Bruce

Thanks for some clarification.  I believe I added the 9 day moving average correctly, but the similar amplitude and shift appearance seems to be the result of my original custom formula setup that was with a smoothing average of 9 instead of 1 as you indicated below (please confirm if this was the reason). 

I observed this Volume MACD Indicator on another chart application.  The significance of applying it to a stock or index chart is a measure of conviction of a move (not too dissimilar to divergences in TSV).  If this indicator rises above 0, it confirms conviction of that move (up or down).  If it falls below 0, it demonstrates lack of conviction in that move (up or down).  My back testing suggests that it works pretty well to that end.

I believe that I read in another discussion that we could not setup a histogram with these custom indicators, is that true?  If that is the case, I believe I have accomplished my objective with your help on this indicator.  I'll look forward to your response to my three follow-up queries, and thank you for your valued help.


Select Chart Template | Add Indicator | Indicator.
- Visible: Checked
- Center Zero Line: Checked
- Plot using price scale: Unchecked
- Smoothing Average: 1     I entered 9 on my original formula
- Average Type: Doesn't matter (because the Smoothing Average is 1)
- Indicator Formula: AVGV9 - AVGV21
Select Chart Template | Add Indicator | Moving Average | FormulaAVGV9 - AVGV21 1 Period.  I'm confused by this notation (italics), since the Moving Average box doesn't provide for a formula entry.  Is there some significance to this representation other than a reference to the moving average?
- Period: 9     When I entered this number, the 2 lines I was looking for seemed correct.
- Average Type: Up to you, but Simple would match the Custom Indicator.
- Shift Left: Unchecked

Hi Bruce

If you are available today, I would like to follow-up on a Regression Trend Line PCF you helped me with last year.  You provided me with a positive and negative sloping RTL for 100 and 40 days which has been working well for my scanning strategies.  I would like to supplement those PCF's with a middle time frame of 70 days.  I have used your previous formula as a template for this time frame which I believe I have setup the body of the formula correctly, but I still don't understand how you came up with the denominator in this equation.  I am including your 100 day formula for reference and your accompanying link, but I was still not able to figure it out.  As always, I appreciate your help.

Thanks - Chuck


My attempt at a 70-Period Regression Trend Line Sloping PCF

Positive

(34.5 * C+ 33.5 * C1 + 32.5 * C2 + 31.5 * C3 + 30.5 * C4 + 29.5 * C5 + 28.5 * C6 + 27.5 * C7 + 26.5 * C8 + 25.5 * C9 + 24.5 * C10 + 23.5 * C11 + 22.5 * C12 + 21.5 * C13 + 20.5 * C14 + 19.5 * C15 + 18.5 * C16 + 17.5 * C17 + 16.5 * C18 + 15.5 * C19 + 14.5 * C20 + 13.5 * C21 + 12.5 * C22 + 11.5 * C23 + 10.5 * C24 + 9.5 * C25 + 8.5 * C26 + 7.5 * C27 + 6.5 * C28 + 5.5 * C29 + 4.5 * C30 + 3.5 * C31 + 2.5 * C32 + 1.5 * C33 + .5 * C34 - .5 * C35 - 1.5 * C36 - 2.5 * C37 - 3.5 * C38 - 4.5 * C39 - 5.5 * C40 - 6.5 * C41 - 7.5 * C42 - 8.5 * C43 - 9.5 * C44 - 10.5 * C45 - 11.5 * C46 - 12.5 * C47 - 13.5 * C48 - 14.5 * C49 - 15.5 * C50 - 16.5 * C51 - 17.5 * C52 - 18.5 * C53 - 19.5 * C54 - 20.5 * C55 - 21.5 * C56 - 22.5 * C57 - 23.5 * C58 - 24.5 * C59 - 25.5 * C60 - 26.5 * C61 - 27.5 * C62 - 28.5 * C63 - 29.5 * C64 - 30.5 * C65 - 31.5 * C66 - 32.5 * C67 - 33.5 * C68 - 34.5 * C69) / ? > 0

Negative

(34.5 * C+ 33.5 * C1 + 32.5 * C2 + 31.5 * C3 + 30.5 * C4 + 29.5 * C5 + 28.5 * C6 + 27.5 * C7 + 26.5 * C8 + 25.5 * C9 + 24.5 * C10 + 23.5 * C11 + 22.5 * C12 + 21.5 * C13 + 20.5 * C14 + 19.5 * C15 + 18.5 * C16 + 17.5 * C17 + 16.5 * C18 + 15.5 * C19 + 14.5 * C20 + 13.5 * C21 + 12.5 * C22 + 11.5 * C23 + 10.5 * C24 + 9.5 * C25 + 8.5 * C26 + 7.5 * C27 + 6.5 * C28 + 5.5 * C29 + 4.5 * C30 + 3.5 * C31 + 2.5 * C32 + 1.5 * C33 + .5 * C34 - .5 * C35 - 1.5 * C36 - 2.5 * C37 - 3.5 * C38 - 4.5 * C39 - 5.5 * C40 - 6.5 * C41 - 7.5 * C42 - 8.5 * C43 - 9.5 * C44 - 10.5 * C45 - 11.5 * C46 - 12.5 * C47 - 13.5 * C48 - 14.5 * C49 - 15.5 * C50 - 16.5 * C51 - 17.5 * C52 - 18.5 * C53 - 19.5 * C54 - 20.5 * C55 - 21.5 * C56 - 22.5 * C57 - 23.5 * C58 - 24.5 * C59 - 25.5 * C60 - 26.5 * C61 - 27.5 * C62 - 28.5 * C63 - 29.5 * C64 - 30.5 * C65 - 31.5 * C66 - 32.5 * C67 - 33.5 * C68 - 34.5 * C69) / ? < 0

Positively sloping RTL &ndash; 100 Period

(49.5 * C + 48.5 * C1 + 47.5 * C2 + 46.5 * C3 + 45.5 * C4 + 44.5 * C5 + 43.5 * C6 + 42.5 * C7 + 41.5 * C8 + 40.5 * C9 + 39.5 * C10 + 38.5 * C11 + 37.5 * C12 + 36.5 * C13 + 35.5 * C14 + 34.5 * C15 + 33.5 * C16 + 32.5 * C17 + 31.5 * C18 + 30.5 * C19 + 29.5 * C20 + 28.5 * C21 + 27.5 * C22 + 26.5 * C23 + 25.5 * C24 + 24.5 * C25 + 23.5 * C26 + 22.5 * C27 + 21.5 * C28 + 20.5 * C29 + 19.5 * C30 + 18.5 * C31 + 17.5 * C32 + 16.5 * C33 + 15.5 * C34 + 14.5 * C35 + 13.5 * C36 + 12.5 * C37 + 11.5 * C38 + 10.5 * C39 + 9.5 * C40 + 8.5 * C41 + 7.5 * C42 + 6.5 * C43 + 5.5 * C44 + 4.5 * C45 + 3.5 * C46 + 2.5 * C47 + 1.5 * C48 + .5 * C49 - .5 * C50 - 1.5 * C51 - 2.5 * C52 - 3.5 * C53 - 4.5 * C54 - 5.5 * C55 - 6.5 * C56 - 7.5 * C57 - 8.5 * C58 - 9.5 * C59 - 10.5 * C60 - 11.5 * C61 - 12.5 * C62 - 13.5 * C63 - 14.5 * C64 - 15.5 * C65 - 16.5 * C66 - 17.5 * C67 - 18.5 * C68 - 19.5 * C69 - 20.5 * C70 - 21.5 * C71 - 22.5 * C72 - 23.5 * C73 - 24.5 * C74 - 25.5 * C75 - 26.5 * C76 - 27.5 * C77 - 28.5 * C78 - 29.5 * C79 - 30.5 * C80 - 31.5 * C81 - 32.5 * C82 - 33.5 * C83 - 34.5 * C84 - 35.5 * C85 - 36.5 * C86 - 37.5 * C87 - 38.5 * C88 - 39.5 * C89 - 40.5 * C90 - 41.5 * C91 - 42.5 * C92 - 43.5 * C93 - 44.5 * C94 - 45.5 * C95 - 46.5 * C96 - 47.5 * C97 - 48.5 * C98 - 49.5 * C99) / 83325 > 0

You may wish to review the following:

Using Linear Regression vs Classical Peaks/Valleys for Divergence Analysis

-Bruce

Hi Bruce and StockGuy

I apoligize for misuderstanding  what I was reading in your formulas.  Yes, I have now tried them and they work perfectly.

Thanks again for your help!
Chuck

Hi Bruce

As I tried to clarify, I didn't want this to be function of crossing through 0.  So let me offer a chart example.  If you would, bring up a daily chart of ADTN (zoom 4), and set up in your middle chart window a MACD histogram with a simple 5,15,9 set up.  You should see 3 examples (2 bearish and 1 bullish) within the last month of what observation I'm trying share with you.  You should see on 12/21/07 a MACD bar peak, followed by a series of daily bar amplitude declines.  On 1/8/08 you should see a MACD bar trough, followed by a series of daily bar amplitude increases.  On 1/28/08 you should see a MACD bar peak again, followed by a series of daily bar amplitude declines.

What I would like you to help me with is setting up a PCF that identifies a 2 day bar decline towards the 0 line (as viewed on the MACD chart) after a MACD amplitude peak; and conversely, a 2 day bar increase towards the 0 line (as viewed on the MACD chart) after a MACD amplitude trough.

I hope this helps to describe my objective - Thanks