Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
I'm in the process of testing an indicator based setup to replicate pure price action, specifically, the breakout trade.
Below, the yellow lines and the green arrows show the PA and indy setups, respectively. Clearly the indy setup lagged the PA entry by 1 bar. Now, that may not be such a bad thing if the setup has a bona fide positive expectancy. In fact, one may view that bar as a small price for insurance, given the consensus that breakouts are not consistent winners.
The indies in P1 are EMA 14 and ADX 4; the one in P2 is a dingle-hopper (developmental indicator).
It should be noted that the indy setup did not trigger a breakout trade prior to the ones marked, althou one could argue the PA breakout setup may have, depending on a discretionary trader's point of view.
Can you help answer these questions from other members on NexusFi?
Looks like you have your arrow condition something like: if close > breakout line then plot the arrow. If you have your setting on the indy to calc. on bar close, then the close of the bar is referenced. If you have calc on bar close = false and it is doing that, I have no idea, because in that case the 'close' in the code is each last tick (i.e. the current bar close whether or not the bar is finished forming). But like you said: maybe it's a good thing to get a close confirming the breakout.
If using COBC false and you want the arrow to trigger on the 'normal' bar close, be sure to use 1 offset on the Draw() tools not 0.
Is this a programming question/problem? (Should be in PP) Or is this a new method you are working on? I ask only because I am confused by "1 bar late" for the thread title.
It's a new method that's being traded manually and will become a program if it has merit. The title reflects the difference between its signal and that of a discretionary trader who simply took the breakout.
I know it sounds utopian--a successful system should work in all markets in any timeframe--but I've never seen it happen in practice. Anyway, here is TF with the system's setups in arrows and the discretionary trader's setups in yellow. I'm going to post charts with other instruments, too, albeit today is slow.
The first short was in the news window and I would filter that out in autotrade, but regardless, the manual trader had an edge if he had the discipline and guts to take it. The second trade had no lag on COBC.
Here is my latest experiment in an effort to drop paintbar studies and other extraneous indicators. So far it feels good, like a fat man losing 50 pounds.
The thought process is to get very good entires within the prevailing trend while risking less than 8 ticks.
The orange line is EMA 5. The identity of the dotted one is your homework assignment so your mind won't rot.
Worked well this morning in a decent range and even in a somewhat choppy area. Seven winners, no losers (hypothetical).
