1st and 2nd derivatives of the MACD - page 37
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
I'm not the only moderator, so I can't guarantee for others.
)))) the thread will be scratched, and trol222 will be banned out of habit))))
And I won't see any more skating sex(
It will give me time to think about how to take my skates off)) they must be uncomfortable.
In case anyone else has forgotten the subject of the thread...
I drew the AFC and FFC of the MACD as a digital filter out of the blue. I'm too lazy to draw MACD, so I drew AO, which is not much different. The blue line is the AFC, the green line is the FFC. What a load of crap!!!
I still can't understand why use decades old crap when anyone can easily make a good filter like this:
In case anyone else has forgotten the subject of the thread...
I drew the AFC and FFC of the MACD as a digital filter out of the blue. I'm too lazy to draw MACD, so I drew AO, which is not much different. The blue line is the AFC, the green line is the FFC. What a load of crap!!!
What kind of software is it?
MATLAB 7.0
In case anyone else has forgotten the subject of the thread...
I drew the AFC and FFC of the MACD as a digital filter out of the blue. I'm too lazy to draw MACD, so I drew AO, which is not much different. The blue line is the AFC, the green line is the FFC. What a load of crap!!!
I still can't understand why use decades old crap when anyone can easily make a good filter like this:
In case anyone else has forgotten the subject of the thread...
I drew the AFC and FFC of the MACD as a digital filter out of the blue. I'm too lazy to draw MACD, so I drew AO, which is not much different. The blue line is the AFC, the green line is the FFC. What a load of crap!!!
I still can't understand why use decades old crap when anyone can easily make a good filter like this:
Linear phase is easy to do - the filter coefficients must be symmetrical. It's hard to say anything about the AFC. You have to look at it in logarithmic scale. Would it be possible to show log by y? Or better yet, show the filter formula.
I agree that IACD is crap.
There was a branch three years ago.
I am transferring two graphs from there.
The bursts are amplitude maxima at frequencies (or rather periods = inverse of frequency.
The algorithm itself, supposedly by Burg, is a maximum entropy filter. Available in Matlab.
Very nice graphs, but when you change the size of the window, and even worse when you shift the window, the look of the graph changes. I.e. those resonant frequencies are rigidly related to the window. Maximum entropy simply summed up the amplitudes at one frequency and that's it, and what it would be different with a shift, that question is not solved - so we can't use the information outside the graph.
Linear phase is easy to do - the filter coefficients must be symmetrical. It's hard to say anything about the AFC. You have to look at it in logarithmic scale. Would it be possible to show log by y? Better yet, show the filter formula.
I agree that MACD is bullshit.
It's not the kind of filter that can stupidly replace MACD, at least because of the huge phase delay. I just wanted to show that you can get a filter with any desired characteristics in 5 minutes.
What's the use. Cotier decomposition has resonant frequencies and they float Your fancy filter has to be moved all the time. But the resonant frequencies are in the middle of the sample, not at the edge, and you'll be smearing past them all the time.
You could have many narrowband filters instead of one wideband filter and not have to move anything.