P3 we know. From this we can easily find the required level P1, at which the slope has crossed zero.
Already found but :
And here's where we find the bummer. This zero, in this calculation algorithm, is quite often located outside the first bar where the acceleration has changed its sign. We get a jump-like motion of acceleration, it was "-" and then "+", but zero was not there. And, what to do with it I don't know yet.
What does this have to do with bars? We need a price at which acceleration equals zero from this equation
P1=2P2-P3.
It is determined with one pip accuracy, without any jumps.
That is, for example, as follows:
Р3=1,5
Р2=1,51
then P1 will be equal to 0.02
We are not looking for the time, we are looking for the price level. We do not enter immediately, but only after the breakdown of 38.2 and we have time,
at least the time to wait for the formation of the bar, where the acceleration sign will change.
The final prediction: