21 replies to this topic

[draggen33]

Thanks Fib. Also, I assume that you believe it should be viewed exponentially. I'm not sure I should ask why because the answer will probably be beyond my comprehension. Can you explain it to those who are mathematically compromised?

The DOW is just a horrible indicator because there is no constant in the equation and therefore is not a valid mathematical formula. The divisor is so low now its headed toward infinity which is undefined. 100 points on the DOW is only about a $15 move. At least doing a log function on the DOW would add some validation to trends - but every time a stock is substituted or the divisor is lowered - a new graph is the only thing one can look at from the date of the change forward until the next change - long term trends do not even have the same components much less the same divisor.

thxs mary, everytime I see your name i think of https://en.wikipedia...wiki/Dawn_Wells.


gillians mary ann I just had to share, no offense

Edited by draggen33, 11 August 2015 - 01:36 PM.

[MaryAM]

Thanks Fib. Also, I assume that you believe it should be viewed exponentially. I'm not sure I should ask why because the answer will probably be beyond my comprehension. Can you explain it to those who are mathematically compromised?

The DOW is just a horrible indicator because there is no constant in the equation and therefore is not a valid mathematical formula. The divisor is so low now its headed toward infinity which is undefined. 100 points on the DOW is only about a $15 move. At least doing a log function on the DOW would add some validation to trends - but every time a stock is substituted or the divisor is lowered - a new graph is the only thing one can look at from the date of the change forward until the next change - long term trends do not even have the same components much less the same divisor.

thxs mary, everytime I see your name i think of https://en.wikipedia...wiki/Dawn_Wells.


gillians mary ann I just had to share, no offense

HA HA - Were that I were that pretty - no offense taken - quite a compliment in fact.
Regards - and have a good day

[Venatici]

Thanks Fib. Also, I assume that you believe it should be viewed exponentially. I'm not sure I should ask why because the answer will probably be beyond my comprehension. Can you explain it to those who are mathematically compromised?

Will spare you the simple moving average explanation. Exponential is in simple terms an average that reduces the lag by applying more weight to recent prices.

Simple and Exponential averages

[claire]

Thanks Fib. Also, I assume that you believe it should be viewed exponentially. I'm not sure I should ask why because the answer will probably be beyond my comprehension. Can you explain it to those who are mathematically compromised?

Will spare you the simple moving average explanation. Exponential is in simple terms an average that reduces the lag by applying more weight to recent prices.

Simple and Exponential averages

I was too lazy to try to read about it & thought it would be too complex. Thanks for making it clear.

So different time frames will show different divergences in the ma's - which means it's very important to chart this using different time frames. I can't take credit for this conclusion since it was pointed out to me by someone who hasn't posted on this thread.

[Zim]

Back in 2011 I did some back testing of these crosses. I looked at it from the standpoint of buy and sell the crosses, i.e. always in the market. The sells are the death cross. The results using this method are no better than a coin toss on the death cross. But it could work shorter term, I did not test for that. I could I suppose and maybe I will who knows.

Death Cross Back Test

Good Trading

Bill

[libertas]

For a number of years I tracked the Decision Point trend following system for Dow, S&P and NDX. Relative to buy-and-hold, the Dow gave the best results. The S&P was not far behind, both slightly outperformed buy-and-hold. The NDX I stopped tracking after 3 winners and 14 losing trades. I made no attempt to "tune" the DP system for the different indices.

Edited by libertas, 11 August 2015 - 03:12 PM.

[MDurkin]

57 Best Market Timing Indicator - S&P 500 - Weekly

http://stockcharts.c...1107832/tenpp/5

Probably the simplest indicator I know only 6 signals in 20 years -7 if you count 1995- not shown.

[bigbud]

death cross 50/200 SMA for the Norwgian index means either -we just had a deep correction -we are in the middle of a deep correction -we are just before a deep correction Havent tested for US... but if it works there too, I guess it would be the third alternative: just before a deep correction (because it hasnt made any yet)

[brucekeller]

57 Best Market Timing Indicator - S&P 500 - Weekly

http://stockcharts.c...1107832/tenpp/5

Probably the simplest indicator I know only 6 signals in 20 years -7 if you count 1995- not shown.

So a weekly close below about $SPX 2059 and we are there... also we happen to be in the RSI confirmation redzone too.

[Dex]

Thanks Fib. Also, I assume that you believe it should be viewed exponentially. I'm not sure I should ask why because the answer will probably be beyond my comprehension. Can you explain it to those who are mathematically compromised?

Will spare you the simple moving average explanation. Exponential is in simple terms an average that reduces the lag by applying more weight to recent prices.

Simple and Exponential averages

I was too lazy to try to read about it & thought it would be too complex. Thanks for making it clear.

So different time frames will show different divergences in the ma's - which means it's very important to chart this using different time frames. I can't take credit for this conclusion since it was pointed out to me by someone who hasn't posted on this thread.

It's not the time frame - it is the emphasis.
Simple - every data point is equal
Expo - newest data heavier weighting