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: thnkbigr
About
User Name: thnkbigr
Groups: Member, Platinum User, TeleChart
Rank: Registered User
Real Name:
Location
Occupation:
Interests:
Gender: Unsure
Statistics
Joined: Friday, March 31, 2006
Last Visit: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 12:29:49 AM
Number of Posts: 3,180
[1.08% of all post / 0.69 posts per day]
Avatar
Last 10 Posts
Topic: Adj Vol based C vs. DR
Posted: Tuesday, December 04, 2018 2:14:57 PM

Bruce I played with both PCF's one checking for price being above the mid of today's DR and C > C1

I am just curious why we need to check for price to be above the mid of today's DR bc if price is below the middle of its DR that means today's down volume is higher than today's up volume and that alone should eliminate the stock.

when I changed to C > C1 instead of mid-range I got stocks like FBR and TRCO checking true on 11/30

Both stocks closed below the mid of their DR on 11/30. 

for ex, FBR closed at the 41.46% of its DR so almost 59% of the volume of that day is counted as Down Vol and 41% as Up Vol

That alone should eliminate the stock unless the PCF is starting to check from yesterday?  

    

Topic: Adj Vol based C vs. DR
Posted: Friday, November 30, 2018 11:07:07 AM

This seems to be correct. Let me play with it 

For the last few months I decided not to ask this bc I thought it would be too complicated to do this in TC

Thank you! You are amazing 

 

Topic: Adj Vol based C vs. DR
Posted: Thursday, November 29, 2018 7:10:07 PM

MA on 10/11 vs 10/12 is another ex

The PCF plots 10/12 as True and that's incorrect 

10/11 Total Vol was 9.2M (2.2M Up Vol, 7.0M Down Vol based on closing at 23.46% of DR)

10/12 Total Vol was 6.2M (5.8M Up Vol, 370K Down Vol based on closing at 94% of DR) 

The 5.8M Up Vol on 10/12 is less than the 7.0M Down Vol on 10/11

Even the Total Vol of 6.2M on 10/12 is less than the 7.0M Down Vol on 10/12

It should be False on 10/12 and not True 

The Up Vol should be higher then Down Vol in the last 10 days 

Thanks  

Topic: Adj Vol based C vs. DR
Posted: Thursday, November 29, 2018 6:57:59 PM

Bruce, I played with the above PCF and something is off 

I plotted your PCF as a IIF function so I can compare

IIF((C > C1 AND V * IIF(H > L OR H <> C1, (C - LEAST(L, C1)) / (GREATEST(H, C1) - LEAST(L, C1)), 1 / 2) > MAX(V1 * IIF(H1 > L1 OR H1 <> C2, (C1 - LEAST(L1, C2)) / (GREATEST(H1, C2) - LEAST(L1, C2)), 1 / 2), 10)), 10, 1/0)

This will plot 10 if true and nothing if false 

if you plot the above it shows that 10/25 was a PP on MSFT which is not true

On 10/25 MSFT Total Vol was 61.6M and the stock closed at 86% of DR therefore 86% of the Total Vol will be the UP Day Vol at 53M Shares 

One day before on 10/24 MSFT traded 63.8M Shares and closed at 10.58% of its DR making 89.42% of the Total Vol as Down Day Vol 57.1

10/25 - 61.6M Total Volume - Closed at 86% of DR - Up Day Vol (53M - 86% of 61.6M) with remaining 14% as Down Day Vol

10/24 - 63.8M Total Volume - Closed at 10.58% of DR - Up Day Vol (6.8M - 10.58% of 63.8M) and Down Day Vol (57.1M - 89.42% of 63.8M) 

So the Up Vol on 10/25 of 53M shares was less than the Down Vol of 57.1M on 10/24 therefore the condition should be false on 10/25 and not true 

   

 

Topic: Adj Vol based C vs. DR
Posted: Thursday, November 29, 2018 2:23:08 PM

Bruce, 

Few months ago you wrote the PCF below that plots the volume based on where the stock closed in its Daily Range and I have monitored this with PP signals 

V * IIF(H > L OR H <> C1, (C - LEAST(L, C1)) / (GREATEST(H, C1) - LEAST(L, C1)), 1 / 2)

this is pcf for the PP i use 

(C > C1 AND V > MAX(ABS(C1 < C2) * V1, 10))

I like to change the PP PCF and Adj the Volume based on where the stock closed within its DR.

For ex

Please take a look at MSFT and as you can see it did not meet the PP requirement yesterday as yesterday&#39;s volume was lower than the 11/20 volume when the stock closed down

But on 11/20 the stock closed almost at the 45% of its DR so since the stock closed significantly off of its lows I like to adjust the Down day volume based on where the stock closed within its DR.   

Total of 64M shares traded on 11/20 - Adj that based on the Close vs DR 35.4M (55% of the Volume) as Down Vol and 28.7M (45% of the Volume) as Up Vol

Yesterday 11/28 the stock traded total of 46.8M shares and closed at the 95% of its DR - Meaning 95% of the total Vol as Up Vol (44.4M) and 5% of the total volume as Down Vol (2.3M) 

I want the new PP PCF to compare today&#39;s Up Vol vs. the Down Volume in the last 10 days 

As such yesterday MSFT would have had a PP signal since yesterday&#39;s Up Vol of 44.4M was higher than any of the Down Day Volumes in the last 10 days  

AMZN is another ex - It did not qualify as PP yesterday since yesterday&#39;s vol was lower than the 11/20 vol when the stock closed down. But on 11/20 AMZN closed at the 65.76% of its DR. 

If we Adj the Down Day Vol based on Close vs. DR it would only count about 35% of the total vol on 11/20 as Down Vol. 

yesterday it traded 8.4M shares and closed at 96.3% of DR so the Up Vol yesterday was 8.1M shares which is higher than any of the Down Day Vol&#39;s in the last 10 days   

Can this be done?   

Topic: Shorter way to plot MAXC63
Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 12:57:52 PM

Ok thanks 

Topic: Shorter way to plot MAXC63
Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 12:16:46 PM

Take a look at LOXO for ex

the stock made a new 63 day closing high on 11/7 but the MAX(MAXC63, 100) continues to plot the 7/6 high since this is plotting the Max value of MAXC63 up to 100 days and it will adj after 100 days 

I need the indicator to start plotting the New 63 day closing high as soon as the stock makes a new one  

Topic: Shorter way to plot MAXC63
Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 11:46:33 AM

Bruce 

MAXC63 plots the max high in the last 63 days but the issue I have is when 63 days pass by and we don&#39;t have a new 63 day high. In that case the indicator continues to drop plotting the highest point in the last 63 days. Take a look at MDGL as an ex. Starting 9/12 the MAXC63 indicator starts to drop 

The PCF below is what I use which continues to plot the last 63 day high up to 100 days and only adjusts when the stock makes another 63 day closing high. I like to have this plot for longer than 100 bars but in that case the PCF becomes longer and longer

By any chance is there a shorter way to plot the PCF below 

IIF(C>= MAXC63.1, C,IIF(C1 >= MAXC63.2, C1, IIF(C2 >= MAXC63.3, C2, IIF(C3 >= MAXC63.4, C3, IIF(C4 >= MAXC63.5, C4, IIF(C5 >= MAXC63.6, C5, IIF(C6 >= MAXC63.7, C6, IIF(C7 >= MAXC63.8, C7, IIF(C8 >= MAXC63.9, C8, IIF(C9 >= MAXC63.10, C9, IIF(C10 >= MAXC63.11, C10, IIF(C11 >= MAXC63.12, C11, IIF(C12 >= MAXC63.13, C12, IIF(C13 >= MAXC63.14, C13, IIF(C14 >= MAXC63.15, C14, IIF(C15 >= MAXC63.16, C15, IIF(C16 >= MAXC63.17, C16, IIF(C17 >= MAXC63.18, C17, IIF(C18 >= MAXC63.19, C18, IIF(C19 >= MAXC63.20, C19, IIF(C20 >= MAXC63.21, C20, IIF(C21 >= MAXC63.22, C21, IIF(C22 >= MAXC63.23, C22, IIF(C23 >= MAXC63.24, C23, IIF(C24 >= MAXC63.25, C24, IIF(C25 >= MAXC63.26, C25, IIF(C26 >= MAXC63.27, C26, IIF(C27 >= MAXC63.28, C27, IIF(C28 >= MAXC63.29, C28, IIF(C29 >= MAXC63.30, C29, IIF(C30 >= MAXC63.31, C30, IIF(C31 >= MAXC63.32, C31, IIF(C32 >= MAXC63.33, C32, IIF(C33 >= MAXC63.34, C33, IIF(C34 >= MAXC63.35, C34, IIF(C35 >= MAXC63.36, C35, IIF(C36 >= MAXC63.37, C36, IIF(C37 >= MAXC63.38, C37, IIF(C38 >= MAXC63.39, C38, IIF(C39 >= MAXC63.40, C39, IIF(C40 >= MAXC63.41, C40, IIF(C41 >= MAXC63.42, C41, IIF(C42 >= MAXC63.43, C42, IIF(C43 >= MAXC63.44, C43, IIF(C44 >= MAXC63.45, C44, IIF(C45 >= MAXC63.46, C45, IIF(C46 >= MAXC63.47, C46, IIF(C47 >= MAXC63.48, C47, IIF(C48 >= MAXC63.49, C48, IIF(C49 >= MAXC63.50, C49, IIF(C50 >= MAXC63.51, C50, IIF(C51 >= MAXC63.52, C51, IIF(C52 >= MAXC63.53, C52, IIF(C53 >= MAXC63.54, C53, IIF(C54 >= MAXC63.55, C54, IIF(C55 >= MAXC63.56, C55, IIF(C56 >= MAXC63.57, C56, IIF(C57 >= MAXC63.58, C57, IIF(C58 >= MAXC63.59, C58, IIF(C59 >= MAXC63.60, C59, IIF(C60 >= MAXC63.61, C60, IIF(C61 >= MAXC63.62, C61, IIF(C62 >= MAXC63.63, C62, IIF(C63 >= MAXC63.64, C63, IIF(C64 >= MAXC63.65, C64, IIF(C65 >= MAXC63.66, C65, IIF(C66 >= MAXC63.67, C66, IIF(C67 >= MAXC63.68, C67, IIF(C68 >= MAXC63.69, C68, IIF(C69 >= MAXC63.70, C69, IIF(C70 >= MAXC63.71, C70, IIF(C71 >= MAXC63.72, C71, IIF(C72 >= MAXC63.73, C72, IIF(C73 >= MAXC63.74, C73, IIF(C74 >= MAXC63.75, C74, IIF(C75 >= MAXC63.76, C75, IIF(C76 >= MAXC63.77, C76, IIF(C77 >= MAXC63.78, C77, IIF(C78 >= MAXC63.79, C78, IIF(C79 >= MAXC63.80, C79, IIF(C80 >= MAXC63.81, C80, IIF(C81 >= MAXC63.82, C81, IIF(C82 >= MAXC63.83, C82, IIF(C83 >= MAXC63.84, C83, IIF(C84 >= MAXC63.85, C84, IIF(C85 >= MAXC63.86, C85, IIF(C86 >= MAXC63.87, C86, IIF(C87 >= MAXC63.88, C87, IIF(C88 >= MAXC63.89, C88, IIF(C89 >= MAXC63.90, C89, IIF(C90 >= MAXC63.91, C90, IIF(C91 >= MAXC63.92, C91, IIF(C92 >= MAXC63.93, C92, IIF(C93 >= MAXC63.94, C93, IIF(C94 >= MAXC63.95, C94, IIF(C95 >= MAXC63.96, C95, IIF(C96 >= MAXC63.97, C96, IIF(C97 >= MAXC63.98, C97, IIF(C98 >= MAXC63.99, C98, IIF(C99 >= MAXC63.100, C99, IIF(C100 >= MAXC63.101, C100, 1 / 0)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
 

 

Topic: ?
Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 11:16:16 AM

Ok thx

Topic: ?
Posted: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 3:52:15 PM

IIF(C >=  MAXC42.0, ATR42.0,IIF(C.1 >=  MAXC42.1, MIN(ATR42,2),IIF(C.2 >=  MAXC42.2, MIN(ATR42,3),

Above is just part of a PCF I have. 

So you mean I need to say C1 or C2 rather than C.1, C.2 in teh highlighted sections above