Swing with left and right strength independence

[aligator]

All in All, I personally find having the flexibility to plot confirmations sooner a definite plus..

Hi -=Edge=-,

Agree. I also did a little research many years ago on daily stock data by calculating and comparing the up swing and down swing price velocities (Velocity = (Swing Price Range) / (Number of bars in the swing)). Then calculating the average of all swing ratios ( VelocityRatio = DnVelocity/ UpVelocity) for the 10 yrs data sample.

Not a large data sample, but the average swing velocity ratio was greater than 1, confirming the down swings are on average steeper than the up swings. I did not continue the research, but perhaps assigning qualifying and confirming strength numbers based on this ratio may have made sense in the long run.

Also, agree that swing points are identified too late to trade them for reversals. As a matter of fact many years ago (early 1980's) when MetaStock was one of the only technical tools out there, they recommended not to trade based on their ZigZag indicator signals because they were repainting until confirmed (Ref: Steve Achelis, "Technical Analysis From A to Z).

That said, I do successfully trade swing reversals confirmed by certain momentum divergence indications.

Cheers!

[aligator]

Thanks for pointing out my non-contribution.

That was not my intention. You don't know nkhoi or his intention to harshly reply to his comment.

You could have asked the original poster to elaborate why such an indicator maybe better. Your reply discourages someone whose been a contributor of free NinjaTrader coding for the past 15 years. He may know something you and us do not know, just ask him without insulting him. That is the point.

[eDanny]

Fortunately I don't care about my post count and rarely post at all. When I do it is because I think I can contribute something. In this case I wanted the other posters to rethink what they said. There may be many possible reasons to have independent swing strengths. A blanket statement that it has no advantage is crazy and can only apply to the poster. The best way for an individual to know is if it is tested. To test, one needs code that has that function. Thanks for pointing out my non-contribution.

[aligator]

That is an odd answer. You know this to be a fact or just trying to increase your post count for some reason?

eDanny,

No need for that. I don't think you are contributing anything here other than increasing your own post count here, either.

nkhoi has been around here a lot longer than most of us and his contributions to NinjaTrader users community here and on Futures.IO forum are unselfish, unlike many turned self-serving third-party vendors. He has a real job and just loves to trade and write and modify codes for free.

That said, if someone asks for an indicator, should at least provide reasons why such an indicator is worth the time to develop, rather than asking nkhoi to provide basis for his comment.

Yes, I do have such an indicator that has custom left and right strength parameters, but frankly I have not bothered to investigate if that is advantageous. However, real traders know by experience that market drops are often much faster and steeper than market rises. So, it makes sense if a shorter strength on the drop side of a swing may make a difference.

Ideas need to be substantiated to motivate others spend their time to indulge that idea.

Cheers!

[-=Edge=-]

How's about analysis rather than pontification! See this: https://youtu.be/ptBcb7ykZRg

Oh my, you would have to pick one of the first demonstration video's I ever recorded.. heh ..
(So many scattered long winded repeated thoughts makes for a much too long boring video!)

"Opinions" are rather meaningless without some type of explanation and/or reasoning behind them!

"Why, How, on What Basis" an opinion is either formed or expressed  "Matters" !!!  

Without This:  "The Opinion Does NOT!"

Even with This: "Don't Trust, Until Verified!"

With that said, let me try to summarize that old video, and give my opinion on this topic..
First, some sample research and reasoning behind how I have formed this opinion for myself!

Just as a cherry picked example (but very typical) ... let's look at a 1 min YM chart..
I'll apply the Default NT Swings indicator using a strength setting of 60..
(1 min chart * swing strength 60 = highest high or lowest low of last hour)

https://www.screencast.com/t/iemjVfFk

At first glance, it appears there might be opportunities to fade these area's of possible support or resistance..
If I overlay these identified swings with 9 tick ranged regions.. It appears to look even more impressive..

https://www.screencast.com/t/Sq0g62WCNK9

But! .. yes there is a Big But! It's not that swings "Re-Paint" anything (another issue totally)..
But! .. these Swings also "DO NOT" Plot on, or even near their identified start point in Real Time!

If I add signal arrows to where these swings actually get added and plotted on the chart.. I see this:

https://www.screencast.com/t/zNwy8QiB5WCg

The "But" becomes very apparent.. The Swings/Areas looked great! When viewing historically.. "After the Fact"!
But in real time, I'd never see most of these re-tests, as the associated swing never gets plotted soon enough!


In Simplistic terms.. Swings calculate and compare, two different independent set of conditions, on each bar close.
1st Set = Qualifying Conditions -- is Highest High or Lowest Low of Last "X" Bars (must remain met to continue)
2nd Set = Confirmation Conditions -- Above Conditions Met && Remains Highest High or Lowest Low for Next "X" Bars

The Qualifications are looking "X" bars back historically, while the Confirmations wait for "X" bars forward in time..
But swings only provide one configurable property for "X", meaning that same number must be used for both conditions.
(So, in example above, because I use 60 (strength) for my qualifying bars back, I'm forced to wait 60 bars for Confirmation)


Several years ago, I researched what would happen if I could independently adjust "X" for each of these conditions instead..
I still wanted to use a larger number "X" for my Qualifiers, but possibly a much smaller number "XX" for my Confirmations..

Using the same strength setting "X" = 60 for the Qualifications.. but now using "XX" = 30 (instead of 60) for Confirmations:

https://www.screencast.com/t/6wWC61WN

Seems just this simple modification definitely helps bring most of the previous identified re-tests into view..
I do see that these new settings also add a somewhat unwanted swing.. or at least one that wasn't there before..
I also find that the lower I set the confirmation "XX", the more this seems to happen. Sometimes Good, Sometimes Not..

With Further Testing.. All in All, I personally find having the flexibility to plot confirmations sooner a definite plus..
But again, this is just one man's "Opinion".. and everyone should test and verify for themselves before forming their own!

Other Lessons Learned:...Every Trader is Different!...There is No "ONE" Way to Do Things!...Choices are "Rarely" a bad thing!

[spooz2]

How's about analysis rather than pontification! See this: https://youtu.be/ptBcb7ykZRg

[koganam]

Well,i think he is correct...There is really no specified advantage of having different left and right strength..As u will end up in increasing complications and nothing else

Even though backtesting has very limited efficacy, one cannot make assertions about non-viability without at least the backtest step.

[Johnathan80]

Well,i think he is correct...There is really no specified advantage of having different left and right strength..As u will end up in increasing complications and nothing else MySchoolBucks

[eDanny]

That is an odd answer. You know this to be a fact or just trying to increase your post count for some reason?

[nkhoi]

there is no advantage to have diff left and right strength.

[ProfitPilgrim]

Does anyone have a swing indicator with separate parameters for left and right strength?