Looking for patterns - page 197

 
CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV:

There is a cause and there is a consequence.

I just wanted to show that the cause of change of absolutely any indicator is the same. regardless of the types and methods of calculation and even if they are based on open or close prices.

I hope you were referring to the indicators indicating essentially the same signal, no matter how tricky it is?
 
Vitaly Muzichenko:

All indicators are written on the same principle, which is price: open, high, low, close, anywhere and everywhere.

Principle/algorithm and input data are different)
 
Valeriy Yastremskiy:
Principle / algorithm and input data are different)

+

 
Renat Akhtyamov:
I hope you were talking about the indicators showing essentially the same signal, no matter how tricky it is?

Right.

The only question is what the signal (the initial one generated by the price itself) gives, and whether it can give anything at all.

The first question is worked out by algorithms of order operation, the second question is worked out by pure statistics.

In essence, statistics comes first, followed by algorithms. Otherwise nothing will work.

 
CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV:

Right.

The only question is what the signal (the original one generated by the price itself) gives, and whether it can give anything at all.

It is confusing to call a signal a stable price behaviour. Repetition is stability. It is confusing. Signal
 
CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV:

Right.

The only question is what the signal (the original one generated by the price itself) gives, and whether it can give anything at all.

It is confusing to call a signal a stable price behaviour. Repetition is stability. It is confusing. Signal is shorter than stability a priori or by definition)
 
Valeriy Yastremskiy:
It's a bit confusing to call a signal a stable price behaviour. Repetition is stability. It is confusing. Signal

stable price behaviour,repetition is stability - in reality almost non-existent.

A signal- well, call it an event. Whatever is convenient.

 
CHINGIZ MUSTAFAEV:

stable price behaviour,repetition is stability - in reality almost non-existent.

A signal- well, call it an event. Whatever is convenient.

Always under the noise cover) no argument.
 
Serqey Nikitin:

A trend can be identified by TREND INDICATORS...

Zig-Zag and Fractal have nothing to do with trend indicators.

Absolutely agree with you. Zig-Zag is a market analysis tool on history. But what do you mean by trend indicators is not quite clear to me. Apparently, they are indicators that tell you whether or not to put your foot under the descending knife.

 
Uladimir reasonably noted that the first confirmation of a trend is a signal of a possible reversal. The knife is about to fall and then we start to catch it. Because it is overbought/oversold, or some other tambourine. Or maybe just enter a new trend on the reversal of the old one?