|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Title: TimeFrames: Is their use flawed?
I hate to rock the boat but this has been nagging me for quite some time.
In EOD trading TimeFrames can be synchronized with significant date boundaries, like weeks, months, years etc. and sometimes this may make some sense. However, TimeFrame Indicators need to reach full period before they update. This means that TF indicators can lag a number of bars equal to the number of bars in the TimeFrame period. Why would anyone work with lagging indicators?
In RealTime, TimeFrame periods are synchronized with the start of regular trading day. Here again, the TF indicators need to reach full period before they update. This means that a RT signal based on a 15Min TF indicator, on a 1-min chart, may lag up to 14 minutes.
There must be some reasons why TimeFrames are still used and I welcome your explanation. If they solely exist because they were used some 75 years ago, to simplify hand calculations, then perhaps it is time to move on :-)
best regards,
herman
__._,_.___
**** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
(submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
![]()
__,_._,___
|