sammyn 81 posts msg #145262 - Ignore sammyn modified |
11/14/2018 8:13:30 AM
throwing this out there for discussion.
So, thinking about the investor band. What if we weighted the averages of the EMAs (60 has more weight than the 30).
Then, plotted the closing price against that weighted average. I'm sure this isn't earth shattering, just a different way at looking at the investor average.
Thought? Comments? Opinions?
|
sammyn 81 posts msg #145263 - Ignore sammyn |
11/14/2018 8:59:24 AM
hmmm...another version
basically, plot the trader MA ave on the Investor MA ave. Also include the bar chart of the closing prices above those MA averages.
|
nibor100 1,032 posts msg #145268 - Ignore nibor100 |
11/14/2018 7:04:37 PM
I was surprised your weights weren't greater than 1 such as 1.115 for x30 and am curious as to how you came up with your weights for the short term and long term groups of averages?
The way EMAs are calculated the Guppy normal averages are already weighted in the opposite direction that you are weighting them, with a greater weight being applied to the lowest avg in each group.
Did you consider/try just plotting your newly calculated short term group vs the newly calculated long term group without the normal Guppy's on the chart?
Thanks,
Ed S.
|
sammyn 81 posts msg #145269 - Ignore sammyn |
11/14/2018 8:04:00 PM
So, it sounds like Guppy does something like this already (since you are saying a shorter EMA should be weighted more). If so, I'm unaware of that. (If it's in his book, I'm still working my way through it). This idea just came to me, while trying to clean up the charts.
Can you point me in the right direction where I can read more about weighing the lower EMAs more?
How I came up with my weighting was:
30+35+40+45+50+60 = 260
30/260 = 0.115
35/260 = 0.135
40/260 = 0.154
45/260 = 0.173
50/260 = 0.192
60/260 = 0.231
[quote]
Did you consider/try just plotting your newly calculated short term group vs the newly calculated long term group without the normal Guppy's on the chart?
[/quote]
That's what those investor/trader lines are. But, here it is, without the rainbow chart:
|
nibor100 1,032 posts msg #145274 - Ignore nibor100 |
11/15/2018 10:30:48 AM
I beilieve I was a bit unclear in my prior post:
1. What I meant to convey is that the Exponential Moving Avg calculation used to compute each of the 12 Guppy moving averages weights the most recent closing price more than prior values whereas simple moving averages assign equal weight to all closing prices.
The following is from the Chart School website:
"The Weighting Multiplier
A 10-period exponential moving average applies an 18.18% weighting to the most recent price. A 10-period EMA can also be called an 18.18% EMA. A 20-period EMA applies a 9.52% weighting to the most recent price (2/(20+1) = .0952). Notice that the weighting for the shorter time period is more than the weighting for the longer time period. In fact, the weighting drops by half every time the moving average period doubles.
If you want to use a specific percentage for an EMA, you can use this formula to convert it to time periods and then enter that value as the EMA's parameter:
Time Period = (2 / Percentage) - 1
3% Example: Time Period = (2 / 0.03) - 1 = 65.67 time periods"
2. Regarding plotting your newly calculated short term and long term groups I was referring to the actual line calculations for the 12 individual lines and not your composite indicator line which I liked as it was.
Below is what I was asking about:
Thanks,
Ed S.
|