Hi All ya folks,
1. Having gone through all the postings to date, I got the answer to #1 below !
2. In general, given all the various strategies being debated and tested here and on other online forums, I am curious about the various methodologies quoted.
Here, for example, there is talk about using the difference in strength vs its 1st derivative, the difference in slope strength, aka, CSSDiff (and by extension, change in the slope strength, as 2nd derivative to strength difference.)
So:
A. Do we know that when there is a strength difference, even while it is constant over a period, the pairs price will still go up/down (so the strength difference is a proxy for the price difference from previous to current and future periods)? Or would that come from a CSSDiff, a slope difference ? What is the justification?
B. Would above then mean that, in the plain strength difference case, the CSSDiff then is a proxy for the slope of the pairs price change, and by extension, the change in CSSDiff (= slope of CSSDiff) a proxy for a change in the slope of the pair price on the chart ?
C. Also there is implication that the lower TFs represent more recent movement than higher TFs (though there is no theoretical justification I have seen from analyst research much as there is no evidence that the indicators we use are anything more than lagging or at best, coincident, indicators, price itself being the best coincident indicator.)
If lower TFs do show more recent movement, then they are 'leading' indicators to the higher TFs. In such case then we are justified in basing our entry/exits on lower TFs, which is what apparently most traders do.
D. If we combine the above arguments, we then have a trading strategy by which we can base our assurance of continued or increasing divergence by looking at lower TFs and also by considering the higher derivatives of currency strength, both for trade-for-difference and trade-by-level trading.
With above arguments, btw, the trade-by-difference method is more dynamic, i.e., should generate more pips. Trade-by-level dependent upon the individual currencies on opposite sides of the zero line, the zero line is actually not absolute but a level normalized for convenience Hence the zero line is an artificial construct- it can be moved up or down by changing the math formula.
Any comments?
I am trying to find some kind of logic behind various successes reported, because many of them seem to go away with high DDs or a 'change' in market conditions ( i.e., high or low volatility trending or ranging, meaning 4 different market conditions, plus the market conditions for retracements followed by trend resumptions.)
At the end of the day, it is obviously instincts from long trading experience that counts, as I see from Nanning Bob comments. He has posted his currency volatility summary in 10.2 docs having classified pairs into 5-6 groups with various characteristics.
Interestingly I do not see anyone having coded this volatility summary as a background advisor for various manual or automated strategies which currently depend only upon technical signals, all of whom arguably are lagging indicators. E.g. simple pop-up text advice (or strategy coding) on whether enough pips have been achieved statistically, given Bobs' volatility studies, or whether various sub-strategies like exit/entry make sense given pairs characteristics under similar market conditions.
Maybe that is how we reduce loss/DDs, from observation and indicators than merely tech indicators. Or perhaps such statistical inference is too valuable a trading tool to be shared
Regards,
Athar.
atharmian wrote:Steve,
Thanks for your serial killer approach to EA/Indy coding and your running this very productive forum
Sorry, if this question has been answered earlier:
1. Is your Baluda.mq4 EA current after June 2, because I noticed a post same day from garyfritz talking about the different strength numbers between Baluda and gary's own indy ? Baluda has been releasing many updates I noticed from his Baluda Indy forum.
2. Is there a way to turn off this EA for manual trades besides just unchecking Live Trade in Empty4 options?
3. I am surprised that while there has been immense interest in looking at NB10.2A and its CTS offshoot for lower TF and range trading, there does not seem to be so much interest in combining Baldua.mq4 currency strength as well with NB102.2A trading strategy. At least there ought to be an indy that shows buy/sell signals from both NB10.2A and Baluda.mq4 here, and let the trader decide.
Cheers,
Athar.
