New version 18 available now


Download software Tutorial videos
Subscription & data-feed pricing Class schedule


New account application Trading resources
Margin rates Stock & option commissions

Welcome Guest, please sign in to participate in a discussion. Search | Active Topics |

Profile: Chris55
About
User Name: Chris55
Groups: Gold User, Member, TeleChart
Rank: Registered User
Real Name:
Location
Occupation:
Interests:
Gender: Gender:
Statistics
Joined: Tuesday, June 14, 2016
Last Visit: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 6:21:34 PM
Number of Posts: 191
[0.07% of all post / 0.28 posts per day]
Avatar
Last 10 Posts
Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 4:24:37 PM

Many thanks, have a good week. Chris 

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 4:10:48 PM

Hi Bruce,

Re the dot on the:

 IIF(V > 1.618 * AVGV6.1, V, 1 / 0)

 
If I ented this into an indicator formula, it gives me an error message: "Dividng by Zero".. ?
 
Thanks, Chris 
Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 3:44:02 PM

Thanks very much Bruce,

Pertaining to the Narrow Range bars:

I would like to see more than one NR4  or narrower bar (Narrowest Range in the last 4 bars...) within the last 10 bars. So 2 of them would be the minimum. There are be any number of 2 or more of these narrow bars within the last 10 bars.

Any way to code this condition to see if it occurs more than once within the last 10 bars?

Thanks, Chris 

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 9:56:06 AM

Hi Bruce,

You're probably away from the office this week. I wanted to comment on the followng:

- If it is cumbersome or not possible to make the "Volume Flow Indicator", above, more sensitive and faster, then I have a good alternative for it (or in addition to it):

- The condition is:  "Volume exceeds 1.618 times the average volume of the last 6 volume bars".

- Do you think it can be coded in such a way as to place a dot about the respective volume bar for which the condition is true? Or in a separate pane?

Thank you much. Kind regards,

Chris 

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Monday, April 23, 2018 4:35:14 PM

Hi Bruce,

I found this Volume Flow Indicator formula (Scan PCF) in the forum and wondered whether there is any way ti make it more sensitive, i.e. faster:

XAVG(IIF(AVGV130.1 > 0, SUM(IIF(ABS(H + L + C - H1 - L1 - C1) / 3 > .2 * SQR(ABS((SUM((LOG((H + L + C) / 3) - LOG((H1 + L1 + C1) / 3)) ^ 2, 30) - SUM(LOG((H + L + C) / 3) - LOG((H1 + L1 + C1) / 3), 30) ^ 2 / 30) / 30)) * C, SGN(H + L + C - H1 - L1 - C1) * LEAST(V, AVGV130.1 * 2.5), 0) , 130) / AVGV130.1, 0), 3)

It seems to be using 3 bars? If so, can you expand it to the last 10 bars?

Thanks,

Chris 

 

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Monday, April 23, 2018 11:13:27 AM

Good Monring Bruce,

I wonder if you could help me with a PCF for the following to be true (or to show as +1 in a histogram):

- There should be more than one narrow range bar within the last 10 bars;

- A narrow bar would be considered from NR4 to NR7 or narrower.

I would like to use this condition for scans, but also to show when it is true on a histogram.

Many thanks.

Chris 

 

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Thursday, April 19, 2018 12:21:11 PM

Thanks, I couldn't fiure that one out.

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Thursday, April 19, 2018 10:23:30 AM

Sorry to be a bother, when I use this folumula for Crossing UP now:

(XUP(-4.235801 * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), 4), 4), 4) + 20.561175096* XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), 4), 4) - 33.268947 * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), 4) + 17.943573032* XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), -4.235801 * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC8, 8), 8), 8), 8), 8) + 20.561175096* XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC8, 8), 8), 8), 8) - 33.268947 * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC8, 8), 8), 8) + 17.943573032* XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC8, 8), 8)) OR (XUP(-4.235801 * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), 4), 4), 4) + 20.561175096* XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), 4), 4) - 33.268947 * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), 4) + 17.943573032* XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC4, 4), 4), -(1.272 ^ 3) * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC6, 6), 6), 6), 6), 6) + 3 * ((1.272 ^ 2) + (1.272 ^ 3)) * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC6, 6), 6), 6), 6) - (6 * (1.272 ^ 2) + 3 * (1.272 + (1.272 ^ 3))) * XAVG(XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC6, 6), 6), 6) + (1 + 3 * 1.272 + (1.272 ^ 3) + 3 * (1.272 ^ 2)) * XAVG(XAVG(XAVGC6, 6), 6))

 

I get a formula error, unmatched parenthesis at 949 or similar??

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Thursday, April 19, 2018 10:11:48 AM

Just to be sure. Is this the PCF for the current bar only:

WAS:

CountTrue(XUP(T3-4-1.618, T3-8-1.618), 3) > 0 OR CountTrue(XUP(T3-4-1.618, T3-6-1.272), 3) > 0

 

IS (for current bar):

(XUP(T3-4-1.618, T3-8-1.618), 1) > 0 OR CountTrue(XUP(T3-4-1.618, T3-6-1.272), 1) > 0

 

Thanks.

 

Topic: Ichimuko test in progress
Posted: Thursday, April 19, 2018 10:05:38 AM

Many thanks Bruce - that helps alot. Chris