Your welcome. A few important things to note.
My version is based on percent difference from the prior day SMA. I think that his was based on absolute difference in the pairs other than JPY. To be truthful, I didn't reverse engineer his code entirely, since I'm not really a programmer. I just wrote the concept of it as I saw it into this code, so I hope that it is still useful to you. If you want to remove that difference, you can get rid of the "/SMA(Closes,MovAvgLength);" from each of the deltaPair lines. I found it more useful as relative percentage changes though.
You can easily change the colors of the various pairs to your liking when you are using the indicator by double clicking any line on it, and adjusting the indicator details on the right. For my eye, I also found it useful to change the size of a pair of lines vs the rest. They are all defaulted to line size 1, but making the pairs you're focused on size 4 is helpful.
A bit of feedback. Firstly, thank you so much for coding this. I monitored it today against the original MT4 version. Set them up as as per the original author's method (two charts, one on 80 SMA and one on 20 SMA), using 15min bars. They do look similar, but with some small differences. I have attached a couple of images. below (the MT4 version on the left, and your version on the right). In the first image, the two main currencies that has to be monitored for the purpose of the method (the USD in green, and YEN in yellow) are both below zero on the 80 sma and 20 sma on the MT4 version. However, on your version the YEN is still above zero. though approaching/touching it. So, like I mentioned before, yours is quite close to the MT4 version, just some small differences like may be when some currencies are well below zero on the MT4 version, they might just be touching or still slightly above zero on yours. Or they might be say below zero in both versions, but starting to point upwards towards the zero direction on the MT4 version, while still pointing downwards on yours, if you know what I mean.
Not withstanding, many thanks for doing this anyway, and if you do decide to tweak it more, then I would be most grateful In the meantime, I will keep monitoring it, along with the MT4 version, and hope eventually Sir FT might be able to find the time to come up with his version.
I didn't get a chance to see your reply until today, as I don't get on the forum here everyday. Thank you for posting the two indicators side by side. As I hopefully made clear above, they do not do the same thing. Mine was based on percent change, while the original was based on absolute change in currency values.
My primary goal was to give you a starting point for coding a multi-symbol indicator. When I wrote it closer to the original, I saw some inconsistency in the data that indicated that a pair was diverging when the naked eye showed it to be converging. This may have been my flaw in transposing, or a flaw in the design; probably the former.
I would encourage you to tinker with the math formulas to get the result that you want. I tried to make the labels easy to read by removing "A", "B", etc and adding pair names to the formula to make it easy to edit it.
Good luck with it. Any questions posed about specific formula changes will likely get answered here by someone with better market/math/programming skills than me, but I'll try if I can!
The following user says Thank You to fctrader for this post:
The differences are interesting. I wonder if it has to do with the way the WMA is calculated between NinjaTrader and MetaTrader. In his code he used "MODE_LWMA" for Linear Weighted Moving Average, whereas I used NinjaTrader's "WMA" for Weighted Moving Average. As far as I know, they should be calculated the same, but I don't have the formulas that they used in front of me.
It could also be the data is slightly different. Are you using the same data-feed for both indicators? Or is one from your brokerage, and the other from a feed? The inter-bank market has no centralized exchange, and different providers frequently quote different numbers. If that is the case, it could easily explain the discrepancy.
Anyway, it's pretty close, and I'm glad it seems to work for you. Hopefully you can make it into a profitable system ;-)