| Welcome Guest, please sign in to participate in a discussion. | Search | Active Topics | |
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 69
|
BRUCE,
In the following post a fx for MIN 13D FORCE. ?? Can you write a fx for MAX 2D FORCE (LAST 15 DAYS)??
THANKS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce,
I assume the request is for a PCF equivalent to the form:
XAVGC13.0 < XAVGC13.1
AND XAVGC13.0 < XAVGC13.2
AND ...
AND XAVGC13.0 < XAVGC13.9
with C replaced by (C-C1)*V.
The direct method would require 18 series expansions of the EMAs. We will show that it can be done with 9 series expansions of the EMAs and 9 truncated series expansions of the EMAs. The number of terms in the 9 truncated series expansions is 1,2,...,9.
The series expansion for XAVGCP is:
(1-a)*(a^0*C0+a^1*C1+...+a^k*Ck+...)
where a = (P-1)/(P+1). Let XAVGCP.Q,R represent XAVGCP.Q with the series portion truncated to R terms, i.e., XAVGCP.Q,R is defined to be:
(1-a)*(a^0*CQ+a^1*C(Q+1)+...+a^(R-1)*C(Q+R-1))
Theorem: Define a = (P-1)/(P+1). Then, for N < M,
XAVGP.N - XAVGCP.M = XAVGP.N,(M-N) - (1-a^(M-N))*XAVGCP.M
As an application of the Theorem, let P = 13, N = 2. M = 7. Then,
XAVG13.2 - XAVGC13.7
is equivalent to:
(1-6/7)
*(C2+6/7
*(C3+6/7
*(C4+6/7
*(C5+6/7
*(C6)))))
-(1-(6/7)^5)*XAVGC13.7
An application of the Theorem to each of the 9 inequalities results in each of the Cs replaced by (C-C1)*V being written only once and then in a particularly simple form.
For better accuracy, I would be inclined to approximate the infinite series of only XAVGC13.9.
I do not believe we can simplify more than I have indicated.
Your comments will be appreciated.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy |
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 65,138
|
No, it is not a formula, it is an explanation of a technique for attempting to shorten a formula to hopefully make it practical (and it's not enough to make it short enough to be practical for either the original or new request).
MIN FORCE FORMUAL
I would seriously suggest considering Blocks if you are still interested in finding this Value.
-Bruce
Personal Criteria Formulas
TC2000 Support Articles
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 69
|
Bruce,
Can you go along with me although incorrect. The fx I listed DOES an excellent job of finding entries for LONG positions. IFFFF you had to reverse translate it for SHORTS what would you change: 1+6/7; (Cx-6/7)???
Thank you
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 65,138
|
Are you using the following as the formula for LONG positions?
(1-6/7)
*(C2+6/7
*(C3+6/7
*(C4+6/7
*(C5+6/7
*(C6)))))
-(1-(6/7)^5)*XAVGC13.7
If so, it is the same as:
XAVGC13.2 - XAVGC13.7
I'm not sure how you would translate that to a formula for SHORT positions. For one, I don't know how you would be using the formula. Additionally, the trainers can't give setting, interpretation or investment advice. I guess you could switch which term comes first:
XAVGC13.7 - XAVGC13.2
But the absolute value of the formula would be the same, only the sign would change.
-Bruce
Personal Criteria Formulas
TC2000 Support Articles
|
|
|
Guest-1 |