Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Yep, looks good to me. Thanks HTW.
Are you looking for today's volume to be 500,000 or average volume to be 500,000?
Wow, do you guys always get along so well? What a happy place! ROFL.
DOW -64
Yes, you can change the timeframe on any formula. I'd suggest that you give the Formula and Syntax Guide a read. It'll give you a good idea of what your options are regarding basic formula construction. It's what first clued me into the power of SD.... it's quite enligtening.
Welcome stockauthorata!
Like this...
{BULL}
1 *
(Bar[Close,D] > MovingAverage[MA,Close,10,0,D]
AND
Stochastic[StocK,8,3,3,D] > Stochastic[StocD,8,3,3,D]
AND
MACD[Diff,Close,8,12,9,D] > 0)
+
{BEAR}
-1 *
(Bar[Close,D] < MovingAverage[MA,Close,10,0,D]
AND
Stochastic[StocK,8,3,3,D] < Stochastic[StocD,8,3,3,D]
AND
MACD[Diff,Close,8,12,9,D] < 0)
OK, I have to speak for the geeks! You are completely right... mining for gold in the off-the-book fundamentals can yield great buxx... if you have the time. But don't belittle the nerds that pick up your buys using math.... ~automagically~.
Howdy GB... welcome to the board!
Amen to all that....
LOL... well there you go. I'd buy it over $1.21... maybe lower depending on other technicals.
OOPS, posted this to myself...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=38126867
Ha... quick scan pulled back KOG. I think I like it! Probably needs some tweaking.
That's some fairly intense code that I'm not able to work on at the moment, but I'll give you some pointers to get your started....
Highest high of last 5 days could kinda be done by using the Moving Average High over a period of 5 days. It won't give you the absolute high, but an average high. The week is 5 days, so you could possibly use Bar High for the week, but realize like today, if you were looking at the week bar high, that would only entail today's data.
The crosses are simple to code, but what you're asking for needs to be thought through more... for example... do you want the code to only count those crosses that all happen at the same time? If so, you're likely to never get any triggers. Is it enough that it has crossed and is above the EMA(s), or are you looking for fresh crosses, etc. Those are the kind of questions that must be addressed when trying to code what you're looking for.
You might get some alternative ideas by looking thru the Formula and Syntax guide. It's not very good, imo, for using the formulas as-is, but it will give you an idea of how to code some of the stuff you're looking for.
Hope that helps.
I threw this together, so I have no idea what it might yield, but give it a whirl. If nothing else, maybe it'll give you some ideas about where to head next....
(Bar[Close,D] > .25 AND Bar[Close,D] < 5)
{I use this vs Last so that after hours scans are more accurate}
AND
(Bar[Close,D] >= Bar[Close,W,1] AND Bar[Close,W,1] >= Bar[Close,W,2] AND Bar[Close,W,2] >= Bar[Close,W,3] AND Bar[Close,W,3] >= Bar[Close,W,4])
{I use bar close on the day as the first operator, because bar close on the week can give you funky results}
AND
(Bar[Low,D] >= Bar[Low,W,1] AND Bar[Low,W,1] >= Bar[Low,W,2] AND Bar[Low,W,2] >= Bar[Low,W,3] AND Bar[Low,W,3] >= Bar[Low,W,4])
{... because the standard def of an uptrend is higher highs and higher lows, you can't leave out this part}
AND
(Bar[Close,D] < (.96 * Bar[High,W]))
{PPS falls 5-10%}
I don't ever use notepad, at least directly, but I do use Excel a bunch. I copy the symbols from a column, and then use the Insert Symbols function to paste them in.
Many times, I will load up a L1 with somewhat "granular" data, export my L1 data to Excel and then use filters instead of writing SD code. Comes in handy when in development mode.
I think your best bet for those crappy stocks ;) is to find a list of them and save it to your SD... kinda like a 6th segment. There should be a list somewhere, but I dunno cause I don't trade them. But if you find the list, you should only have to update it periodically.
That one I can help with....
In your Level 1... click on Level 1 then Insert Symbols
- Click on Symbol Lists
- Choose Exchanges, then AMEX
- Repeat until you have all 5 segments added to the list
- Add your screener
Ta daaa!!!!
Insert Symbols adds symbols to your list. Load Symbols does a replace.
IBN, are you asking how to scan the entire market at once or are you asking how to scan for non-NASDAQ, AMEX, NYSE symbols?
There's no easy answer to that question. If there were, we'd all be sittin on the beach.
Your best bet is to find a strategy that works without automation... test it, trade it, turn it inside out and upside down, examine its behavior in all market conditions... and then worry about automating it. If you have a setup that works all the time for you, it can be automated, but not without getting into the tool and learning it intimately for yourself.
DOW +164
Welcome shbhanda!
Try testing your formula using 'detect intrabar' set to 1 minute. That will give you a better indication of how it would perform live. Without that it is quite easy to get great results in a backtest, but those tests don't behave like the same strategy would live. I know... that's screwed up... but it's just a quirky thing with the backtesting/live strategy engine. If you don't want to do that, you can always implement your logic as a live strategy and just tell it to trigger an alert vs. a trade.
In general, I would say it's not a good idea to implement ~any~ code that you don't understand intimately and have completely tested yourself. I've used several things that I've seen posted here and there on the web and most of it is worth exactly what you paid for it... LOL!
I'm not sure what last triggered means in your context. It may be referring to the last time you ran your backtest.
That is some interesting logic that you posted, however. The concept is fairly mainstream, but the settings are odd. I might give it a whirl to see what I get back.
Let us know how you do...
Acutally, I guess you probably can do that by checking the "test up to now" box in the backtest... but it's still a backtest iykwim.
Anyway, the technology is the eeaaasy part... let us know if you get stuck.
TIP of the week: Alerts from chart annotations.... the simplest kind of automation.
From page 29 of the User Manual...
"You can set up alerts to trigger when a trend line gets crossed by the price curve. To add an alert, right-click on the line and select Add Alert from the menu. Once a trend line alert is added, it will appear in the Trade Manager...."
NOTES:
- You can choose whether you want the alert to trigger a trade or just alert you to the condition.
- Use the line-drawing pointer or the ray-drawing pointer icons to draw lines that extend into the future if you want your alerts extended into the future.
Sorry, this info is a repeat for some, but helpful enough that I wanted to repost it.
Welcome Psymon!
In my opinion, te hardest part of getting to where you want to be, is being able to define your trades, in English. If you can describe your ideal setup, you can make SD do just about anything for you after you learn how it works.
There are several ways to get SD to alert you to various conditions live in the market, but none of them result in the B and S symbols on the charts that you may have seen here... that's just for backtesting.
Welcome to the forum, Vegas!
I have been where you are and it is very frustrating. I still can't claim success re live strategies, but it's not completely at the top of my priority list either and I think I know how to get there.
Try this... it's helped me. Create a custom study that display(s) the combined conditions of your logic as true/false, and then examine it carefully against the chart. What the math sees and what you see with the naked eye are many times two different things. So if you create a custom study that shows you an on/off switch, it can at times give you better insight into how the processor is handling your logic.
Hope that makes sense.
Was that pick from one of your earlier Demark scans?
Well that's pretty interesting. Makes me want to go calc some other things using that same method.
Could you somewhat synthesize it from a list of sector-level ETFs? I mean if you're just trying to get an idea of what's driving the market, seems that would tell you.... like if it's a broad-based move or not.
Oh, Duh. Yeah, it's a blonde day. LOL.
... sorry if I offended any of you blondes.
Your example formula is not constructed the same way as mine... that's why it won't work. Parenthesis placement is everything when interpreting logic. My formula displays a -2, -1, 1, 2. I think it was the same schema as Tony's original.
The question that I have is not one of syntax or logic, it's about the interpretation of the Demark setup as it relates to bar numbers.
I don't have a syntax problem. The "-1 *" can come before or after and it doesn't make a difference mathematically.
And on the pix... go to Other, Image Upload
My code already has the perfection criteria in it.
No hurry... I'm not going to be around much for the next few days.
That makes absolutely no sense to me... maybe I'm having a densa kinda day. I drew it out on paper aside his definition (the table on page 1) and realized that I think it's more like this.... what am I missing?
-1 * (Bar[Close,W,0] < Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] < Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] < Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] < Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] < Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] < Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] < Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] < Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] < Bar[Close,W,12])
+
-1 * ((Bar[Close,W,0] < Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] < Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] < Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] < Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] < Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] < Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] < Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] < Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] < Bar[Close,W,12]) AND
((Bar[Low,W,11] < Bar[Low,W,9] AND Bar[Low,W,11] < Bar[Low,W,10]) OR
(Bar[Low,W,12] < Bar[Low,W,9] AND Bar[Low,W,12] < Bar[Low,W,10])))
+
1 * (Bar[Close,W,0] > Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] > Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] > Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] > Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] > Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] > Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] > Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] > Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] > Bar[Close,W,12])
+
1 * ((Bar[Close,W,0] > Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] > Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] > Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] > Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] > Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] > Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] > Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] > Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] > Bar[Close,W,12]) AND
((Bar[High,W,11] > Bar[High,W,9] AND Bar[High,W,11] > Bar[High,W,10]) OR
(Bar[High,W,12] > Bar[High,W,9] AND Bar[High,W,12] > Bar[High,W,10])))
Thanks for that, Tony. I'm hoping to get a table of contents built for us over the weekend for stuff like that. Even if we do decide to relocate the board, it'll be helful. Any word from the onlinetrader people?
That is interesting. Thanks for the info.
Tony/Syko,
Are either of you using Demark score... like the data above or below 9/-9?
BTW, I think the perfection buy code needs some tweaking. The perfection score is supposed to reference bars 6,7,8,9 and as it was posted earlier, it references 1,2,3,4. Here's my version.... it's not as pretty as Tony's. And after looking at it some more, Tony, I do think there are material differences. Like look at the SPY early March scores with this new code.
-1 * (Bar[Close,W,0] < Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] < Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] < Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] < Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] < Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] < Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] < Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] < Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] < Bar[Close,W,12])
+
-1 * ((Bar[Close,W,0] < Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] < Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] < Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] < Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] < Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] < Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] < Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] < Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] < Bar[Close,W,12]) AND
((Bar[Low,W,7] < Bar[Low,W,5] AND Bar[Low,W,7] < Bar[Low,W,6]) OR
(Bar[Low,W,8] < Bar[Low,W,5] AND Bar[Low,W,8] < Bar[Low,W,6])))
+
1 * (Bar[Close,W,0] > Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] > Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] > Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] > Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] > Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] > Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] > Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] > Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] > Bar[Close,W,12])
+
1 * ((Bar[Close,W,0] > Bar[Close,W,4] AND Bar[Close,W,1] > Bar[Close,W,5] AND Bar[Close,W,2] > Bar[Close,W,6] AND Bar[Close,W,3] > Bar[Close,W,7] AND Bar[Close,W,4] > Bar[Close,W,8] AND Bar[Close,W,5] > Bar[Close,W,9] AND Bar[Close,W,6] > Bar[Close,W,10] AND Bar[Close,W,7] > Bar[Close,W,11] AND Bar[Close,W,8] > Bar[Close,W,12]) AND
((Bar[High,W,7] > Bar[High,W,5] AND Bar[High,W,7] > Bar[High,W,6]) OR
(Bar[High,W,8] > Bar[High,W,5] AND Bar[High,W,8] > Bar[High,W,6])))
Sorry, that should have said... "intra-day data"
Sorry for the confusion. That PM request was for Paladin.
That's a nice screen. Looks a lot like mine, LOL.