العقود الآجلة للذهب
تم تحديثه

PRS DEMO: WHY SO MANY LINES?

88
Well, while they are representative of price from different periods (or perspective), none of them are truly representative of price action as a whole.

I have presented this question before: What does the 50-day moving average tell you? Well, the 50-day moving average.

So let's say you use 3, 50-, 100-, and, 200-day averages. You are leaving out EVERYTHING OVER, UNDER, AND IN BETWEEN THOSE AVERAGES. But if you use ALL OF THEM, you CAN'T see anything? Right? Wrong.

In order to use all of them. You have to understand how they relate to each other. This is the theory behind PIMA, Pham Infinite moving average, pictured below. Note that the screen shot for this demo does NOT use PIMA, but PIRL.

This is snapshot of PIMA:

لقطة

PIMA allows you to see ALL THE TRENDS AS LIMITED BY BAR HISTORY. Why do you need to see ALL THE TRENDS? Because they are all representative of price and THEY ALL MATTER. Plus, you can see the gradual changes as one layer of trends influence another. That said, PIMA is not great for forecasting. For that I use Pham Infinite Regression Layering.

The picture at the top for this demo is gold in 2010 vs gold right now, it is what I call "a regression fractal". Why? Because EVERY SINGLE TREND LINE HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FOR.

to be continued... (by the way, WE ARE NOT GOING DOWN, and I will provide the evidence why soon)
ملاحظة
First, here is gold on 5 day bars:

لقطة
ملاحظة
What does this show? It shows that if you account for EVERY SINGLE TREND, we are NOWHERE NEAR DOUBLE TOPPING. The regressions are layered in a ratio that allows you to see what a topping process looks like.
ملاحظة
Here is a zoom in of that 2011 top, same bar size:

لقطة

Here is a zoom in of same top, with much smaller bar. Note that the grays in the previous picture ARE NOW ORANGE. This lets you see all the smaller trends happening too.

لقطة
ملاحظة
Now here same bar size for today:

لقطة
ملاحظة
In order to have a top from a weekly/monthly perspective, you have put in several tops FIRST. And for the same "trend" perspective, price is needs to get under the entire orange wave to be considered A GIANT DOUBLE TOP.
ملاحظة
That explains why I'm not bearish. But doesn't really explain why I am bullish. I will post more later.

to becontinued...
ملاحظة
In the meantime, I want to point out something: WE ARE MORE BULLISH THAN WE WERE IN 2010. I will obviously show evidence.
ملاحظة
First here is 1 day bars in 2010 vs 2020.

2010

لقطة
ملاحظة
2020

لقطة
ملاحظة
So the chart at the top for this demo is the same comparison but on 8 hour bars. What does it say? First on block-by-block, trend line for trend line basis, we are HANDS DOWN STRONGER than 2010. But that doesn't mean we can't have localized votalitily.
ملاحظة
If the last statement is true, and it is from a regression stand point, what will happen next? Price will get over the redline bold line very likely in 9 8 hour bars or 3 days. Yes it can can happen in bars. Therefore it is very likely in 9 bars. But this is probability not a court of civil law. You are guilty until proven innocent. Picture of this move below:
ملاحظة
لقطة
ملاحظة
So compare the idea chart at the top. Remember this: all trends have been considered. This is why it's so hard to see a crash from here, because it's in position to crash. It CAN GET INTO THAT POSITION by morphing sideways for a while. BUT NOT RIGHT NOW.
ملاحظة
SEVERAL TYPOS:

1) 9 8-hour bars or 3 days
2) it can happen in 3 bars (or 1 day). Therefore it is very likely in 9 bars.
3) a crash from here, because it's NOT in position to crash.

إخلاء المسؤولية

لا يُقصد بالمعلومات والمنشورات أن تكون، أو تشكل، أي نصيحة مالية أو استثمارية أو تجارية أو أنواع أخرى من النصائح أو التوصيات المقدمة أو المعتمدة من TradingView. اقرأ المزيد في شروط الاستخدام.