One more average ... - page 3
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
One more application of one more average ... As far as I know, those overshooting are much, much smaller with oma version, but ... no guarantee, since there is no upper and lower bound check
Interesting, to check this DMX side by side with ADX on Elite follower method.
which method ?
To Linuxser
which method are you talking about ?
Could you put link ?
To Linuxser
which method are you takling about ?
please could you put link ?
Great !!!
Really wonderful work , Mladen !!! A sack of thanks !
To Linuxser
which method are you talking about ?
Could you put link ?which method are you takling about ? please could you put link ?
This one. An oldie.
https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/178487
Using low lag averages (smoothers) to correct some of the indicators problems
___________________________
Some normally very useful indicators like RSX, due to the nature of their calculation, tend to narrow ("flatten") the range they are showing if their periods are widened. In the case of RSX (as well as its predecessor RSI) are tending to center values of 50 as the periods are growing. Here is an example (RSX in this case, but keep in mind that RSX is a smoothed RSI)That is the reason why any serious study is recommending NOT to use periods larger than 10 for RSI (and RSX implicitly) Well, here is one solution that adds no lag to it and corrects that "flattening" problem : instead of using a raw price using a low lag smoothers like one more average. And, see the results :As you can see, the crosses are on the same place, but the ranges are dramatically enhanced (to the level that one can almost use the classical 20-80 levels for signals too)I am including a version that uses Jurik smoothing too (as a comparison, default parameters are set to have the values as similar as possible) I know that it sounds like preaching, but even in this case it is clear that OMA is not lagging behind Jurik smooth (in some cases, quite the opposite) but for the sake of fair comparison I decided to include the both versions.
___________________________
PS: a little advice - the longer the RSX period the longer the smoothing period should be. But do not "oversmooth" : We still need those crosses as early as we can get them. I used smoothing length of 10 for RSX 50, for exampleNice work Mladen, Thanks a lot!
My last Indicator request for a long time
Mladen thank you again for your contributions. Your efforts are very much appreciated.
I have a request for an indicator please. I have been using your new RSX on OMA. This is a very impressive and reliable indicator. I have been using it with an EMA placed on top of it. My request would be the RSX on OMA with an OMA of this indicator. Or another way to ask would be to have an OMA of RSX on OMA. A new version of the Moving Average of RSI but using your OMA. I hope that all make sense.
If you could please try this with an alert for a cross of the OMA over/under the RSX on OMA.
Thank you
Ypu Rock Mladen
I can not believe how fast you coded this. Truly incredible! Thank you very much. It is absolutely perfect. You are a saint
...
Mikhael,
The one shown on those pictures actually is not OMA but a variation of the one posted in the elite section that uses Jurik (posting it here)I am working on OMA version too but there are some cases that are happening which I need to solve first (here is the preview of the same period OMA version).It seems that OMA is "too good" making 3 averages of a high, low and close, and that in some cases something like this can happen (frankly I did not check that thoroughly the jurik version as much as I am checking the OMA version - case like this happens one time on my 1 hour EURUSD, but I want to know exactly why it happens and to prevent it)As soon as I find the reasons for those and as soon as I have the solution for that, will post it here. Also, I would like to make it a bit "slower" (less sensitive in this case - now I have a funny problem of too much speed with this indicator, the one that I used for comparison is already running on speed 1.5, which as you know, is really not muchregards
mladen