From theory to practice - page 710
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
A local maximum (minimum) or a global maximum (minimum) will be formed and nothing else, only time will show, which was the global or local one .
In fact, if we add to the condition of price leaving the channel the condition of breaking HIGH or LOW at a certain period of history, it will be a signal of the end of the trend and return to the average. Right?
Maybe the parameter we are looking for is the seller/buyer ratio? But, how and where do you get this real-time data into your TS?
The quantitative ratio of sellers/buyers does not solve anything. It's the actual volume that decides, but it's not available in the public domain.
With your inquisitive persistence you need to pay more attention to wave theory. It has what you are looking for, but don't find on line graphs of increments.
In fact, if you add the HIGH or LOW breakdown condition on a particular historical time frame to the price exit condition, it will signal the end of the trend and a return to the mean. Right?
no
There aren't any trends until you draw them, the structures exist, they are formed by the market, those structures that are visible with the timeframe increase are global, and those that disappear are local.
I do not know, I try to analyze fractal. But channels make sense as they are linked to timeframes and the crossing of channels between higher and lower timeframes form structures repetition.
Alexander_K:
But, ALL models have one IMPORTANT drawback - when the price goes out of the channel borders it remains unclear, where will the price go next? The Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model says - back to the mean. But, in the market it is not so, even though the correlation coefficient, on average, is negative.
So Alexander, it follows that the model itself becomes inadequate in this situation. It simply breaks down. No?
Which means no parameters can adjust it to the realities of the market. A simple chain of logic. Or don't you agree?
So Alexander, it follows that the model itself becomes inadequate in this situation. It simply breaks down. No?
This means that no parameters will adapt it to the market realities. A simple logical chain. Or don't you agree?
The model itself, which states that it will definitely return to the average, breaks down in about 30% of cases. Proven in practice.
I think if we look at something like Hurst when the price leaves the channel, it should allow us to eliminate a significant amount of losing trades.
Let me repeat: there is nothing to do in the market without this parameter. Y.N. Orlov called it "the breakdown indicator".
no
There are notrends unless you draw them, the structures exist, they are formed by the market, those structures that are visible with the timeframe increase are global, while those that disappear are local.
If you don't draw them, they're formed by the market ... If you're looking for trends with higher timeframes, they are global, but if you don't draw them you may disappear - they are local.
That's a rather strange statement...
Well, if I don't draw it, then there's no trend? ;) like, it's only in my head? ;)
.
In fact, if you add the HIGH or LOW breakdown condition on a particular historical time frame to the price exit condition, it will signal the end of the trend and a return to the mean. Right?
No offence, but you may have missed the basics of TA knowledge, and started digging deep without understanding what lies on the surface.
What is a channel? It's essentially a trend on a small TF This is a wave of a BOOSTF and if you want even a candle even BOOSTF. Everything is packed. A trend is a set of waves on a particular TF.
Each wave has its own definite character, regardless of the TF. The waves obey the general law regardless of the TF. I could write a dissertation on this subject, but I do not need it. Every type of wave has its own boundaries. It's like in Mendeleev's table there are defined qualities.
There is a memory there that you and not only you dream of.
I think if you look at something like Hearst at the moment the price leaves the channel, it should allow you to weed out a significant number of losing trades.
Anyone have a clue?
Alexander_K:
I think if you look at something like Hearst when the price exits the channel, it should allow you to screen out a significant number of losing trades.
Again, there is nothing to do in the market without such a parameter. Y.N. Orlov called it "the breakdown indicator".
IMHO, the practical existence of such a parameter is utopia. To calculate this parameter we need previous source data - it's obvious. And the breakdown of the model is always abrupt.
Therefore, this parameter (even if it exists), will always be catastrophically late. At the moment of break, the algorithm won't fix anything - at all.
I can illustrate this with an example of Hearst (its counterpart), if you like.
That's a rather strange statement...
Well if I don't draw it then there's no trend? ;) like, it's only in my head? ;)
alas, i think so, we do not draw a line, we do not see what we want to call a trend, the trend line you draw using only 2-4 candles, and the fact that the remaining bars are not involved in this graphical construction, well, so it was assumed