|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
What does that mean exactly? What is the "average of upward price change"? Can you provide a simple example?
That would be great.
Thanks
Al
----- Original Message -----
From: wavemechanic
To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Modified RSI
http://www.equis.com/free/taaz/rsi.html
----- Original Message -----
From: AR.Holzwarth@xxxx
To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Modified RSI
I would like to understand the definition of RSI in order to follow the
thread. Could you please explain what (up/down)(last x) means exactly and
what the "normal " definition of RSI is?
Thank you.
Al
----- Original Message -----
From: "server not recognized" <winchp@xxxx>
To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Modified RSI
> Dimitri,
>
> What you describe is not what I meant.. The rsi formula
>
> rsi = 100-(100/(1+(up/down)).
>
> is the fundamental problem.
>
> As up tends to zero, up/down tends to zero and rsi tends to 0
> as down tends to zero, up/down tends to infinity and rsi tends to 1.
>
> The characteristic of these reciprocal type curves is long, unresponsive
tails that lead to the rsi being unresponsive as the
> numerator or denominator tends to zero. All the sensitivity is at the 50%
mark but you are trying to make decisions in the rapidly
> declining sensitivty region.
>
> I suggest the nicety of limit bands be discarded entirely and the rsibe
structered as something else entirely, so that:
>
> it has no limits,
> crosses zero
> and can be equally positive and negative.
>
> For example, and I make this up in my head without checking first,
>
> modrsi = up(last 4)/down (last15) - down(last4)/up(last15)
>
> or closer to the original which I think will tone it down some. (if not
reverse the order - put the last14/last3)
>
> modrsi = 100-(100/(1+(up/down)(last3)/(up/down)(last14))).
>
> I am suggesting to be radical and not simply rearrage or blend outcomes
from various established indicators, but break them open
> completely an re-cast their principles.
>
> P
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "DIMITRIS TSOKAKIS" <TSOKAKIS@xxxx>
> To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 3:55 PM
> Subject: [amibroker] Re: Modified RSI
>
>
> > I have always the alternative of Normalization, exposed here in some
> > earlier post, ie
> > NormRSI=100*(RSI-RSImin)//RSImax-RSImin)
> > which fit better in [0,100] band.
> > I think that this new idea of Modified RSI is a better approach.
> > I will revert after more tests.
> > Thank you for hint.
> > Dimitris Tsokakis
> > --- In amibroker@xxxx, "server not recognized" <winchp@xxxx> wrote:
> > > Dimitri,
> > >
> > > Constance Brown in her book "Technical Analysis for the Trading
> > Professional", advocates that the 30/70 is not appropriate as
> > > constants, and should be modified depending upon recent history.
> > For example after an RSI > 70 period then a decline to 40 is
> > > significant and vice versa, i.e 30/70 shpould be applied with
> > judgement.
> > >
> > > Secondly the non zeroing of RSI and its lack of sensitivity beyond
> > the 70/30 is a fault with its ideal of normalising. Constances
> > > suggested opened the door to eve better understanding for me. I
> > would suggest that rather than using the RSI() supplied that you
> > > play around with actual formula and try and achieve the following:
> > >
> > > no upper/lower limit,
> > > able to cross zero
> > > can have negative numbers
> > >
> > > I have done this with ADX with some satisfaction. I would also
> > suggest that additonal terms can be included inside the RSI formula
> > > to increase sensivity to certain events when they are present. I
> > would also suggest that where ever possible ema and ma not be used
> > > except when trying to establish long term baselines. You may not
> > like the jerkiness without them, but the peak values take on
> > > significance in magnitude and timing after you use the
> > reconstructed formulas that ema and ma do their best to blurr.
> > >
> > > Both RSI() and ADX() in my view are horses of different colours
> > because both are associated with volatility breakout. The results of
> > > one are similar to the other.
> > >
> > > I hope this helps with your search.
> > >
> > > P
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
------=_NextPart_001_009E_01C151D6.E9745110
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thank you for the quick response. I have just read
the explanation on the site you provided. But I am still confused. At the end of
the article it says:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><IMG style="WIDTH: 333px; HEIGHT: 48px" height=45
src="http://www.equis.com/free/taaz/images/rsicalc2.gif"; width=303></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>What does that mean exactly? What is the "average of
upward price change"? Can you provide a simple example?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>That would be great.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Thanks</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Al</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
wavemechanic
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 10, 2001 9:46
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [amibroker] Re: Modified
RSI</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT size=2><A
href="http://www.equis.com/free/taaz/rsi.html";>http://www.equis.com/free/taaz/rsi.html</A></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=AR.Holzwarth@xxxx
href="mailto:AR.Holzwarth@xxxx";>AR.Holzwarth@xxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 10, 2001 3:12
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [amibroker] Re: Modified
RSI</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>I would like to understand the definition of RSI in order to
follow the<BR>thread. Could you please explain what (up/down)(last x) means
exactly and<BR>what the "normal " definition of RSI is?<BR>Thank
you.<BR><BR>Al<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: "servernot
recognized" <<A
href="mailto:winchp@xxxx";>winchp@xxxx</A>><BR>To:
<<A
href="mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR>Sent:
Wednesday, October 10, 2001 8:49 AM<BR>Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Modified
RSI<BR><BR><BR>> Dimitri,<BR>><BR>> What you describe is not what I
meant.. The rsi formula<BR>><BR>> rsi =
100-(100/(1+(up/down)).<BR>><BR>> is the fundamental
problem.<BR>><BR>> As up tends to zero, up/down tends to zero andrsi
tends to 0<BR>> as down tends to zero, up/down tends to infinity andrsi
tends to 1.<BR>><BR>> The characteristic of these reciprocal type
curves is long, unresponsive<BR>tails that lead to the rsi being
unresponsive as the<BR>> numerator or denominator tends to zero.
All the sensitivity is at the 50%<BR>mark but you are trying to make
decisions in the rapidly<BR>> declining sensitivty
region.<BR>><BR>> I suggest the nicety of limit bands be discarded
entirely and the rsi be<BR>structered as something else entirely, so
that:<BR>><BR>> it has no limits,<BR>> crosses zero<BR>>
and can be equally positive and negative.<BR>><BR>> For example, and I
make this up in my head without checking first,<BR>><BR>> modrsi
= up(last 4)/down (last15) -
down(last4)/up(last15)<BR>><BR>> or closer to the original which I
think will tone it down some. (if not<BR>reverse the order - put the
last14/last3)<BR>><BR>> modrsi =
100-(100/(1+(up/down)(last3)/(up/down)(last14))).<BR>><BR>> I am
suggesting to be radical and not simply rearrage or blend outcomes<BR>from
various established indicators, but break them open<BR>> completely an
re-cast their principles.<BR>><BR>> P<BR>><BR>><BR>> -----
Original Message -----<BR>> From: "DIMITRIS TSOKAKIS" <<A
href="mailto:TSOKAKIS@xxxx";>TSOKAKIS@xxxx</A>><BR>> To:
<<A
href="mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 3:55 PM<BR>> Subject: [amibroker] Re:
Modified RSI<BR>><BR>><BR>> > I have always the alternativeof
Normalization, exposed here in some<BR>> > earlier post, ie<BR>>
> NormRSI=100*(RSI-RSImin)//RSImax-RSImin)<BR>> > which fit better
in [0,100] band.<BR>> > I think that this new idea of Modified RSI is
a better approach.<BR>> > I will revert after more tests.<BR>>>
Thank you for hint.<BR>> > Dimitris Tsokakis<BR>> > --- In <A
href="mailto:amibroker@xxxx";>amibroker@xxxx</A>..., "server not recognized"<<A
href="mailto:winchp@xxxx";>winchp@xxxx</A>...> wrote:<BR>> > >
Dimitri,<BR>> > ><BR>> > > Constance Brown in her book
"Technical Analysis for the Trading<BR>> > Professional", advocates
that the 30/70 is not appropriate as<BR>> > > constants, and should
be modified depending upon recent history.<BR>> > For example after an
RSI > 70 period then a decline to 40 is<BR>> > > significant and
vice versa, i.e 30/70 shpould be applied with<BR>> >
judgement.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > Secondly the non zeroingof
RSI and its lack of sensitivity beyond<BR>> > the 70/30 is a fault
with its ideal of normalising. Constances<BR>> > > suggested
opened the door to eve better understanding for me. I<BR>> >
would suggest that rather than using the RSI() supplied that you<BR>>
> > play around with actual formula and try and achieve the
following:<BR>> > ><BR>> > > no upper/lower limit,<BR>>
> > able to cross zero<BR>> > > can have negative
numbers<BR>> > ><BR>> > > I have done this with ADX with
some satisfaction. I would also<BR>> > suggest that additonal
terms can be included inside the RSI formula<BR>> > > to increase
sensivity to certain events when they are present. I<BR>> >
would also suggest that where ever possible ema and ma not be used<BR>>
> > except when trying to establish long term baselines. You may
not<BR>> > like the jerkiness without them, but the peak values take
on<BR>> > > significance in magnitude and timing after you use
the<BR>> > reconstructed formulas that ema and ma do their best to
blurr.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > Both RSI() and ADX() in my view
are horses of different colours<BR>> > because both are associated
with volatility breakout. The results of<BR>> > > one are similar
to the other.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > I hope this helps with
your search.<BR>> > ><BR>> > > P<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > Your use of Yahoo!
Groups is subject to<BR><A
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</A><BR>>
><BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>> Your use of Yahoo!
Groups is subject to <A
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</A><BR>><BR>><BR><BR><BR>------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--><BR>Get your FREE VeriSign
guide to security solutions for your web site: encrypting transactions,
securing intranets, and more!<BR><A
href="http://us.click.yahoo.com/UnN2wB/m5_CAA/yigFAA/dkFolB/TM";>http://us.click.yahoo.com/UnN2wB/m5_CAA/yigFAA/dkFolB/TM</A><BR>---------------------------------------------------------------------~-><BR><BR> <BR><BR>Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <A
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</A>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><TT>Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>Yahoo! Terms of Service</A>.</TT>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_009E_01C151D6.E9745110--
Attachment:
Description: ""
|
![http://www.equis.com/free/taaz/images/rsicalc2.gif"](http://www.equis.com/free/taaz/images/rsicalc2.gif"){kind=link}