Sultonov differential indicator - page 14
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
An example of how the indicator will prevent the market from fooling the trader with an upward swing in a copper market https://www.mql5.com/ru/charts/7572224/eurusd-m1-e-global-trade All sales of the last 4 hours on the M1 TF should close at the TP:
Dear opponents of the indicator, opposing the RSI and ADX indicators, can you also confidently predict the imminent collapse of the price in a rising market, as did the indicator DA?
Judging by the screenshot and the calculation method you're using, the indicator does not have the property of "convergence" (or "stationarity" I'm not sure of the term) - its readings depend on the starting point of reference. If you take a smaller buffer depth, it will show the opposite
How do you know if you have or do not have, not knowing perfectly the methods of calculation of the indicator and the logic of its construction? Or do you have such a fertile imagination, bordering on fantasy?
you're going to be insulted by the criticism...:-)
The indicator lines tend to diverge, because the calculation (and method) accumulates data.
I am surprised at this thread, to be honest, but do you know why????
Most market participants (mostly beginners and experienced ones) see a quote as a non-stationary time series and nothing more, without even trying to understand the essence of trading and price formation. They have a quotation and try to extract something out of it using complex formulas and algorithms. Usually it does not lead to anything, because they do not want to understand the essence of price formation. Here is an example of a cause-and-effect model of price formation. I made up this model myself, so I will criticize it :-)
That is, the cause forms the consequence and that's why the indicators do not work in the market. You want to build an indicator based on the price that will be the cause for the price itself (to reverse the last arrow). It is physically impossible, if you base your indicator calculations on the price.
But you have taken on the task of determining the strength of the Bulls and Bears, which is commendable.... I also thought about it, but personally I see the solution to this problem as follows.
When analyzing the volume there is information about the number of buyers and sellers in each particular bar, but the number is not the strength, so how to determine who is stronger????
Obviously, who has moved the market in its direction, the stronger and if the motion of the opening bar divided by the number of buyers, then we find out what contribution made one buyer, the so-called strength of a single buyer that can be both positive and negative, depending on the closing of this bar relative to the opening. The same is done with the sellers, and comparing the strength of a single buyer with the strength of a single seller can make something turn out. But here is the problem. There might be 100 buyers at the beginning of the bar, and it will grow 10 points, and then one seller will drop this bar before it closes by 100 points. Who is stronger???? If we are to work on this complex question "Determining Bulls and Bears strength", it will be in this direction, but not by the price.
It is enough to determine the correctness of force on one bar (to invent some algorithm). After all, what does strength mean? The strength of Bulls or Bears is to understand where the "smart money" is hiding behind the number of bulls or bears. After all, there can be many sellers and they are as weak as the buyers. Not to mention the fact that the "smart money" can afford to be in deficit, and the deficit depends on the time they were invested in the asset. The longer the funds are, the bigger deficit they can afford, because if the situation changes and the smart money is in deficit, they will use additional resources to pull the market into BU and roll over there.
Anyway I thought about this question and came to the conclusion that without more information to determine the strength of BUYERS and SELLERS NOT POSSIBLE!!!!!!!
There are two solutions to this problem.....
In the first, it is to ask the "smart money" to broadcast where they are up??? (if you want to know something, just ask about it) BUT you know yourself that this is not realistic, because the trade will come to naught.
The second way is to have information about "Open Interest" on every bar, which is also impossible, because SME does not broadcast it.
Conclusion: To determine the strength of the bulls and bears can ONLY be on the daily data, since the OI is published daily, but I did not do it, because I work INTRADEY.
Well in general the train of thought is clear?????? where is the fish......
And yes this is about forex, on the fund OI you can see for each bar, maybe that's why the fund is easier???? I think we need to move on from the forex :-)
An example of how the indicator will not let the market cheat the trader by an upward move in the copper market https://www.mql5.com/ru/charts/7572224/eurusd-m1-e-global-trade All sales of the last 4 hours on the M1 TF should close at the TP:
Try to look at your picture without fantasies - in the place marked with red/blue cross you could buy or sell and in both variants within this picture make profit commensurate with TF M1. Or one could get a loss in both cases, if one uses stops commensurate with this TF. The non-fantasy viewers have nothing to catch in your pictures
An example of how the indicator will not let the market fool the trader with an upward move in a copper market https://www.mql5.com/ru/charts/7572224/eurusd-m1-e-global-trade All sales of the last 4 hours on the M1 TF should close at the TP:
Dear opponents of the indicator, that opposed the RSI and ADX indicators, can you also confidently predict the imminent collapse of the price in a rising market, as it has just done indicator DA? My advice to you: either take off your hat or silently wait until the indicator proves its absolute superiority over all Forex indicators put together, in order not to embarrass yourself.
Yusuf, and you are not answering the question - are you familiar with RSI and ADX indicator algorithms? Probably and as usual - no. Yes?
Try to look at your picture without fantasies - in the place marked with red/blue cross you could buy or sell and in both variants within this picture make a profit commensurate with TF M1. Or one could get a loss in both cases, if one uses stops commensurate with this TF. The non-fantasy viewers have nothing to catch in your pictures
At the locations you mentioned, with frequent crossovers meaning uncertainty in the market, the EA will work around zero profit or with a small loss, there should be no huge losses. Setting of stops and takes on the M1 TF should not differ from any other TF in terms of dimensionality. All TFs, except for M1 TF, are artificially created informational flows with distortion and loss of some initial information inside corresponding bars. I consider TFs to be an imposed way of presenting information in order to make their many varieties visible, when the progenitor of all TFs, by definition, is the pristine TF due to the absence of smaller TFs, right down to tick data. People don't need to catch on these pictures, an EA should catch with variable success with a proportion of at least 50/50, whereas people armed with an arsenal of TA and FA catch with success 5/95.
I take it the post will go unanswered?