I don't use the O'Neill version of volume interpretation. I get a real-time feed of index volumes on a 1 min chart, and I can set volume moving averages, etc. I never use that alone, it is like the put/call---an adjunct, helps me judge how much confidence I can put in the other signals.
And I don't use MACD much, I find it too slow. I use quicker settings of the MACD sometimes, however.
For swing- to intermediate-term trends that I like to trade with MFs in retirement accounts, I rely first and foremost on the 15-5-5 stochastic. It doesn't work so well with some stocks, and some try to fine-tune the settings. I also have shown the crossovers that constitute the siganl.
Me, usually I don't, but below you will see the 15-5-5 stochastic on top, and the 15-9-5 on the bottom, just to show you that you can adjust this indicator to eliminate or minimize whipsaw. And it doesn't change the signal timing much.
I prefer AskResearch stochastics, which are a bit different from Stockcharts for some reason. With most indexes, the 5-15-15 is pretty reliable and reasonably quick. Here's an example of something I trade, the yield on the 10 year note. You will see that it signals several times a year, and hardly ever whipsaws:
Here's the put/call I like to use. Some people prefer the equity put/call ($CPCE), and there are reasons why that ought to be a good indicator. Personally, I find the CPC to be a better indicator. As you probably know, this sentiment indicator is only valuable at the extremes, which I define as greater than 0.95 or less than 0.75. I ignore the daily spikes, and only look at the 10 sma and 21 sma. Preferably, they should both exceed the extremes, but sometimes only the 10 sma will exceed the limit in a quickly pivoting market (e.g., early January of 2006). Also, you can see that not infrequently, this is a leading indicator, and price may not respond for a week or two.
The situation in late 2004 was interesting... the put/call exceeded the limits and reached a peak (10 sma) in early to mid-November, when there was no evidence yet of technical deterioration. It was only a week or so later that bearish divergence began to develop, increased thereafter, and that was followed by the intermediate-term correction that began in mid- to late Dec. 2004.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
