APA-Adaptive, Ehlers Early Onset Trend [Loxx]APA-Adaptive, Ehlers Early Onset Trend is Ehlers Early Onset Trend but with Autocorrelation Periodogram Algorithm dominant cycle period input.
What is Ehlers Early Onset Trend?
The Onset Trend Detector study is a trend analyzing technical indicator developed by John F. Ehlers , based on a non-linear quotient transform. Two of Mr. Ehlers' previous studies, the Super Smoother Filter and the Roofing Filter, were used and expanded to create this new complex technical indicator. Being a trend-following analysis technique, its main purpose is to address the problem of lag that is common among moving average type indicators.
The Onset Trend Detector first applies the EhlersRoofingFilter to the input data in order to eliminate cyclic components with periods longer than, for example, 100 bars (default value, customizable via input parameters) as those are considered spectral dilation. Filtered data is then subjected to re-filtering by the Super Smoother Filter so that the noise (cyclic components with low length) is reduced to minimum. The period of 10 bars is a default maximum value for a wave cycle to be considered noise; it can be customized via input parameters as well. Once the data is cleared of both noise and spectral dilation, the filter processes it with the automatic gain control algorithm which is widely used in digital signal processing. This algorithm registers the most recent peak value and normalizes it; the normalized value slowly decays until the next peak swing. The ratio of previously filtered value to the corresponding peak value is then quotiently transformed to provide the resulting oscillator. The quotient transform is controlled by the K coefficient: its allowed values are in the range from -1 to +1. K values close to 1 leave the ratio almost untouched, those close to -1 will translate it to around the additive inverse, and those close to zero will collapse small values of the ratio while keeping the higher values high.
Indicator values around 1 signify uptrend and those around -1, downtrend.
What is an adaptive cycle, and what is Ehlers Autocorrelation Periodogram Algorithm?
From his Ehlers' book Cycle Analytics for Traders Advanced Technical Trading Concepts by John F. Ehlers , 2013, page 135:
"Adaptive filters can have several different meanings. For example, Perry Kaufman’s adaptive moving average ( KAMA ) and Tushar Chande’s variable index dynamic average ( VIDYA ) adapt to changes in volatility . By definition, these filters are reactive to price changes, and therefore they close the barn door after the horse is gone.The adaptive filters discussed in this chapter are the familiar Stochastic , relative strength index ( RSI ), commodity channel index ( CCI ), and band-pass filter.The key parameter in each case is the look-back period used to calculate the indicator. This look-back period is commonly a fixed value. However, since the measured cycle period is changing, it makes sense to adapt these indicators to the measured cycle period. When tradable market cycles are observed, they tend to persist for a short while.Therefore, by tuning the indicators to the measure cycle period they are optimized for current conditions and can even have predictive characteristics.
The dominant cycle period is measured using the Autocorrelation Periodogram Algorithm. That dominant cycle dynamically sets the look-back period for the indicators. I employ my own streamlined computation for the indicators that provide smoother and easier to interpret outputs than traditional methods. Further, the indicator codes have been modified to remove the effects of spectral dilation.This basically creates a whole new set of indicators for your trading arsenal."
Cerca negli script per "algo"
Jurik Composite Fractal Behavior (CFB) on EMA [Loxx]Jurik Composite Fractal Behavior (CFB) on EMA is an exponential moving average with adaptive price trend duration inputs. This purpose of this indicator is to introduce the formulas for the calculation Composite Fractal Behavior. As you can see from the chart above, price reacts wildly to shifts in volatility--smoothing out substantially while riding a volatility wave and cutting sharp corners when volatility drops. Notice the chop zone on BTC around August 2021, this was a time of extremely low relative volatility.
This indicator uses three previous indicators from my public scripts. These are:
JCFBaux Volatility
Jurik Filter
Jurik Volty
The CFB is also related to the following indicator
Jurik Velocity ("smoother moment")
Now let's dive in...
What is Composite Fractal Behavior (CFB)?
All around you mechanisms adjust themselves to their environment. From simple thermostats that react to air temperature to computer chips in modern cars that respond to changes in engine temperature, r.p.m.'s, torque, and throttle position. It was only a matter of time before fast desktop computers applied the mathematics of self-adjustment to systems that trade the financial markets.
Unlike basic systems with fixed formulas, an adaptive system adjusts its own equations. For example, start with a basic channel breakout system that uses the highest closing price of the last N bars as a threshold for detecting breakouts on the up side. An adaptive and improved version of this system would adjust N according to market conditions, such as momentum, price volatility or acceleration.
Since many systems are based directly or indirectly on cycles, another useful measure of market condition is the periodic length of a price chart's dominant cycle, (DC), that cycle with the greatest influence on price action.
The utility of this new DC measure was noted by author Murray Ruggiero in the January '96 issue of Futures Magazine. In it. Mr. Ruggiero used it to adaptive adjust the value of N in a channel breakout system. He then simulated trading 15 years of D-Mark futures in order to compare its performance to a similar system that had a fixed optimal value of N. The adaptive version produced 20% more profit!
This DC index utilized the popular MESA algorithm (a formulation by John Ehlers adapted from Burg's maximum entropy algorithm, MEM). Unfortunately, the DC approach is problematic when the market has no real dominant cycle momentum, because the mathematics will produce a value whether or not one actually exists! Therefore, we developed a proprietary indicator that does not presuppose the presence of market cycles. It's called CFB (Composite Fractal Behavior) and it works well whether or not the market is cyclic.
CFB examines price action for a particular fractal pattern, categorizes them by size, and then outputs a composite fractal size index. This index is smooth, timely and accurate
Essentially, CFB reveals the length of the market's trending action time frame. Long trending activity produces a large CFB index and short choppy action produces a small index value. Investors have found many applications for CFB which involve scaling other existing technical indicators adaptively, on a bar-to-bar basis.
What is Jurik Volty used in the Juirk Filter?
One of the lesser known qualities of Juirk smoothing is that the Jurik smoothing process is adaptive. "Jurik Volty" (a sort of market volatility ) is what makes Jurik smoothing adaptive. The Jurik Volty calculation can be used as both a standalone indicator and to smooth other indicators that you wish to make adaptive.
What is the Jurik Moving Average?
Have you noticed how moving averages add some lag (delay) to your signals? ... especially when price gaps up or down in a big move, and you are waiting for your moving average to catch up? Wait no more! JMA eliminates this problem forever and gives you the best of both worlds: low lag and smooth lines.
Ideally, you would like a filtered signal to be both smooth and lag-free. Lag causes delays in your trades, and increasing lag in your indicators typically result in lower profits. In other words, late comers get what's left on the table after the feast has already begun.
Modifications and improvements
1. Jurik's original calculation for CFB only allowed for depth lengths of 24, 48, 96, and 192. For theoretical purposes, this indicator allows for up to 20 different depth inputs to sample volatility. These depth lengths are
2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, 48, 64, 96, 128, 192, 256, 384, 512, 768, 1024, 1536
Including these additional length inputs is arguable useless, but they are are included for completeness of the algorithm.
2. The result of the CFB calculation is forced to be an integer greater than or equal to 1.
3. The result of the CFB calculation is double filtered using an advanced, (and adaptive itself) filtering algorithm called the Jurik Filter. This filter and accompanying internal algorithm are discussed above.
Customizable Non-Repainting HTF MACD MFI Scalper Bot StrategyThis script was originally shared by Wunderbit as a free open source script for the community to work with.
WHAT THIS SCRIPT DOES:
It is intended for use on an algorithmic bot trading platform but can be used for scalping and manual trading.
This strategy is based on the trend-following momentum indicator . It includes the Money Flow index as an additional point for entry.
HOW IT DOES IT:
It uses a combination of MACD and MFI indicators to create entry signals. Parameters for each indicator have been surfaced for user configurability.
Take profits are fixed, but stop loss uses ATR configuration to minimize losses and close profitably.
HOW IS MY VERSION ORIGINAL:
I started trying to deploy this script myself in my algorithmic trading but ran into some issues which I have tried to address in this version.
Delayed Signals : The script has been refactored to use a time frame drop down. The higher time frame can be run on a faster chart (recommended on one minute chart for fastest signal confirmation and relay to algotrading platform.)
Repainting Issues : All indicators have been recoded to use the security function that checks to see if the current calculation is in realtime, if it is, then it uses the previous bar for calculation. If you are still experiencing repainting issues based on intended (or non intended use), please provide a report with screenshot and explanation so I can try to address.
Filtering : I have added to additional filters an ABOVE EMA Filter and a BELOW RSI Filter (both can be turned on and off)
Customizable Long and Close Messages : This allows someone to use the script for algorithmic trading without having to alter code. It also means you can use one indicator for all of your different alterts required for your bots.
HOW TO USE IT:
It is intended to be used in the 5-30 minute time frames, but you might be able to get a good configuration for higher time frames. I welcome feedback from other users on what they have found.
Find a pair with high volatility (example KUCOIN:ETH3LUSDT ) - I have found it works particularly well with 3L and 3S tokens for crypto. although it the limitation is that confrigurations I have found to work typically have low R/R ratio, but very high win rate and profit factor.
Ideally set one minute chart for bots, but you can use other charts for manual trading. The signal will be delayed by one bar but I have found configurations that still test well.
Select a time frame in configuration for your indicator calculations.
Select the strategy config for time frame. I like to use 5 and 15 minutes for scalping scenarios, but I am interested in hearing back from other community memebers.
Optimize your indicator without filters (trendFilter and RSI Filter)
Use the TrendFilter and RSI Filter to further refine your signals for entry. You will get less entries but you can increase your win ratio.
I will add screenshots and possibly a video provided that it passes community standards.
Limitations: this works rather well for short term, and does some good forward testing but back testing large data sets is a problem when switching from very small time frame to large time frame. For instance, finding a configuration that works on a one minute chart but then changing to a 1 hour chart means you lose some of your intra bar calclulations. There are some new features in pine script which might be able to address, this, but I have not had a chance to work on that issue.
Relative Strength Super Smoother by lastguruA better version of Apirine's RS EMA by using a superior MA: Ehlers Super Smoother.
In January 2022 edition of TASC Vitaly Apirine introduced his Relative Strength Exponential Moving Average. A concept not entirely new, as Tushar Chande used a similar calculation for his VIDYA moving average. Both are based on the idea to change EMA length depending on the absolute RSI value, so the moving average would speed up then RSI is going up or down from the center value (when there is a significant directional price movement), and slow down when RSI returns to the center value (when there is a neutral or sideways movement). That way EMA responsiveness would increase where it matters most, but decrease where there is a high probability of whipsaw.
There are only two main differences between VIDYA and RS EMA:
RSI internal smoothing - VIDYA uses SMA, as Chande's CMO is an RSI with SMA; RS EMA uses EMA
Change direction - VIDYA sets the fastest length; RS EMA sets the slowest length
Both algorithms use EMA as the base of their calculation. As John F. Ehlers has shown in his article "Predictive and Successful Indicators" (January 2014 issue of TASC), EMA is not a very efficient filter, as it introduces a significant lag if sufficient smoothing is required. He describes a new smoothing filter called SuperSmoother, "that sharply attenuates aliasing noise while minimizing filtering lag." In other words, it provides better smoothing with lower lag than EMA.
In this script, I try to get the best of all these approaches and present to you Relative Strength Super Smoother. It uses RS EMA algorithm to calculate the SuperSmoother length. Unlike the original RS EMA algorithm, that has an abstract "multiplier" setting to scale the period variance (without this parameter, RSI would only allow it to speed up twice; Vitaly Apirine sets the multiplier to 10 by default), my implementation has explicit lower bound setting, so you can specify the exact range of calculated length.
Settings:
Lower Bound - fastest SuperSmoother length (when RSI is +100 or -100)
Upper Bound - slowest SuperSmoother length (when RSI is 0)
RSI Length - underlying RSI length. Unlike the original RSI that uses RMA as an internal smoothing algorithm, Vitaly Apirine uses EMA, which is approximately twice as fast (that is needed because he uses a generally long RSI length and RMA would be too slow for this). It is the same as the Upper Bound by default (0), as in the original implementation
The original RS EMA is also shown on the chart for comparison. The default multiplier of 10 for RS EMA means that the fastest EMA period is around 4. I use the fastest period of 8 by default. It does not introduce too much of a lag in comparison, but the curve is much smoother.
This script is just an interface for my public libraries. Check them out for more information.
Bogdan Ciocoiu - MakaveliDescription
This indicator integrates the functionality of multiple volume price analysis algorithms whilst aligning their scales to fit in a single chart.
Having such indicators loaded enables traders to take advantage of potential divergences between the price action and volume related volatility.
Users will have to enable or disable alternative algorithms depending on their choice.
Uniqueness
This indicator is unique because it combines multiple algorithm-specific two-volume analyses with price volatility.
This indicator is also unique because it amends different algorithms to show output on a similar scale enabling traders to observe various volume-analysis tools simultaneously whilst allocating different colour codes.
Open source re-use
This indicator utilises the following open-source scripts:
Bogdan Ciocoiu - Sniper EntryWhat is Sniper Entry
Sniper Entry is a set indicator that encapsulates a collection of pre-configured scripts using specific variables that enable users to extract signals by interpreting market behaviour quickly, suitable for 1-3min scalping. This instrument is a tool that acts as a confluence for traders to make decisions concerning current market conditions. This indicator does not apply solely to an asset.
What Sniper Entry is not
Sniper Entry is not interpreting fundamental analysis and will also not be providing out of box market signals. Instead, it will provide a collection of integrated and significantly improved open-source subscripts designed to help traders speculate on market trends. Traders must apply their strategies and configure Sniper Entry accordingly to maximise the script's output.
Originality and usefulness
The collection of subscripts encapsulated in this tool makes it unique in the Trading View ecosystem. This indicator enables traders to consider entry positions or exit positions by comparing similar algorithms at once.
Its usefulness also emerges from the unique configurations embedded in the indicator's settings, which are different from those of the original scripts.
This indicator's originality is also reflected in how its modules are integrated, including the integration of the settings.
Open-source reuse
I used the following open-source resources, which I simplified significantly and pre-configured for short term scalping. The source codes for the below are already in the public domain, including the following links listed below.
www.tradingview.com (open source)
(open source and generic algorithm)
www.tradingview.com (open source)
(open source)
(open source)
www.tradingview.com (generic MA algorithm and open source)
(generic VWAP algorithm and open source)
Acrypto - Weighted StrategyHello traders!
I have been developing a fully customizable algo over the last year. The algorithm is based on a set of different strategies, each with its own weight (weighted strategy). The set of strategies that I currently use are 5:
MACD
Stochastic RSI
RSI
Supertrend
MA crossover
Moreover, the algo includes STOP losses criteria and a taking profit strategy. The algo must be optimized for the desired asset to achieves its full potential. The 1H and 4H dataframe give good results. The algo has been tested for several asset (same dataframe, different optimization values).
Important note:
Backtest the algorithm with different data stamps to avoid overfitting results
Best,
Alberto
MathSearchDijkstraLibrary "MathSearchDijkstra"
Shortest Path Tree Search Methods using Dijkstra Algorithm.
min_distance(distances, flagged_vertices) Find the lowest cost/distance.
Parameters:
distances : float array, data set with distance costs to start index.
flagged_vertices : bool array, data set with visited vertices flags.
Returns: int, lowest cost/distance index.
dijkstra(matrix_graph, dim_x, dim_y, start) Dijkstra Algorithm, perform a greedy tree search to calculate the cost/distance to selected start node at each vertex.
Parameters:
matrix_graph : int array, matrix holding the graph adjacency list and costs/distances.
dim_x : int, x dimension of matrix_graph.
dim_y : int, y dimension of matrix_graph.
start : int, the vertex index to start search.
Returns: int array, set with costs/distances to each vertex from start vertexs.
shortest_path(start, end, matrix_graph, dim_x, dim_y) Retrieves the shortest path between 2 vertices in a graph using Dijkstra Algorithm.
Parameters:
start : int, the vertex index to start search.
end : int, the vertex index to end search.
matrix_graph : int array, matrix holding the graph adjacency list and costs/distances.
dim_x : int, x dimension of matrix_graph.
dim_y : int, y dimension of matrix_graph.
Returns: int array, set with vertex indices to the shortest path.
P-Square - Estimation of the Nth percentile of a seriesEstimation of the Nth percentile of a series
When working with built-in functions in TradingView we have to limit our length parameters to max 4999. In case we want to use a function on the whole available series (bar 0 all the way to the current bar), we can usually not do this without manually creating these calculations in our code. For things like mean or standard deviation, this is quite trivial, but for things like percentiles, this is usually very costly. In more complex scripts, this becomes impossible because of resource restrictions from the Pine Script execution servers.
One solution to this is to use an estimation algorithm to get close to the true percentile value. Therefore, I have ported this implementation of the P-Square algorithm to Pine Script. P-Square is a fast algorithm that does a good job at estimating percentiles in data streams. Here's the algorithms original paper .
The chart
On the chart we see:
The returns of the series (blue scatter plot)
The mean of the returns of the series (orange line)
The standard deviation of the returns of the series (yellow line)
The actual 84.1th percentile of the returns (white line)
The estimatedl 84.1th percentile of the returns using the P-Square algorithm (green line)
Note: We can see that the returns are not normally distributed as we can see that one standard deviation is higher than the 84.1th percentile. One standard deviation should equal the 84.1th percentile if the data is normally distributed.
Machine Learning: Logistic RegressionMulti-timeframe Strategy based on Logistic Regression algorithm
Description:
This strategy uses a classic machine learning algorithm that came from statistics - Logistic Regression (LR).
The first and most important thing about logistic regression is that it is not a 'Regression' but a 'Classification' algorithm. The name itself is somewhat misleading. Regression gives a continuous numeric output but most of the time we need the output in classes (i.e. categorical, discrete). For example, we want to classify emails into “spam” or 'not spam', classify treatment into “success” or 'failure', classify statement into “right” or 'wrong', classify election data into 'fraudulent vote' or 'non-fraudulent vote', classify market move into 'long' or 'short' and so on. These are the examples of logistic regression having a binary output (also called dichotomous).
You can also think of logistic regression as a special case of linear regression when the outcome variable is categorical, where we are using log of odds as dependent variable. In simple words, it predicts the probability of occurrence of an event by fitting data to a logit function.
Basically, the theory behind Logistic Regression is very similar to the one from Linear Regression, where we seek to draw a best-fitting line over data points, but in Logistic Regression, we don’t directly fit a straight line to our data like in linear regression. Instead, we fit a S shaped curve, called Sigmoid, to our observations, that best SEPARATES data points. Technically speaking, the main goal of building the model is to find the parameters (weights) using gradient descent.
In this script the LR algorithm is retrained on each new bar trying to classify it into one of the two categories. This is done via the logistic_regression function by updating the weights w in the loop that continues for iterations number of times. In the end the weights are passed through the sigmoid function, yielding a prediction.
Mind that some assets require to modify the script's input parameters. For instance, when used with BTCUSD and USDJPY, the 'Normalization Lookback' parameter should be set down to 4 (2,...,5..), and optionally the 'Use Price Data for Signal Generation?' parameter should be checked. The defaults were tested with EURUSD.
Note: TradingViews's playback feature helps to see this strategy in action.
Warning: Signals ARE repainting.
Style tags: Trend Following, Trend Analysis
Asset class: Equities, Futures, ETFs, Currencies and Commodities
Dataset: FX Minutes/Hours/Days
Price levelsThanks to the developers for adding arrays to TradingView. This gives you more freedom in Pine Script coding.
I have created an algorithm that draws support and resistance levels on a chart. The algorithm can be easily customized as you need.
This algorithm can help both intuitive and system traders. Intuitive traders just look at the drawn lines. For system traders, the "levels" array stores all level values. Thus, you can use these values for algorithmic trading.
[R&D] Moving CentroidThis script utilizes this concept. Instead of weighting by volume, it weights by amount of price action on every close price of the rolling window. I assume it can be used as an additional reference point for price mode and price antimode.
it is directly connected with Market (not volume) profile, or TPO charts.
The algorithm:
1) takes a rolling window of, for example, 50 data points of close prices:
2) for each of this closing prices, the algorithm will check how many bars touched this close price.
3) then: sum of datapoints * weights/sum of weights
Since the logic is implemented in pretty non-efficient way, the script sometimes can take time to make calculations. Moreover, it calculates the centroid taking into account only close prices, not every tick. of a given rolling window That's why it's still experimental.
RenkoNow you can plot a "Renko" chart on any timeframe for free! As with my previous algorithm, you can plot the "Linear Break" chart on any timeframe for free!
I again decided to help TradingView programmers and wrote code that converts a standard candles / bars to a "Renko" chart. The built-in renko() and security() functions for constructing a "Renko" chart are working wrong. Do not try to write strategies based on the built-in renko() function! The developers write in the manual: "Please note that you cannot plot Renko bricks from Pine script exactly as they look. You can only get a series of numbers similar to OHLC values for Renko bars and use them in your algorithms". However, it is possible to build a "Renko" chart exactly like the "Renko" chart built into TradingView. Personally, I had enough Pine Script functionality.
For a complete understanding of how such a chart is built, you can read to Steve Nison's book "BEYOND JAPANESE CANDLES" and see the instructions for creating a "Renko" chart:
Rule 1: one white brick (or series) is built when the price rises above the base price by a fixed threshold value or more.
Rule 2: one black brick (or series) is built when the price falls below the base price by a fixed threshold or more.
Rule 3: if the rise or fall of the price is less than the minimum fixed value, then new bricks are not drawn.
Rule 4: if today's closing price is higher than the maximum of the last brick (white or black) by a threshold or more, move to the column to the right and build one or more white bricks of equal height. A new brick begins with the maximum of the previous brick.
Rule 5: if today's closing price is below the minimum of the last brick (white or black) by a threshold or more, move to the column to the right and build one or more black bricks of equal height. A new brick begins with the minimum of the previous brick.
Rule 6: if the price is below the maximum or above the minimum, then new bricks are not drawn on the chart.
So my algorithm can to plot Traditional Renko with a fixed box size. I want to note that such a "Renko" chart is slightly different from the "Renko" chart built into TradingView, because as a base price I use (by default) close of first candle. How the developers of TradingView calculate the base price I don’t know. Personally, I do as written in the book of Steve Neeson.
The algorithm is very complicated and I do not want to explain it in detail. I will explain very briefly. The first part of the get_renko () function — // creating lists — creates two lists that record how many green bricks should be and how many red bricks. The second part of the get_renko () function — // creating open and close series — creates open and close series to plot bricks. So, this is a white box - study it!
As you understand, one green candle can create a condition under which it will be necessary to plot, for example, 10 green bricks. So the smaller the box size you make, the smaller the portion of the chart you will see.
I stuffed all the logic into a wrapper in the form of the get_renko() function, which returns a tuple of OHLC values. And these series with the help of the plotcandle() annotation can be converted to the "Renko" chart. I also want to note that with a large number of candles on the chart, outrages about the buffer size uncertainty are heard from the TradingView blackbox. Because of it, in the annotation study() set the value of the max_bars_back parameter.
In general, use this script (for example, to write strategies)!
Enhanced Instantaneous Cycle Period - Dr. John EhlersThis is my first public release of detector code entitled "Enhanced Instantaneous Cycle Period" for PSv4.0 I built many months ago. Be forewarned, this is not an indicator, this is a detector to be used by ADVANCED developers to build futuristic indicators in Pine. The origins of this script come from a document by Dr. John Ehlers entitled "SIGNAL ANALYSIS CONCEPTS". You may find this using the NSA's reverse search engine "goggles", as I call it. John Ehlers' MESA used this measurement to establish the data window for analysis for MESA Cycle computations. So... does any developer wish to emulate MESA Cycle now??
I decided to take instantaneous cycle period to another level of novel attainability in this public release of source code with the following methods, if you are curious how I ENHANCED it. Firstly I reduced the delay of accurate measurement from bar_index==0 by quite a few bars closer to IPO. Secondarily, I provided a limit of 6 for a minimum instantaneous cycle period. At bar_index==0, it would provide a period of 0 wrecking many algorithms from the start. I also increased the instantaneous cycle period's maximum value to 80 from 50, providing a window of 6-80 for the instantaneous cycle period value window limits. Thirdly, I replaced the internal EMA with another algorithm. It reduces the lag while extracting a floating point number, for algorithms that will accept that, compared to a sluggish ordinary EMA return. You will see the excessive EMA delay with adding plot(ema(ICP,7)) as it was originally designed. Lastly it's in one simple function for reusability in a nice little package comprising of less than 40 lines of code. I hope I explained that adequately enough and gave you the reader a glimpse of the "Power of Pine" combined with ingenuity.
Be forewarned again, that most of Pine's built-in functions will not accept a floating-point number or dynamic integers for the "length" of it's calculation. You will have to emulate the built-in functions by creating Pine based custom functions, and I assure you, this is very possible in many cases, but not all without array support. You may use int(ICP) to extract an integer from the smoothICP return variable, which may be favorable compared to the choppiness/ringing if ICP alone.
This is commonly what my dense intricate code looks like behind the veil. If you are wondering why there is barely any notation, that's because the notation is in the variable naming and this is intended primarily for ADVANCED developers too. It does contain lines of code that explore techniques in Pine that may be applicable in other Pine projects for those learning or wishing to excel with Pine.
Showcased in the chart below is my free to use "Enhanced Schaff Trend Cycle Indicator", having a common appeal to TV users frequently. If you do have any questions or comments regarding this indicator, I will consider your inquiries, thoughts, and ideas presented below in the comments section, when time provides it. As always, "Like" it if you simply just like it with a proper thumbs up, and also return to my scripts list occasionally for additional postings. Have a profitable future everyone!
NOTICE: Copy pasting bandits who may be having nefarious thoughts, DO NOT attempt this, because this may violate Tradingview's terms, conditions and/or house rules. "WE" are always watching the TV community vigilantly for mischievous behaviors and actions that exploit well intended authors for the purpose of increasing brownie points in reputation scores. Hiding behind a "protected" wall may not protect you from investigation and account penalization by TV staff. Be respectful, and don't just throw an ma() in there branding it as "your" gizmo. Fair enough? Alrighty then... I firmly believe in "innovating" future state-of-the-art indicators, and please contact me if you wish to do so.
J.P. Morgan Efficiente 5 IndexJ.P. MORGAN EFFICIENTE 5 INDEX REPLICATION
Walk into any retail trading forum and you'll find the same scene playing out thousands of times a day: traders huddled over their screens, drawing trendlines on candlestick charts, hunting for the perfect entry signal, convinced that the next RSI crossover will unlock the path to financial freedom. Meanwhile, in the towers of lower Manhattan and the City of London, portfolio managers are doing something entirely different. They're not drawing lines. They're not hunting patterns. They're building fortresses of diversification, wielding mathematical frameworks that have survived decades of market chaos, and most importantly, they're thinking in portfolios while retail thinks in positions.
This divide is not just philosophical. It's structural, mathematical, and ultimately, profitable. The uncomfortable truth that retail traders must confront is this: while you're obsessing over whether the 50-day moving average will cross the 200-day, institutional investors are solving quadratic optimization problems across thirteen asset classes, rebalancing monthly according to Markowitz's Nobel Prize-winning framework, and targeting precise volatility levels that allow them to sleep at night regardless of what the VIX does tomorrow. The game you're playing and the game they're playing share the same field, but the rules are entirely different.
The question, then, is not whether retail traders can access institutional strategies. The question is whether they're willing to fundamentally change how they think about markets. Are you ready to stop painting lines and start building portfolios?
THE INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK: HOW THE PROFESSIONALS ACTUALLY THINK
When Harry Markowitz published "Portfolio Selection" in The Journal of Finance in 1952, he fundamentally altered how sophisticated investors approach markets. His insight was deceptively simple: returns alone mean nothing. Risk-adjusted returns mean everything. For this revelation, he would eventually receive the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1990, and his framework would become the foundation upon which trillions of dollars are managed today (Markowitz, 1952).
Modern Portfolio Theory, as it came to be known, introduced a revolutionary concept: through diversification across imperfectly correlated assets, an investor could reduce portfolio risk without sacrificing expected returns. This wasn't about finding the single best asset. It was about constructing the optimal combination of assets. The mathematics are elegant in their logic: if two assets don't move in perfect lockstep, combining them creates a portfolio whose volatility is lower than the weighted average of the individual volatilities. This "free lunch" of diversification became the bedrock of institutional investment management (Elton et al., 2014).
But here's where retail traders miss the point entirely: this isn't about having ten different stocks instead of one. It's about systematic, mathematically rigorous allocation across asset classes with fundamentally different risk drivers. When equity markets crash, high-quality government bonds often rally. When inflation surges, commodities may provide protection even as stocks and bonds both suffer. When emerging markets are in vogue, developed markets may lag. The professional investor doesn't predict which scenario will unfold. Instead, they position for all of them simultaneously, with weights determined not by gut feeling but by quantitative optimization.
This is what J.P. Morgan Asset Management embedded into their Efficiente Index series. These are not actively managed funds where a portfolio manager makes discretionary calls. They are rules-based, systematic strategies that execute the Markowitz framework in real-time, rebalancing monthly to maintain optimal risk-adjusted positioning across global equities, fixed income, commodities, and defensive assets (J.P. Morgan Asset Management, 2016).
THE EFFICIENTE 5 STRATEGY: DECONSTRUCTING INSTITUTIONAL METHODOLOGY
The Efficiente 5 Index, specifically, targets a 5% annualized volatility. Let that sink in for a moment. While retail traders routinely accept 20%, 30%, or even 50% annual volatility in pursuit of returns, institutional allocators have determined that 5% volatility provides an optimal balance between growth potential and capital preservation. This isn't timidity. It's mathematics. At higher volatility levels, the compounding drag from large drawdowns becomes mathematically punishing. A 50% loss requires a 100% gain just to break even. The institutional solution: constrain volatility at the portfolio level, allowing the power of compounding to work unimpeded (Damodaran, 2008).
The strategy operates across thirteen exchange-traded funds spanning five distinct asset classes: developed equity markets (SPY, IWM, EFA), fixed income across the risk spectrum (TLT, LQD, HYG), emerging markets (EEM, EMB), alternatives (IYR, GSG, GLD), and defensive positioning (TIP, BIL). These aren't arbitrary choices. Each ETF represents a distinct factor exposure, and together they provide access to the primary drivers of global asset returns (Fama and French, 1993).
The methodology, as detailed in replication research by Jungle Rock (2025), follows a precise monthly cadence. At the end of each month, the strategy recalculates expected returns and volatilities for all thirteen assets using a 126-day rolling window. This six-month lookback balances responsiveness to changing market conditions against the noise of short-term fluctuations. The optimization engine then solves for the portfolio weights that maximize expected return subject to the 5% volatility target, with additional constraints to prevent excessive concentration.
These constraints are critical and reveal institutional wisdom that retail traders typically ignore. No single ETF can exceed 20% of the portfolio, except for TIP and BIL which can reach 50% given their defensive nature. At the asset class level, developed equities are capped at 50%, bonds at 50%, emerging markets at 25%, and alternatives at 25%. These aren't arbitrary limits. They're guardrails preventing the optimization from becoming too aggressive during periods when recent performance might suggest concentrating heavily in a single area that's been hot (Jorion, 1992).
After optimization, there's one final step that appears almost trivial but carries profound implications: weights are rounded to the nearest 5%. In a world of fractional shares and algorithmic execution, why round to 5%? The answer reveals institutional practicality over mathematical purity. A portfolio weight of 13.7% and 15.0% are functionally similar in their risk contribution, but the latter is vastly easier to communicate, to monitor, and to execute at scale. When you're managing billions, parsimony matters.
WHY THIS MATTERS FOR RETAIL: THE GAP BETWEEN APPROACH AND EXECUTION
Here's the uncomfortable reality: most retail traders are playing a different game entirely, and they don't even realize it. When a retail trader says "I'm bullish on tech," they buy QQQ and that's their entire technology exposure. When they say "I need some diversification," they buy ten different stocks, often in correlated sectors. This isn't diversification in the Markowitzian sense. It's concentration with extra steps.
The institutional approach represented by the Efficiente 5 is fundamentally different in several ways. First, it's systematic. Emotions don't drive the allocation. The mathematics do. When equities have rallied hard and now represent 55% of the portfolio despite a 50% cap, the system sells equities and buys bonds or alternatives, regardless of how bullish the headlines feel. This forced contrarianism is what retail traders know they should do but rarely execute (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979).
Second, it's forward-looking in its inputs but backward-looking in its process. The strategy doesn't try to predict the next crisis or the next boom. It simply measures what volatility and returns have been recently, assumes the immediate future resembles the immediate past more than it resembles some forecast, and positions accordingly. This humility regarding prediction is perhaps the most institutional characteristic of all.
Third, and most critically, it treats the portfolio as a single organism. Retail traders typically view their holdings as separate positions, each requiring individual management. The institutional approach recognizes that what matters is not whether Position A made money, but whether the portfolio as a whole achieved its risk-adjusted return target. A position can lose money and still be a valuable contributor if it reduced portfolio volatility or provided diversification during stress periods.
THE MATHEMATICAL FOUNDATION: MEAN-VARIANCE OPTIMIZATION IN PRACTICE
At its core, the Efficiente 5 strategy solves a constrained optimization problem each month. In technical terms, this is a quadratic programming problem: maximize expected portfolio return subject to a volatility constraint and position limits. The objective function is straightforward: maximize the weighted sum of expected returns. The constraint is that the weighted sum of variances and covariances must not exceed the volatility target squared (Markowitz, 1959).
The challenge, and this is crucial for understanding the Pine Script implementation, is that solving this problem properly requires calculating a covariance matrix. This 13x13 matrix captures not just the volatility of each asset but the correlation between every pair of assets. Two assets might each have 15% volatility, but if they're negatively correlated, combining them reduces portfolio risk. If they're positively correlated, it doesn't. The covariance matrix encodes these relationships.
True mean-variance optimization requires matrix algebra and quadratic programming solvers. Pine Script, by design, lacks these capabilities. The language doesn't support matrix operations, and certainly doesn't include a QP solver. This creates a fundamental challenge: how do you implement an institutional strategy in a language not designed for institutional mathematics?
The solution implemented here uses a pragmatic approximation. Instead of solving the full covariance problem, the indicator calculates a Sharpe-like ratio for each asset (return divided by volatility) and uses these ratios to determine initial weights. It then applies the individual and asset-class constraints, renormalizes, and produces the final portfolio. This isn't mathematically equivalent to true mean-variance optimization, but it captures the essential spirit: weight assets according to their risk-adjusted return potential, subject to diversification constraints.
For retail implementation, this approximation is likely sufficient. The difference between a theoretically optimal portfolio and a very good approximation is typically modest, and the discipline of systematic rebalancing across asset classes matters far more than the precise weights. Perfect is the enemy of good, and a good approximation executed consistently will outperform a perfect solution that never gets implemented (Arnott et al., 2013).
RETURNS, RISKS, AND THE POWER OF COMPOUNDING
The Efficiente 5 Index has, historically, delivered on its promise of 5% volatility with respectable returns. While past performance never guarantees future results, the framework reveals why low-volatility strategies can be surprisingly powerful. Consider two portfolios: Portfolio A averages 12% returns with 20% volatility, while Portfolio B averages 8% returns with 5% volatility. Which performs better over time?
The arithmetic return favors Portfolio A, but compound returns tell a different story. Portfolio A will experience occasional 20-30% drawdowns. Portfolio B rarely draws down more than 10%. Over a twenty-year horizon, the geometric return (what you actually experience) for Portfolio B may match or exceed Portfolio A, simply because it never gives back massive gains. This is the power of volatility management that retail traders chronically underestimate (Bernstein, 1996).
Moreover, low volatility enables behavioral advantages. When your portfolio draws down 35%, as it might with a high-volatility approach, the psychological pressure to sell at the worst possible time becomes overwhelming. When your maximum drawdown is 12%, as might occur with the Efficiente 5 approach, staying the course is far easier. Behavioral finance research has consistently shown that investor returns lag fund returns primarily due to poor timing decisions driven by emotional responses to volatility (Dalbar, 2020).
The indicator displays not just target and actual portfolio weights, but also tracks total return, portfolio value, and realized volatility. This isn't just data. It's feedback. Retail traders can see, in real-time, whether their actual portfolio volatility matches their target, whether their risk-adjusted returns are improving, and whether their allocation discipline is holding. This transparency transforms abstract concepts into concrete metrics.
WHAT RETAIL TRADERS MUST LEARN: THE MINDSET SHIFT
The path from retail to institutional thinking requires three fundamental shifts. First, stop thinking in positions and start thinking in portfolios. Your question should never be "Should I buy this stock?" but rather "How does this position change my portfolio's expected return and volatility?" If you can't answer that question quantitatively, you're not ready to make the trade.
Second, embrace systematic rebalancing even when it feels wrong. Perhaps especially when it feels wrong. The Efficiente 5 strategy rebalances monthly regardless of market conditions. If equities have surged and now exceed their target weight, the strategy sells equities and buys bonds or alternatives. Every retail trader knows this is what you "should" do, but almost none actually do it. The institutional edge isn't in having better information. It's in having better discipline (Swensen, 2009).
Third, accept that volatility is not your friend. The retail mythology that "higher risk equals higher returns" is true on average across assets, but it's not true for implementation. A 15% return with 30% volatility will compound more slowly than a 12% return with 10% volatility due to the mathematics of return distributions. Institutions figured this out decades ago. Retail is still learning.
The Efficiente 5 replication indicator provides a bridge. It won't solve the problem of prediction no indicator can. But it solves the problem of allocation, which is arguably more important. By implementing institutional methodology in an accessible format, it allows retail traders to see what professional portfolio construction actually looks like, not in theory but in executable code. The the colorful lines that retail traders love to draw, don't disappear. They simply become less central to the process. The portfolio becomes central instead.
IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS AND PRACTICAL REALITY
Running this indicator on TradingView provides a dynamic view of how institutional allocation would evolve over time. The labels on each asset class line show current weights, updated continuously as prices change and rebalancing occurs. The dashboard displays the full allocation across all thirteen ETFs, showing both target weights (what the optimization suggests) and actual weights (what the portfolio currently holds after price movements).
Several key insights emerge from watching this process unfold. First, the strategy is not static. Weights change monthly as the optimization recalibrates to recent volatility and returns. What worked last month may not be optimal this month. Second, the strategy is not market-timing. It doesn't try to predict whether stocks will rise or fall. It simply measures recent behavior and positions accordingly. If volatility has risen, the strategy shifts toward defensive assets. If correlations have changed, the diversification benefits adjust.
Third, and perhaps most importantly for retail traders, the strategy demonstrates that sophistication and complexity are not synonyms. The Efficiente 5 methodology is sophisticated in its framework but simple in its execution. There are no exotic derivatives, no complex market-timing rules, no predictions of future scenarios. Just systematic optimization, monthly rebalancing, and discipline. This simplicity is a feature, not a bug.
The indicator also highlights limitations that retail traders must understand. The Pine Script implementation uses an approximation of true mean-variance optimization, as discussed earlier. Transaction costs are not modeled. Slippage is ignored. Tax implications are not considered. These simplifications mean the indicator is educational and analytical, not a fully operational trading system. For actual implementation, traders would need to account for these real-world factors.
Moreover, the strategy requires access to all thirteen ETFs and sufficient capital to hold meaningful positions in each. With 5% as the rounding increment, practical implementation probably requires at least $10,000 to avoid having positions that are too small to matter. The strategy is also explicitly designed for a 5% volatility target, which may be too conservative for younger investors with long time horizons or too aggressive for retirees living off their portfolio. The framework is adaptable, but adaptation requires understanding the trade-offs.
CAN RETAIL TRULY COMPETE WITH INSTITUTIONS?
The honest answer is nuanced. Retail traders will never have the same resources as institutions. They won't have Bloomberg terminals, proprietary research, or armies of analysts. But in portfolio construction, the resource gap matters less than the mindset gap. The mathematics of Markowitz are available to everyone. ETFs provide liquid, low-cost access to institutional-quality building blocks. Computing power is essentially free. The barriers are not technological or financial. They're conceptual.
If a retail trader understands why portfolios matter more than positions, why systematic discipline beats discretionary emotion, and why volatility management enables compounding, they can build portfolios that rival institutional allocation in their elegance and effectiveness. Not in their scale, not in their execution costs, but in their conceptual soundness. The Efficiente 5 framework proves this is possible.
What retail traders must recognize is that competing with institutions doesn't mean day-trading better than their algorithms. It means portfolio-building better than their average client. And that's achievable because most institutional clients, despite having access to the best managers, still make emotional decisions, chase performance, and abandon strategies at the worst possible times. The retail edge isn't in outsmarting professionals. It's in out-disciplining amateurs who happen to have more money.
The J.P. Morgan Efficiente 5 Index Replication indicator serves as both a tool and a teacher. As a tool, it provides a systematic framework for multi-asset allocation based on proven institutional methodology. As a teacher, it demonstrates daily what portfolio thinking actually looks like in practice. The colorful lines remain on the chart, but they're no longer the focus. The portfolio is the focus. The risk-adjusted return is the focus. The systematic discipline is the focus.
Stop painting lines. Start building portfolios. The institutions have been doing it for seventy years. It's time retail caught up.
REFERENCES
Arnott, R. D., Hsu, J., & Moore, P. (2013). Fundamental Indexation. Financial Analysts Journal, 61(2), 83-99.
Bernstein, W. J. (1996). The Intelligent Asset Allocator. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dalbar, Inc. (2020). Quantitative Analysis of Investor Behavior. Boston: Dalbar.
Damodaran, A. (2008). Strategic Risk Taking: A Framework for Risk Management. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.
Elton, E. J., Gruber, M. J., Brown, S. J., & Goetzmann, W. N. (2014). Modern Portfolio Theory and Investment Analysis (9th ed.). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1993). Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 33(1), 3-56.
Jorion, P. (1992). Portfolio optimization in practice. Financial Analysts Journal, 48(1), 68-74.
J.P. Morgan Asset Management. (2016). Guide to the Markets. New York: J.P. Morgan.
Jungle Rock. (2025). Institutional Asset Allocation meets the Efficient Frontier: Replicating the JPMorgan Efficiente 5 Strategy. Working Paper.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio Selection. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77-91.
Markowitz, H. (1959). Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Swensen, D. F. (2009). Pioneering Portfolio Management: An Unconventional Approach to Institutional Investment. New York: Free Press.
COT IndexTHE HIDDEN INTELLIGENCE IN FUTURES MARKETS
What if you could see what the smartest players in the futures markets are doing before the crowd catches on? While retail traders chase momentum indicators and moving averages, obsess over Japanese candlestick patterns, and debate whether the RSI should be set to fourteen or twenty-one periods, institutional players leave footprints in the sand through their mandatory reporting to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. These footprints, published weekly in the Commitment of Traders reports, have been hiding in plain sight for decades, available to anyone with an internet connection, yet remarkably few traders understand how to interpret them correctly. The COT Index indicator transforms this raw institutional positioning data into actionable trading signals, bringing Wall Street intelligence to your trading screen without requiring expensive Bloomberg terminals or insider connections.
The uncomfortable truth is this: Most retail traders operate in a binary world. Long or short. Buy or sell. They apply technical analysis to individual positions, constrained by limited capital that forces them to concentrate risk in single directional bets. Meanwhile, institutional traders operate in an entirely different dimension. They manage portfolios dynamically weighted across multiple markets, adjusting exposure based on evolving market conditions, correlation shifts, and risk assessments that retail traders never see. A hedge fund might be simultaneously long gold, short oil, neutral on copper, and overweight agricultural commodities, with position sizes calibrated to volatility and portfolio Greeks. When they increase gold exposure from five percent to eight percent of portfolio allocation, this rebalancing decision reflects sophisticated analysis of opportunity cost, risk parity, and cross-market dynamics that no individual chart pattern can capture.
This portfolio reweighting activity, multiplied across hundreds of institutional participants, manifests in the aggregate positioning data published weekly by the CFTC. The Commitment of Traders report does not show individual trades or strategies. It shows the collective footprint of how actual commercial hedgers and large speculators have allocated their capital across different markets. When mining companies collectively increase forward gold sales to hedge thirty percent more production than last quarter, they are not reacting to a moving average crossover. They are making strategic allocation decisions based on production forecasts, cost structures, and price expectations derived from operational realities invisible to outside observers. This is portfolio management in action, revealed through positioning data rather than price charts.
If you want to understand how institutional capital actually flows, how sophisticated traders genuinely position themselves across market cycles, the COT report provides a rare window into that hidden world. But understand what you are getting into. This is not a tool for scalpers seeking confirmation of the next five-minute move. This is not an oscillator that flashes oversold at market bottoms with convenient precision. COT analysis operates on a timescale measured in weeks and months, revealing positioning shifts that precede major market turns but offer no precision timing. The data arrives three days stale, published only once per week, capturing strategic positioning rather than tactical entries.
If you need instant gratification, if you trade intraday moves, if you demand mechanical signals with ninety percent accuracy, close this document now. COT analysis rewards patience, position sizing discipline, and tolerance for being early. It punishes impatience, overleveraging, and the expectation that any single indicator can substitute for market understanding.
The premise is deceptively simple. Every Tuesday, large traders in futures markets must report their positions to the CFTC. By Friday afternoon, this data becomes public. Academic research spanning three decades has consistently shown that not all market participants are created equal. Some traders consistently profit while others consistently lose. Some anticipate major turning points while others chase trends into exhaustion. Bessembinder and Chan (1992) demonstrated in their seminal study that commercial hedgers, those with actual exposure to the underlying commodity or financial instrument, possess superior forecasting ability compared to speculators. Their research, published in the Journal of Finance, found statistically significant predictive power in commercial positioning, particularly at extreme levels. This finding challenged the efficient market hypothesis and opened the door to a new approach to market analysis based on positioning rather than price alone.
Think about what this means. Every week, the government publishes a report showing you exactly how the most informed market participants are positioned. Not their opinions. Not their predictions. Their actual money at risk. When agricultural producers collectively hold their largest short hedge in five years, they are not making idle speculation. They are locking in prices for crops they will harvest, informed by private knowledge of weather conditions, soil quality, inventory levels, and demand expectations invisible to outside observers. When energy companies aggressively hedge forward production at current prices, they reveal information about expected supply that no analyst report can capture. This is not technical analysis based on past prices. This is not fundamental analysis based on publicly available data. This is behavioral analysis based on how the smartest money is actually positioned, how institutions allocate capital across portfolios, and how those allocation decisions shift as market conditions evolve.
WHY SOME TRADERS KNOW MORE THAN OTHERS
Building on this foundation, Sanders, Boris and Manfredo (2004) conducted extensive research examining the behaviour patterns of different trader categories. Their work, which analyzed over a decade of COT data across multiple commodity markets, revealed a fascinating dynamic that challenges much of what retail traders are taught. Commercial hedgers consistently positioned themselves against market extremes, buying when speculators were most bearish and selling when speculators reached peak bullishness. The contrarian positioning of commercials was not random noise but rather reflected their superior information about supply and demand fundamentals. Meanwhile, large speculators, primarily hedge funds and commodity trading advisors, exhibited strong trend-following behaviour that often amplified market moves beyond fundamental values. Small traders, the retail participants, consistently entered positions late in trends, frequently near turning points, making them reliable contrary indicators.
Wang (2003) extended this research by demonstrating that the predictive power of commercial positioning varies significantly across different commodity sectors. His analysis of agricultural commodities showed particularly strong forecasting ability, with commercial net positions explaining up to fifteen percent of return variance in subsequent weeks. This finding suggests that the informational advantages of hedgers are most pronounced in markets where physical supply and demand fundamentals dominate, as opposed to purely financial markets where information asymmetries are smaller. When a corn farmer hedges six months of expected harvest, that decision incorporates private observations about rainfall patterns, crop health, pest pressure, and local storage capacity that no distant analyst can match. When an oil refinery hedges crude oil purchases and gasoline sales simultaneously, the spread relationships reveal expectations about refining margins that reflect operational realities invisible in public data.
The theoretical mechanism underlying these empirical patterns relates to information asymmetry and different participant motivations. Commercial hedgers engage in futures markets not for speculative profit but to manage business risks. An agricultural producer selling forward six months of expected harvest is not making a bet on price direction but rather locking in revenue to facilitate financial planning and ensure business viability. However, this hedging activity necessarily incorporates private information about expected supply, inventory levels, weather conditions, and demand trends that the hedger observes through their commercial operations (Irwin and Sanders, 2012). When aggregated across many participants, this private information manifests in collective positioning.
Consider a gold mining company deciding how much forward production to hedge. Management must estimate ore grades, recovery rates, production costs, equipment reliability, labor availability, and dozens of other operational variables that determine whether locking in prices at current levels makes business sense. If the industry collectively hedges more aggressively than usual, it suggests either exceptional production expectations or concern about sustaining current price levels or combination of both. Either way, this positioning reveals information unavailable to speculators analyzing price charts and economic data. The hedger sees the physical reality behind the financial abstraction.
Large speculators operate under entirely different incentives and constraints. Commodity Trading Advisors managing billions in assets typically employ systematic, trend-following strategies that respond to price momentum rather than fundamental supply and demand. When crude oil rallies from sixty dollars to seventy dollars per barrel, these systems generate buy signals. As the rally continues to eighty dollars, position sizes increase. The strategy works brilliantly during sustained trends but becomes a liability at reversals. By the time oil reaches ninety dollars, trend-following funds are maximally long, having accumulated positions progressively throughout the rally. At this point, they represent not smart money anticipating further gains but rather crowded money vulnerable to reversal. Sanders, Boris and Manfredo (2004) documented this pattern across multiple energy markets, showing that extreme speculator positioning typically marked late-stage trend exhaustion rather than early-stage trend development.
Small traders, the retail participants who fall below reporting thresholds, display the weakest forecasting ability. Wang (2003) found that small trader positioning exhibited negative correlation with subsequent returns, meaning their aggregate positioning served as a reliable contrary indicator. The explanation combines several factors. Retail traders often lack the capital reserves to weather normal market volatility, leading to premature exits from positions that would eventually prove profitable. They tend to receive information through slower channels, entering trends after mainstream media coverage when institutional participants are preparing to exit. Perhaps most importantly, they trade with emotion, buying into euphoria and selling into panic at precisely the wrong times.
At major turning points, the three groups often position opposite each other with commercials extremely bearish, large speculators extremely bullish, and small traders piling into longs at the last moment. These high-divergence environments frequently precede increased volatility and trend reversals. The insiders with business exposure quietly exit as the momentum traders hit maximum capacity and retail enthusiasm peaks. Within weeks, the reversal begins, and positions unwind in the opposite sequence.
FROM RAW DATA TO ACTIONABLE SIGNALS
The COT Index indicator operationalizes these academic findings into a practical trading tool accessible through TradingView. At its core, the indicator normalizes net positioning data onto a zero to one hundred scale, creating what we call the COT Index. This normalization is critical because absolute position sizes vary dramatically across different futures contracts and over time. A commercial trader holding fifty thousand contracts net long in crude oil might be extremely bullish by historical standards, or it might be quite neutral depending on the context of total market size and historical ranges. Raw position numbers mean nothing without context. The COT Index solves this problem by calculating where current positioning stands relative to its range over a specified lookback period, typically two hundred fifty-two weeks or approximately five years of weekly data.
The mathematical transformation follows the methodology originally popularized by legendary trader Larry Williams, though the underlying concept appears in statistical normalization techniques across many fields. For any given trader category, we calculate the highest and lowest net position values over the lookback period, establishing the historical range for that specific market and trader group. Current positioning is then expressed as a percentage of this range, where zero represents the most bearish positioning ever seen in the lookback window and one hundred represents the most bullish extreme. A reading of fifty indicates positioning exactly in the middle of the historical range, suggesting neither extreme optimism nor pessimism relative to recent history (Williams and Noseworthy, 2009).
This index-based approach allows for meaningful comparison across different markets and time periods, overcoming the scaling problems inherent in analyzing raw position data. A commercial index reading of eighty-five in gold carries the same interpretive meaning as an eighty-five reading in wheat or crude oil, even though the absolute position sizes differ by orders of magnitude. This standardization enables systematic analysis across entire futures portfolios rather than requiring market-specific expertise for each contract.
The lookback period selection involves a fundamental tradeoff between responsiveness and stability. Shorter lookback periods, perhaps one hundred twenty-six weeks or approximately two and a half years, make the index more sensitive to recent positioning changes. However, it also increases noise and produces more false signals. Longer lookback periods, perhaps five hundred weeks or approximately ten years, create smoother readings that filter short-term noise but become slower to recognize regime changes. The indicator settings allow users to adjust this parameter based on their trading timeframe, risk tolerance, and market characteristics.
UNDERSTANDING CFTC DATA STRUCTURES
The indicator supports both Legacy and Disaggregated COT report formats, reflecting the evolution of CFTC reporting standards over decades of market development. Legacy reports categorize market participants into three broad groups: commercial traders (hedgers with underlying business exposure), non-commercial traders (large speculators seeking profit without commercial interest), and non-reportable traders (small speculators below reporting thresholds). Each category brings distinct motivations and information advantages to the market (CFTC, 2020).
The Disaggregated reports, introduced in September 2009 for physical commodity markets, provide finer granularity by splitting participants into five categories (CFTC, 2009). Producer and merchant positions capture those actually producing, processing, or merchandising the physical commodity. Swap dealers represent financial intermediaries facilitating derivative transactions for clients. Managed money includes commodity trading advisors and hedge funds executing systematic or discretionary strategies. Other reportables encompasses diverse participants not fitting the main categories. Small traders remain as the fifth group, representing retail participation.
This enhanced categorization reveals nuances invisible in Legacy reports, particularly distinguishing between different types of institutional capital and their distinct behavioural patterns. The indicator automatically detects which report type is appropriate for each futures contract and adjusts the display accordingly.
Importantly, Disaggregated reports exist only for physical commodity futures. Agricultural commodities like corn, wheat, and soybeans have Disaggregated reports because clear producer, merchant, and swap dealer categories exist. Energy commodities like crude oil and natural gas similarly have well-defined commercial hedger categories. Metals including gold, silver, and copper also receive Disaggregated treatment (CFTC, 2009). However, financial futures such as equity index futures, Treasury bond futures, and currency futures remain available only in Legacy format. The CFTC has indicated no plans to extend Disaggregated reporting to financial futures due to different market structures and participant categories in these instruments (CFTC, 2020).
THE BEHAVIORAL FOUNDATION
Understanding which trader perspective to follow requires appreciation of their distinct trading styles, success rates, and psychological profiles. Commercial hedgers exhibit anticyclical behaviour rooted in their fundamental knowledge and business imperatives. When agricultural producers hedge forward sales during harvest season, they are not speculating on price direction but rather locking in revenue for crops they will harvest. Their business requires converting volatile commodity exposure into predictable cash flows to facilitate planning and ensure survival through difficult periods. Yet their aggregate positioning reveals valuable information because these hedging decisions incorporate private information about supply conditions, inventory levels, weather observations, and demand expectations that hedgers observe through their commercial operations (Bessembinder and Chan, 1992).
Consider a practical example from energy markets. Major oil companies continuously hedge portions of forward production based on price levels, operational costs, and financial planning needs. When crude oil trades at ninety dollars per barrel, they might aggressively hedge the next twelve months of production, locking in prices that provide comfortable profit margins above their extraction costs. This hedging appears as short positioning in COT reports. If oil rallies further to one hundred dollars, they hedge even more aggressively, viewing these prices as exceptional opportunities to secure revenue. Their short positioning grows increasingly extreme. To an outside observer watching only price charts, the rally suggests bullishness. But the commercial positioning reveals that the actual producers of oil find these prices attractive enough to lock in years of sales, suggesting skepticism about sustaining even higher levels. When the eventual reversal occurs and oil declines back to eighty dollars, the commercials who hedged at ninety and one hundred dollars profit while speculators who chased the rally suffer losses.
Large speculators or managed money traders operate under entirely different incentives and constraints. Their systematic, momentum-driven strategies mean they amplify existing trends rather than anticipate reversals. Trend-following systems, the most common approach among large speculators, by definition require confirmation of trend through price momentum before entering positions (Sanders, Boris and Manfredo, 2004). When crude oil rallies from sixty dollars to eighty dollars per barrel over several months, trend-following algorithms generate buy signals based on moving average crossovers, breakouts, and other momentum indicators. As the rally continues, position sizes increase according to the systematic rules.
However, this approach becomes a liability at turning points. By the time oil reaches ninety dollars after a sustained rally, trend-following funds are maximally long, having accumulated positions progressively throughout the move. At this point, their positioning does not predict continued strength. Rather, it often marks late-stage trend exhaustion. The psychological and mechanical explanation is straightforward. Trend followers by definition chase price momentum, entering positions after trends establish rather than anticipating them. Eventually, they become fully invested just as the trend nears completion, leaving no incremental buying power to sustain the rally. When the first signs of reversal appear, systematic stops trigger, creating a cascade of selling that accelerates the downturn.
Small traders consistently display the weakest track record across academic studies. Wang (2003) found that small trader positioning exhibited negative correlation with subsequent returns in his analysis across multiple commodity markets. This result means that whatever small traders collectively do, the opposite typically proves profitable. The explanation for small trader underperformance combines several factors documented in behavioral finance literature. Retail traders often lack the capital reserves to weather normal market volatility, leading to premature exits from positions that would eventually prove profitable. They tend to receive information through slower channels, learning about commodity trends through mainstream media coverage that arrives after institutional participants have already positioned. Perhaps most importantly, retail traders are more susceptible to emotional decision-making, buying into euphoria and selling into panic at precisely the wrong times (Tharp, 2008).
SETTINGS, THRESHOLDS, AND SIGNAL GENERATION
The practical implementation of the COT Index requires understanding several key features and settings that users can adjust to match their trading style, timeframe, and risk tolerance. The lookback period determines the time window for calculating historical ranges. The default setting of two hundred fifty-two bars represents approximately one year on daily charts or five years on weekly charts, balancing responsiveness with stability. Conservative traders seeking only the most extreme, highest-probability signals might extend the lookback to five hundred bars or more. Aggressive traders seeking earlier entry and willing to accept more false positives might reduce it to one hundred twenty-six bars or even less for shorter-term applications.
The bullish and bearish thresholds define signal generation levels. Default settings of eighty and twenty respectively reflect academic research suggesting meaningful information content at these extremes. Readings above eighty indicate positioning in the top quintile of the historical range, representing genuine extremes rather than temporary fluctuations. Conversely, readings below twenty occupy the bottom quintile, indicating unusually bearish positioning (Briese, 2008).
However, traders must recognize that appropriate thresholds vary by market, trader category, and personal risk tolerance. Some futures markets exhibit wider positioning swings than others due to seasonal patterns, volatility characteristics, or participant behavior. Conservative traders seeking high-probability setups with fewer signals might raise thresholds to eighty-five and fifteen. Aggressive traders willing to accept more false positives for earlier entry could lower them to seventy-five and twenty-five.
The key is maintaining meaningful differentiation between bullish, neutral, and bearish zones. The default settings of eighty and twenty create a clear three-zone structure. Readings from zero to twenty represent bearish territory where the selected trader group holds unusually bearish positions. Readings from twenty to eighty represent neutral territory where positioning falls within normal historical ranges. Readings from eighty to one hundred represent bullish territory where the selected trader group holds unusually bullish positions.
The trading perspective selection determines which participant group the indicator follows, fundamentally shaping interpretation and signal meaning. For counter-trend traders seeking reversal opportunities, monitoring commercial positioning makes intuitive sense based on the academic research discussed earlier. When commercials reach extreme bearish readings below twenty, indicating unprecedented short positioning relative to recent history, they are effectively betting against the crowd. Given their informational advantages demonstrated by Bessembinder and Chan (1992), this contrarian stance often precedes major bottoms.
Trend followers might instead monitor large speculator positioning, but with inverted logic compared to commercials. When managed money reaches extreme bullish readings above eighty, the trend may be exhausting rather than accelerating. This seeming paradox reflects their late-cycle participation documented by Sanders, Boris and Manfredo (2004). Sophisticated traders thus use speculator extremes as fade signals, entering positions opposite to speculator consensus.
Small trader monitoring serves primarily as a contrary indicator for all trading styles. Extreme small trader bullishness above seventy-five or eighty typically warns of retail FOMO at market tops. Extreme small trader bearishness below twenty or twenty-five often marks capitulation bottoms where the last weak hands have sold.
VISUALIZATION AND USER INTERFACE
The visual design incorporates multiple elements working together to facilitate decision-making and maintain situational awareness during active trading. The primary COT Index line plots in bold with adjustable line width, defaulting to two pixels for clear visibility against busy price charts. An optional glow effect, controlled by a simple toggle, adds additional visual prominence through multiple plot layers with progressively increasing transparency and width.
A twenty-one period exponential moving average overlays the index line, providing trend context for positioning changes. When the index crosses above its moving average, it signals accelerating bullish sentiment among the selected trader group regardless of whether absolute positioning is extreme. Conversely, when the index crosses below its moving average, it signals deteriorating sentiment and potentially the beginning of a reversal in positioning trends.
The EMA provides a dynamic reference line for assessing positioning momentum. When the index trades far above its EMA, positioning is not only extreme in absolute terms but also building with momentum. When the index trades far below its EMA, positioning is contracting or reversing, which may indicate weakening conviction even if absolute levels remain elevated.
The data table positioned at the top right of the chart displays eleven metrics for each trader category, transforming the indicator from a simple index calculation into an analytical dashboard providing multidimensional market intelligence. Beyond the COT Index itself, users can monitor positioning extremity, which measures how unusual current levels are compared to historical norms using statistical techniques. The extremity metric clarifies whether a reading represents the ninety-fifth or ninety-ninth percentile, with values above two standard deviations indicating genuinely exceptional positioning.
Market power quantifies each group's influence on total open interest. This metric expresses each trader category's net position as a percentage of total market open interest. A commercial entity holding forty percent of total open interest commands significantly more influence than one holding five percent, making their positioning signals more meaningful.
Momentum and rate of change metrics reveal whether positions are building or contracting, providing early warning of potential regime shifts. Position velocity measures the rate of change in positioning changes, effectively a second derivative providing even earlier insight into inflection points.
Sentiment divergence highlights disagreements between commercial and speculative positioning. This metric calculates the absolute difference between normalized commercial and large speculator index values. Wang (2003) found that these high-divergence environments frequently preceded increased volatility and reversals.
The table also displays concentration metrics when available, showing how positioning is distributed among the largest handful of traders in each category. High concentration indicates a few dominant players controlling most of the positioning, while low concentration suggests broad-based participation across many traders.
THE ALERT SYSTEM AND MONITORING
The alert system, comprising five distinct alert conditions, enables systematic monitoring of dozens of futures markets without constant screen watching. The bullish and bearish COT signal alerts trigger when the index crosses user-defined thresholds, indicating the selected trader group has reached extreme positioning worthy of attention. These alerts fire in real-time as new weekly COT data publishes, typically Friday afternoon following the Tuesday measurement date.
Extreme positioning alerts fire at ninety and ten index levels, representing the top and bottom ten percent of the historical range, warning of particularly stretched readings that historically precede reversals with high probability. When commercials reach a COT Index reading below ten, they are expressing their most bearish stance in the entire lookback period.
The data staleness alert notifies users when COT reports have not updated for more than ten days, preventing reliance on outdated information for trading decisions. Government shutdowns or federal holidays can interrupt the normal Friday publication schedule. Using stale signals while believing them current creates dangerous false confidence.
The indicator's watermark information display positioned in the bottom right corner provides essential context at a glance. This persistent display shows the symbol and timeframe, the COT report date timestamp, days since last update, and the current signal state. A trader analyzing a potential short entry in crude oil can glance at the watermark to instantly confirm positioning context without interrupting analysis flow.
LIMITATIONS AND REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS
Practical application requires understanding both the indicator's considerable strengths and inherent limitations. COT data inherently lags price action by three days, as Tuesday positions are not published until Friday afternoon. This delay means the indicator cannot catch rapid intraday reversals or respond to surprise news events. Traders using the COT Index for timing entries must accept this latency and focus on swing trading and position trading timeframes where three-day lags matter less than in day trading or scalping.
The weekly publication schedule similarly makes the indicator unsuitable for short-term trading strategies requiring immediate feedback. The COT Index works best for traders operating on weekly or longer timeframes, where positioning shifts measured in weeks and months align with trading horizon.
Extreme COT readings can persist far longer than typical technical indicators suggest, testing the patience and capital reserves of traders attempting to fade them. When crude oil enters a sustained bull market driven by genuine supply disruptions, commercial hedgers may maintain bearish positioning for many months as prices grind higher. A commercial COT Index reading of fifteen indicating extreme bearishness might persist for three months while prices continue rallying before finally reversing. Traders without sufficient capital and risk tolerance to weather such drawdowns will exit prematurely, precisely when the signal is about to work (Irwin and Sanders, 2012).
Position sizing discipline becomes paramount when implementing COT-based strategies. Rather than risking large percentages of capital on individual signals, successful COT traders typically allocate modest position sizes across multiple signals, allowing some to take time to mature while others work more quickly.
The indicator also cannot overcome fundamental regime changes that alter the structural drivers of markets. If gold enters a true secular bull market driven by monetary debasement, commercial hedgers may remain persistently bearish as mining companies sell forward years of production at what they perceive as favorable prices. Their positioning indicates valuation concerns from a production cost perspective, but cannot stop prices from rising if investment demand overwhelms physical supply-demand balance.
Similarly, structural changes in market participation can alter the meaning of positioning extremes. The growth of commodity index investing in the two thousands brought massive passive long-only capital into futures markets, fundamentally changing typical positioning ranges. Traders relying on COT signals without recognizing this regime change would have generated numerous false bearish signals during the commodity supercycle from 2003 to 2008.
The research foundation supporting COT analysis derives primarily from commodity markets where the commercial hedger information advantage is most pronounced. Studies specifically examining financial futures like equity indices and bonds show weaker but still present effects. Traders should calibrate expectations accordingly, recognizing that COT analysis likely works better for crude oil, natural gas, corn, and wheat than for the S&P 500, Treasury bonds, or currency futures.
Another important limitation involves the reporting threshold structure. Not all market participants appear in COT data, only those holding positions above specified minimums. In markets dominated by a few large players, concentration metrics become critical for proper interpretation. A single large trader accounting for thirty percent of commercial positioning might skew the entire category if their individual circumstances are idiosyncratic rather than representative.
GOLD FUTURES DURING A HYPOTHETICAL MARKET CYCLE
Consider a practical example using gold futures during a hypothetical but realistic market scenario that illustrates how the COT Index indicator guides trading decisions through a complete market cycle. Suppose gold has rallied from fifteen hundred to nineteen hundred dollars per ounce over six months, driven by inflation concerns following aggressive monetary expansion, geopolitical uncertainty, and sustained buying by Asian central banks for reserve diversification.
Large speculators, operating primarily trend-following strategies, have accumulated increasingly bullish positions throughout this rally. Their COT Index has climbed progressively from forty-five to eighty-five. The table display shows that large speculators now hold net long positions representing thirty-two percent of total open interest, their highest in four years. Momentum indicators show positive readings, indicating positions are still building though at a decelerating rate. Position velocity has turned negative, suggesting the pace of position building is slowing.
Meanwhile, commercial hedgers have responded to the rally by aggressively selling forward production and inventory. Their COT Index has moved inversely to price, declining from fifty-five to twenty. This bearish commercial positioning represents mining companies locking in forward sales at prices they view as attractive relative to production costs. The table shows commercials now hold net short positions representing twenty-nine percent of total open interest, their most bearish stance in five years. Concentration metrics indicate this positioning is broadly distributed across many commercial entities, suggesting the bearish stance reflects collective industry view rather than idiosyncratic positioning by a single firm.
Small traders, attracted by mainstream financial media coverage of gold's impressive rally, have recently piled into long positions. Their COT Index has jumped from forty-five to seventy-eight as retail investors chase the trend. Television financial networks feature frequent segments on gold with bullish guests. Internet forums and social media show surging retail interest. This retail enthusiasm historically marks late-stage trend development rather than early opportunity.
The COT Index indicator, configured to monitor commercial positioning from a contrarian perspective, displays a clear bearish signal given the extreme commercial short positioning. The table displays multiple confirming metrics: positioning extremity shows commercials at the ninety-sixth percentile of bearishness, market power indicates they control twenty-nine percent of open interest, and sentiment divergence registers sixty-five, indicating massive disagreement between commercial hedgers and large speculators. This divergence, the highest in three years, places the market in the historically high-risk category for reversals.
The interpretation requires nuance and consideration of context beyond just COT data. Commercials are not necessarily predicting an imminent crash. Rather, they are hedging business operations at what they collectively view as favorable price levels. However, the data reveals they have sold unusually large quantities of forward production, suggesting either exceptional production expectations for the year ahead or concern about sustaining current price levels or combination of both. Combined with extreme speculator positioning indicating a crowded long trade, and small trader enthusiasm confirming retail FOMO, the confluence suggests elevated reversal risk even if the precise timing remains uncertain.
A prudent trader analyzing this situation might take several actions based on COT Index signals. Existing long positions could be tightened with closer stop losses. Profit-taking on a portion of long exposure could lock in gains while maintaining some participation. Some traders might initiate modest short positions as portfolio hedges, sizing them appropriately for the inherent uncertainty in timing reversals. Others might simply move to the sidelines, avoiding new long entries until positioning normalizes.
The key lesson from case study analysis is that COT signals provide probabilistic edges rather than deterministic predictions. They work over many observations by identifying higher-probability configurations, not by generating perfect calls on individual trades. A fifty-five percent win rate with proper risk management produces substantial profits over time, yet still means forty-five percent of signals will be premature or wrong. Traders must embrace this probabilistic reality rather than seeking the impossible goal of perfect accuracy.
INTEGRATION WITH TRADING SYSTEMS
Integration with existing trading systems represents a natural and powerful use case for COT analysis, adding a positioning dimension to price-based technical approaches or fundamental analytical frameworks. Few traders rely exclusively on a single indicator or methodology. Rather, they build systems that synthesize multiple information sources, with each component addressing different aspects of market behavior.
Trend followers might use COT extremes as regime filters, modifying position sizing or avoiding new trend entries when positioning reaches levels historically associated with reversals. Consider a classic trend-following system based on moving average crossovers and momentum breakouts. Integration of COT analysis adds nuance. When large speculator positioning exceeds ninety or commercial positioning falls below ten, the regime filter recognizes elevated reversal risk. The system might reduce position sizing by fifty percent for new signals during these high-risk periods (Kaufman, 2013).
Mean reversion traders might require COT signal confluence before fading extended moves. When crude oil becomes technically overbought and large speculators show extreme long positioning above eighty-five, both signals confirm. If only technical indicators show extremes while positioning remains neutral, the potential short signal is rejected, avoiding fades of trends with underlying institutional support (Kaufman, 2013).
Discretionary traders can monitor the indicator as a continuous awareness tool, informing bias and position sizing without dictating mechanical entries and exits. A discretionary trader might notice commercial positioning shifting from neutral to progressively more bullish over several months. This trend informs growing positive bias even without triggering mechanical signals.
Multi-timeframe analysis represents another powerful integration approach. A trader might use daily charts for trade execution and timing while monitoring weekly COT positioning for strategic context. When both timeframes align, highest-probability opportunities emerge.
Portfolio construction for futures traders can incorporate COT signals as an additional selection criterion. Markets showing strong technical setups AND favorable COT positioning receive highest allocations. Markets with strong technicals but neutral or unfavorable positioning receive reduced allocations.
ADVANCED METRICS AND INTERPRETATION
The metrics table transforms simple positioning data into multidimensional market intelligence. Position extremity, calculated as the absolute deviation from the historical mean normalized by standard deviation, helps identify truly unusual readings versus routine fluctuations. A reading above two standard deviations indicates ninety-fifth percentile or higher extremity. Above three standard deviations indicates ninety-ninth percentile or higher, genuinely rare positioning that historically precedes major events with high probability.
Market power, expressed as a percentage of total open interest, reveals whose positioning matters most from a mechanical market impact perspective. Consider two scenarios in gold futures. In scenario one, commercials show a COT Index reading of fifteen while their market power metric shows they hold net shorts representing thirty-five percent of open interest. This is a high-confidence bearish signal. In scenario two, commercials also show a reading of fifteen, but market power shows only eight percent. While positioning is extreme relative to this category's normal range, their limited market share means less mechanical influence on price.
The rate of change and momentum metrics highlight whether positions are accelerating or decelerating, often providing earlier warnings than absolute levels alone. A COT Index reading of seventy-five with rapidly building momentum suggests continued movement toward extremes. Conversely, a reading of eighty-five with decelerating or negative momentum indicates the positioning trend is exhausting.
Position velocity measures the rate of change in positioning changes, effectively a second derivative. When velocity shifts from positive to negative, it indicates that while positioning may still be growing, the pace of growth is slowing. This deceleration often precedes actual reversal in positioning direction by several weeks.
Sentiment divergence calculates the absolute difference between normalized commercial and large speculator index values. When commercials show extreme bearish positioning at twenty while large speculators show extreme bullish positioning at eighty, the divergence reaches sixty, representing near-maximum disagreement. Wang (2003) found that these high-divergence environments frequently preceded increased volatility and reversals. The mechanism is intuitive. Extreme divergence indicates the informed hedgers and momentum-following speculators have positioned opposite each other with conviction. One group will prove correct and profit while the other proves incorrect and suffers losses. The resolution of this disagreement through price movement often involves volatility.
The table also displays concentration metrics when available. High concentration indicates a few dominant players controlling most of the positioning within a category, while low concentration suggests broad-based participation. Broad-based positioning more reliably reflects collective market intelligence and industry consensus. If mining companies globally all independently decide to hedge aggressively at similar price levels, it suggests genuine industry-wide view about price valuations rather than circumstances specific to one firm.
DATA QUALITY AND RELIABILITY
The CFTC has maintained COT reporting in various forms since the nineteen twenties, providing nearly a century of positioning data across multiple market cycles. However, data quality and reporting standards have evolved substantially over this long period. Modern electronic reporting implemented in the late nineteen nineties and early two thousands significantly improved accuracy and timeliness compared to earlier paper-based systems.
Traders should understand that COT reports capture positions as of Tuesday's close each week. Markets remain open three additional days before publication on Friday afternoon, meaning the reported data is three days stale when received. During periods of rapid market movement or major news events, this lag can be significant. The indicator addresses this limitation by including timestamp information and staleness warnings.
The three-day lag creates particular challenges during extreme volatility episodes. Flash crashes, surprise central bank interventions, geopolitical shocks, and other high-impact events can completely transform market positioning within hours. Traders must exercise judgment about whether reported positioning remains relevant given intervening events.
Reporting thresholds also mean that not all market participants appear in disaggregated COT data. Traders holding positions below specified minimums aggregate into the non-reportable or small trader category. This aggregation affects different markets differently. In highly liquid contracts like crude oil with thousands of participants, reportable traders might represent seventy to eighty percent of open interest. In thinly traded contracts with only dozens of active participants, a few large reportable positions might represent ninety-five percent of open interest.
Another data quality consideration involves trader classification into categories. The CFTC assigns traders to commercial or non-commercial categories based on reported business purpose and activities. However, this process is not perfect. Some entities engage in both commercial and speculative activities, creating ambiguity about proper classification. The transition to Disaggregated reports attempted to address some of these ambiguities by creating more granular categories.
COMPARISON WITH ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES
Several alternative approaches to COT analysis exist in the trading community beyond the normalization methodology employed by this indicator. Some analysts focus on absolute position changes week-over-week rather than index-based normalization. This approach calculates the change in net positioning from one week to the next. The emphasis falls on momentum in positioning changes rather than absolute levels relative to history. This method potentially identifies regime shifts earlier but sacrifices cross-market comparability (Briese, 2008).
Other practitioners employ more complex statistical transformations including percentile rankings, z-score standardization, and machine learning classification algorithms. Ruan and Zhang (2018) demonstrated that machine learning models applied to COT data could achieve modest improvements in forecasting accuracy compared to simple threshold-based approaches. However, these gains came at the cost of interpretability and implementation complexity.
The COT Index indicator intentionally employs a relatively straightforward normalization methodology for several important reasons. First, transparency enhances user understanding and trust. Traders can verify calculations manually and develop intuitive feel for what different readings mean. Second, academic research suggests that most of the predictive power in COT data comes from extreme positioning levels rather than subtle patterns requiring complex statistical methods to detect. Third, robust methods that work consistently across many markets and time periods tend to be simpler rather than more complex, reducing the risk of overfitting to historical data. Fourth, the complexity costs of implementation matter for retail traders without programming teams or computational infrastructure.
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF COT TRADING
Trading based on COT data requires psychological fortitude that differs from momentum-based approaches. Contrarian positioning signals inherently mean betting against prevailing market sentiment and recent price action. When commercials reach extreme bearish positioning, prices have typically been rising, sometimes for extended periods. The price chart looks bullish, momentum indicators confirm strength, moving averages align positively. The COT signal says bet against all of this. This psychological difficulty explains why COT analysis remains underutilized relative to trend-following methods.
Human psychology strongly predisposes us toward extrapolation and recency bias. When prices rally for months, our pattern-matching brains naturally expect continued rally. The recent price action dominates our perception, overwhelming rational analysis about positioning extremes and historical probabilities. The COT signal asking us to sell requires overriding these powerful psychological impulses.
The indicator design attempts to support the required psychological discipline through several features. Clear threshold markers and signal states reduce ambiguity about when signals trigger. When the commercial index crosses below twenty, the signal is explicit and unambiguous. The background shifts to red, the signal label displays bearish, and alerts fire. This explicitness helps traders act on signals rather than waiting for additional confirmation that may never arrive.
The metrics table provides analytical justification for contrarian positions, helping traders maintain conviction during inevitable periods of adverse price movement. When a trader enters short positions based on extreme commercial bearish positioning but prices continue rallying for several weeks, doubt naturally emerges. The table display provides reassurance. Commercial positioning remains extremely bearish. Divergence remains high. The positioning thesis remains intact even though price action has not yet confirmed.
Alert functionality ensures traders do not miss signals due to inattention while also not requiring constant monitoring that can lead to emotional decision-making. Setting alerts for COT extremes enables a healthier relationship with markets. When meaningful signals occur, alerts notify them. They can then calmly assess the situation and execute planned responses.
However, no indicator design can completely overcome the psychological difficulty of contrarian trading. Some traders simply cannot maintain short positions while prices rally. For these traders, COT analysis might be better employed as an exit signal for long positions rather than an entry signal for shorts.
Ultimately, successful COT trading requires developing comfort with probabilistic thinking rather than certainty-seeking. The signals work over many observations by identifying higher-probability configurations, not by generating perfect calls on individual trades. A fifty-five or sixty percent win rate with proper risk management produces substantial profits over years, yet still means forty to forty-five percent of signals will be premature or wrong. COT analysis provides genuine edge, but edge means probability advantage, not elimination of losing trades.
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES AND CONTINUOUS LEARNING
The indicator provides extensive built-in educational resources through its documentation, detailed tooltips, and transparent calculations. However, mastering COT analysis requires study beyond any single tool or resource. Several excellent resources provide valuable extensions of the concepts covered in this guide.
Books and practitioner-focused monographs offer accessible entry points. Stephen Briese published The Commitments of Traders Bible in two thousand eight, offering detailed breakdowns of how different markets and trader categories behave (Briese, 2008). Briese's work stands out for its empirical focus and market-specific insights. Jack Schwager includes discussion of COT analysis within the broader context of market behavior in his book Market Sense and Nonsense (Schwager, 2012). Perry Kaufman's Trading Systems and Methods represents perhaps the most rigorous practitioner-focused text on systematic trading approaches including COT analysis (Kaufman, 2013).
Academic journal articles provide the rigorous statistical foundation underlying COT analysis. The Journal of Futures Markets regularly publishes research on positioning data and its predictive properties. Bessembinder and Chan's earlier work on systematic risk, hedging pressure, and risk premiums in futures markets provides theoretical foundation (Bessembinder, 1992). Chang's examination of speculator returns provides historical context (Chang, 1985). Irwin and Sanders provide essential skeptical perspective in their two thousand twelve article (Irwin and Sanders, 2012). Wang's two thousand three article provides one of the most empirical analyses of COT data across multiple commodity markets (Wang, 2003).
Online resources extend beyond academic and book-length treatments. The CFTC website provides free access to current and historical COT reports in multiple formats. The explanatory materials section offers detailed documentation of report construction, category definitions, and historical methodology changes. Traders serious about COT analysis should read these official CFTC documents to understand exactly what they are analyzing.
Commercial COT data services such as Barchart provide enhanced visualization and analysis tools beyond raw CFTC data. TradingView's educational materials, published scripts library, and user community provide additional resources for exploring different approaches to COT analysis.
The key to mastering COT analysis lies not in finding a single definitive source but rather in building understanding through multiple perspectives and information sources. Academic research provides rigorous empirical foundation. Practitioner-focused books offer practical implementation insights. Direct engagement with data through systematic backtesting develops intuition about how positioning dynamics manifest across different market conditions.
SYNTHESIZING KNOWLEDGE INTO PRACTICE
The COT Index indicator represents the synthesis of academic research, trading experience, and software engineering into a practical tool accessible to retail traders equipped with nothing more than a TradingView account and willingness to learn. What once required expensive data subscriptions, custom programming capabilities, statistical software, and institutional resources now appears as a straightforward indicator requiring only basic parameter selection and modest study to understand. This democratization of institutional-grade analysis tools represents a broader trend in financial markets over recent decades.
Yet technology and data access alone provide no edge without understanding and discipline. Markets remain relentlessly efficient at eliminating edges that become too widely known and mechanically exploited. The COT Index indicator succeeds only when users invest time learning the underlying concepts, understand the limitations and probability distributions involved, and integrate signals thoughtfully into trading plans rather than applying them mechanically.
The academic research demonstrates conclusively that institutional positioning contains genuine information about future price movements, particularly at extremes where commercial hedgers are maximally bearish or bullish relative to historical norms. This informational content is neither perfect nor deterministic but rather probabilistic, providing edge over many observations through identification of higher-probability configurations. Bessembinder and Chan's finding that commercial positioning explained modest but significant variance in future returns illustrates this probabilistic nature perfectly (Bessembinder and Chan, 1992). The effect is real and statistically significant, yet it explains perhaps ten to fifteen percent of return variance rather than most variance. Much of price movement remains unpredictable even with positioning intelligence.
The practical implication is that COT analysis works best as one component of a trading system rather than a standalone oracle. It provides the positioning dimension, revealing where the smart money has positioned and where the crowd has followed, but price action analysis provides the timing dimension. Fundamental analysis provides the catalyst dimension. Risk management provides the survival dimension. These components work together synergistically.
The indicator's design philosophy prioritizes transparency and education over black-box complexity, empowering traders to understand exactly what they are analyzing and why. Every calculation is documented and user-adjustable. The threshold markers, background coloring, tables, and clear signal states provide multiple reinforcing channels for conveying the same information.
This educational approach reflects a conviction that sustainable trading success comes from genuine understanding rather than mechanical system-following. Traders who understand why commercial positioning matters, how different trader categories behave, what positioning extremes signify, and where signals fit within probability distributions can adapt when market conditions change. Traders mechanically following black-box signals without comprehension abandon systems after normal losing streaks.
The research foundation supporting COT analysis comes primarily from commodity markets where commercial hedger informational advantages are most pronounced. Agricultural producers hedging crops know more about supply conditions than distant speculators. Energy companies hedging production know more about operating costs than financial traders. Metals miners hedging output know more about ore grades than index funds. Financial futures markets show weaker but still present effects.
The journey from reading this documentation to profitable trading based on COT analysis involves several stages that cannot be rushed. Initial reading and basic understanding represents the first stage. Historical study represents the second stage, reviewing past market cycles to observe how positioning extremes preceded major turning points. Paper trading or small-size real trading represents the third stage to experience the psychological challenges. Refinement based on results and personal psychology represents the fourth stage.
Markets will continue evolving. New participant categories will emerge. Regulatory structures will change. Technology will advance. Yet the fundamental dynamics driving COT analysis, that different market participants have different information, different motivations, and different forecasting abilities that manifest in their positioning, will persist as long as futures markets exist. While specific thresholds or optimal parameters may shift over time, the core logic remains sound and adaptable.
The trader equipped with this indicator, understanding of the theory and evidence behind COT analysis, realistic expectations about probability rather than certainty, discipline to maintain positions through adverse volatility, and patience to allow signals time to develop possesses genuine edge in markets. The edge is not enormous, markets cannot allow large persistent inefficiencies without arbitraging them away, but it is real, measurable, and exploitable by those willing to invest in learning and disciplined application.
REFERENCES
Bessembinder, H. (1992) Systematic risk, hedging pressure, and risk premiums in futures markets, Review of Financial Studies, 5(4), pp. 637-667.
Bessembinder, H. and Chan, K. (1992) The profitability of technical trading rules in the Asian stock markets, Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 3(2-3), pp. 257-284.
Briese, S. (2008) The Commitments of Traders Bible: How to Profit from Insider Market Intelligence. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Chang, E.C. (1985) Returns to speculators and the theory of normal backwardation, Journal of Finance, 40(1), pp. 193-208.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) (2009) Explanatory Notes: Disaggregated Commitments of Traders Report. Available at: www.cftc.gov (Accessed: 15 January 2025).
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) (2020) Commitments of Traders: About the Report. Available at: www.cftc.gov (Accessed: 15 January 2025).
Irwin, S.H. and Sanders, D.R. (2012) Testing the Masters Hypothesis in commodity futures markets, Energy Economics, 34(1), pp. 256-269.
Kaufman, P.J. (2013) Trading Systems and Methods. 5th edn. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Ruan, Y. and Zhang, Y. (2018) Forecasting commodity futures prices using machine learning: Evidence from the Chinese commodity futures market, Applied Economics Letters, 25(12), pp. 845-849.
Sanders, D.R., Boris, K. and Manfredo, M. (2004) Hedgers, funds, and small speculators in the energy futures markets: an analysis of the CFTC's Commitments of Traders reports, Energy Economics, 26(3), pp. 425-445.
Schwager, J.D. (2012) Market Sense and Nonsense: How the Markets Really Work and How They Don't. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Tharp, V.K. (2008) Super Trader: Make Consistent Profits in Good and Bad Markets. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wang, C. (2003) The behavior and performance of major types of futures traders, Journal of Futures Markets, 23(1), pp. 1-31.
Williams, L.R. and Noseworthy, M. (2009) The Right Stock at the Right Time: Prospering in the Coming Good Years. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
FURTHER READING
For traders seeking to deepen their understanding of COT analysis and futures market positioning beyond this documentation, the following resources provide valuable extensions:
Academic Journal Articles:
Fishe, R.P.H. and Smith, A. (2012) Do speculators drive commodity prices away from supply and demand fundamentals?, Journal of Commodity Markets, 1(1), pp. 1-16.
Haigh, M.S., Hranaiova, J. and Overdahl, J.A. (2007) Hedge funds, volatility, and liquidity provision in energy futures markets, Journal of Alternative Investments, 9(4), pp. 10-38.
Kocagil, A.E. (1997) Does futures speculation stabilize spot prices? Evidence from metals markets, Applied Financial Economics, 7(1), pp. 115-125.
Sanders, D.R. and Irwin, S.H. (2011) The impact of index funds in commodity futures markets: A systems approach, Journal of Alternative Investments, 14(1), pp. 40-49.
Books and Practitioner Resources:
Murphy, J.J. (1999) Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets: A Guide to Trading Methods and Applications. New York: New York Institute of Finance.
Pring, M.J. (2002) Technical Analysis Explained: The Investor's Guide to Spotting Investment Trends and Turning Points. 4th edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Federal Reserve and Research Institution Publications:
Federal Reserve Banks regularly publish working papers examining commodity markets, futures positioning, and price discovery mechanisms. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City maintain active research programs in this area.
Online Resources:
The CFTC website provides free access to current and historical COT reports, explanatory materials, and regulatory documentation.
Barchart offers enhanced COT data visualization and screening tools.
TradingView's community library contains numerous published scripts and educational materials exploring different approaches to positioning analysis.
Swing AURORA v4.0 — Refined Trend Signals### Swing Algo v4.0 — Refined Trend Signals
#### Overview
Swing Algo v4.0 is an advanced technical indicator designed for TradingView, built to detect trend changes and provide actionable buy/sell signals in various market conditions. It combines multiple technical elements like moving averages, ADX for trend strength, Stochastic RSI for timing, and RSI divergence for confirmation, all while adapting to different timeframes through auto-tuning. This indicator overlays on your chart, highlighting trend regimes with background colors, displaying buy/sell labels (including "strong" variants), and offering early "potential" signals for proactive trading decisions. It's suitable for swing trading, trend following, or as a filter for other strategies across forex, stocks, crypto, and other assets.
#### Purpose
The primary goal of Swing Algo v4.0 is to help traders identify high-probability trend reversals and continuations early, reducing noise and false signals. It aims to provide clear, non-repainting signals that align with market structure, volatility, and momentum. By incorporating filters like higher timeframe (HTF) alignment, bias EMAs, and divergence, it refines entries for better accuracy. The indicator emphasizes balanced performance across aggressive, balanced, and conservative modes, making it versatile for both novice and experienced traders seeking to optimize their decision-making process.
#### What It Indicates
- **Trend Regimes (Background Coloring)**: The chart background changes color to reflect the current market regime:
- **Green (Intense for strong uptrends, faded when cooling)**: Indicates bullish trends where price is above the baseline and EMAs are aligned upward.
- **Red/Maroon (Intense maroon for strong downtrends, faded red when cooling)**: Signals bearish trends with price below the baseline and downward EMA alignment.
- **Faded Yellow**: Marks "no-trade" zones or potential trend changes, where conditions are choppy, weak, or neutral (e.g., low ADX, near baseline, or low volatility).
- **Buy/Sell Signals**: Labels appear on the chart for confirmed entries:
- "BUY" or "STRONG BUY" for bullish signals (strong variants require higher scores and optional divergence).
- "SELL" or "STRONG SELL" for bearish signals.
- **Potential Signals**: Early warnings like "Potential BUY" or "Potential SELL" appear before full confirmation, allowing traders to anticipate moves (confirmed after a few bars based on the trigger window).
- **Divergence Marks**: Small "DIV↑" (bullish) or "DIV↓" (bearish) labels highlight RSI divergences on pivots, adding confluence for strong signals.
- **Lines**: Optional plots for baseline (teal), EMA13/21 (lime/red based on crossover), providing visual trend context.
Signals are anchored either to the current bar or confirmed pivots, ensuring alignment with price action. The indicator avoids repainting by confirming on close if enabled.
#### Key Parameters and Customization
Swing Algo v4.0 offers minimal yet efficient parameters for fine-tuning, with defaults optimized for common use cases. Most can be auto-tuned based on timeframe for simplicity:
- **Confirm on Close (no repaint)**: Boolean (default: true) – Ensures signals don't repaint by waiting for bar confirmation.
- **Auto-tune by Timeframe**: Boolean (default: true) – Automatically adjusts lengths and sensitivity for 5-15m, 30-60m, 2-4h, or higher frames.
- **Mode**: String (options: Aggressive, Balanced , Conservative) – Controls signal thresholds; Aggressive for more signals, Conservative for fewer but higher-quality ones.
- **Signal Anchor**: String (options: Pivot (divLB) , Current bar) – Places labels on confirmed pivots or the current bar.
- **Trigger Window (bars)**: Integer (default: 3) – Window for signal timing; auto-tuned if enabled.
- **Baseline Type**: String (options: HMA , EMA, ALMA) – Core trend line; lengths auto-tune (e.g., 55 for short frames).
- **Use Bias EMA Filter**: Boolean (default: false) – Adds a long-term EMA for trend bias.
- **Use HTF Filter**: Boolean (default: false) – Aligns with higher timeframe (auto or manual like 60m, 240m, D); override for stricter scoring.
- **Sensitivity (10–90)**: Integer (default: 55) – Adjusts ADX threshold for trend detection; higher = more sensitive.
- **Use RSI-Stoch Trigger**: Boolean (default: true) – Enables Stochastic RSI for entry timing; customizable lengths, smooths, and levels.
- **Use RSI Divergence for STRONG**: Boolean (default: true) – Requires divergence for strong signals; pivot lookback (default: 5).
- **Visual Options**: Booleans for background regime, labels, divergence marks, and lines (all default: true).
These parameters are grouped for ease, with tooltips in TradingView for quick reference. Start with defaults and tweak based on backtesting.
#### How It Works
At its core, Swing Algo v4.0 calculates a baseline (e.g., HMA) to define the trend direction. It then scores potential buys/sells using factors like:
- **Trend Strength**: ADX above a dynamic threshold, combined with EMA crossovers (13/21) and slope analysis.
- **Volatility/Volume**: Bollinger/Keltner squeeze exits, volume z-score, and ATR filters to avoid choppy markets.
- **Timing**: Stochastic RSI crossovers or micro-timing via DEMA/TEMA for precise entries.
- **Filters**: Bias EMA, HTF alignment, gap from baseline, and no-trade zones (weak ADX, near baseline, low vol).
- **Divergence**: RSI pivots confirm strong signals.
- **Scoring**: Buy/sell scores (min 3-5 based on mode) trigger labels only when all gates pass, with early "potential" detection for foresight.
The algorithm processes these in real-time, auto-adapting to timeframe for efficiency. Signals flip only on direction changes to prevent over-trading. For best results, use on liquid assets and combine with risk management.
#### Disclaimer
This indicator is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice, investment recommendations, or trading signals. Trading involves significant risk of loss and is not suitable for all investors. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Always backtest the indicator on your preferred assets and timeframes, and consult a qualified financial advisor before making any trading decisions. The author assumes no liability for any losses incurred from using this script. Use at your own risk.
Volume Rate of Change (VROC)# Volume Rate of Change (VROC)
**What it is:** VROC measures the rate of change in trading volume over a specified period, typically expressed as a percentage. Formula: `((Current Volume - Volume n periods ago) / Volume n periods ago) × 100`
## **Obvious Uses**
**1. Confirming Price Trends**
- Rising VROC with rising prices = strong bullish trend
- Rising VROC with falling prices = strong bearish trend
- Validates that price movements have conviction behind them
**2. Spotting Divergences**
- Price makes new highs but VROC doesn't = weakening momentum
- Price makes new lows but VROC doesn't = potential reversal
**3. Identifying Breakouts**
- Sudden VROC spikes often accompany legitimate breakouts from consolidation patterns
- Helps distinguish real breakouts from false ones
**4. Overbought/Oversold Conditions**
- Extreme VROC readings (very high or very low) suggest exhaustion
- Mean reversion opportunities when volume extremes occur
---
## **Non-Obvious Uses**
**1. Smart Money vs. Dumb Money Detection**
- Declining VROC during price rallies may indicate retail FOMO while institutions distribute
- Rising VROC during selloffs with price stability suggests institutional accumulation
**2. News Impact Measurement**
- Compare VROC before/after earnings or announcements
- Low VROC on "significant" news = market doesn't care (fade the move)
- High VROC = genuine market reaction (respect the move)
**3. Market Regime Changes**
- Persistent shifts in average VROC levels can signal transitions between bull/bear markets
- Declining baseline VROC over months = waning market participation/topping process
**4. Intraday Liquidity Profiling**
- VROC patterns across trading sessions identify best execution times
- Avoid trading when VROC is abnormally low (wider spreads, poor fills)
**5. Sector Rotation Analysis**
- Compare VROC across sector ETFs to identify where capital is flowing
- Rising VROC in defensive sectors + falling VROC in cyclicals = risk-off rotation
**6. Options Expiration Effects**
- VROC typically drops significantly post-options expiration
- Helps avoid false signals from mechanically-driven volume changes
**7. Algorithmic Activity Detection**
- Unusual VROC patterns (regular spikes at specific times) may indicate algo programs
- Can front-run or avoid periods of heavy algorithmic interference
**8. Liquidity Crisis Early Warning**
- Sharp, sustained VROC decline across multiple assets = liquidity withdrawal
- Can precede market stress events before price volatility emerges
**9. Cryptocurrency Wash Trading Detection**
- Comparing VROC across exchanges for same asset
- Discrepancies suggest artificial volume on certain platforms
**10. Pair Trading Optimization**
- Use relative VROC between correlated pairs
- Enter when VROC divergence is extreme, exit when it normalizes
The key to advanced VROC usage is context: combining it with price action, market structure, and other indicators rather than using it in isolation.
Candle Opens by HAZED🎯 Candle Opens by HAZED - Multi-Timeframe Open Levels Indicator
📊 Overview
This powerful indicator displays multiple timeframe opening prices on your chart, providing crucial reference levels that institutional traders and algorithms frequently monitor. Track up to 7 different timeframe opens simultaneously, from 1-hour to yearly, with advanced visualization features including dynamic coloring, heatmap analysis, and real-time status tracking.
✨ Key Features
📈 Multi-Timeframe Support:
- 1H, 4H, Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, and Yearly opens
- Each timeframe can be individually enabled/disabled
- Automatic visibility adjustment based on chart timeframe
🎨 Dynamic Visual System:
- Smart Color Coding: Lines automatically change color based on price position (green above, red below)
- Customizable Styling: Adjust line thickness, transparency, and colors
- Intelligent Line Positioning: Choose between equal-length or staggered lines for better visibility
- Enhanced Labels: Display timeframe only or include price with colored background
🌈 Advanced Heatmap:
- Background coloring shows overall market sentiment across all timeframes
- Gradient or solid color modes
- Instantly see when multiple timeframes align bullish or bearish
📊 Status Table Dashboard:
- Real-time overview of all active opens
- Shows current price position relative to each open
- Simplified view when all timeframes align
- Customizable position and font style
⚙️ Professional Tools:
- Alert system for new open levels
- Extended hours session support
- Price discovery mode for EOD/intraday discrepancies
- Left/right line extensions for enhanced visibility
💡 Trading Applications
Support & Resistance:
Opening prices act as natural support/resistance levels. Price often reacts at these levels, providing entry/exit opportunities.
Trend Confirmation:
When price is above multiple opens (especially higher timeframes), it confirms bullish momentum. The opposite indicates bearish pressure.
Mean Reversion:
Price tends to revert to significant opens, particularly daily and weekly levels. Use these as targets for counter-trend trades.
Breakout Trading:
Monitor when price breaks above/below clustered opens for potential continuation moves.
Risk Management:
Use opens as logical stop-loss levels or position sizing references based on distance from key opens.
🔧 Indicator Settings
Timeframes Section:
- Toggle each timeframe on/off
- Customize individual colors
Visual Style Section:
- Dynamic Colors: Auto-color based on price position
- Line Thickness: 1-4 pixels
- Transparency: 0-80%
- Extension Length: How far lines extend right
- Label Style: Plain or enhanced with price
Heatmap Section:
- Enable/disable background coloring
- Adjust transparency
- Choose gradient or solid zones
Status Table Section:
- Position on chart
- Font selection
Advanced Section:
- Enable alerts for new opens
- Price discovery mode
- Extended hours inclusion
]📈 Best Practices
1. Timeframe Selection:
- For intraday: Focus on 1H, 4H, and Daily
- For swing trading: Daily, Weekly, Monthly
- For position trading: Monthly, Quarterly, Yearly
2. Color Coding:
- Enable dynamic colors for instant sentiment reading
- Use heatmap for overall market bias
3. Confluence Zones:
- Pay special attention when multiple opens cluster
- These zones often produce stronger reactions
4. Alignment Signals:
- When all timeframes show same color = strong trend
- Mixed colors = potential consolidation or reversal zone
🎯 Pro Tips
- Volume Confirmation: Combine with volume indicators to confirm reactions at open levels
- Multiple Instruments: Compare opens across correlated assets for divergences
- News Events: Opens often act as magnets after major news releases
- Options Trading: Weekly and monthly opens align with options expiry levels
- Algorithmic Levels: Many algorithms use these opens for entries/exits
🔄 Updates in Version 8.3
- Added 1H and 4H timeframe support
- Enhanced dynamic color system
- Implemented heatmap visualization
- Added real-time status table
- Optimized performance for smoother operation
- Improved label styling options
- Better yearly timeframe detection
⚡ Performance Optimizations
This indicator uses advanced Pine Script v6 features for optimal performance:
- Efficient object reuse instead of recreation
- Smart calculation loops
- Minimal repainting
- Optimized for real-time updates
📝 Notes
- Works on all markets (stocks, forex, crypto, futures)
- Best on timeframes lower than the opens you're tracking
- Lines automatically hide when their timeframe is lower than chart timeframe
- Past opens are not displayed (indicator shows current opens only)
🙏 Credits & Support
Created by HAZED | Version 8.3
Optimized for TradingView Pine Script v6
For questions, suggestions, or bug reports, please comment below.
If you find this indicator useful, please consider leaving a like and a follow!
Remember: No indicator is perfect. Always use proper risk management and combine multiple confirmation signals in your trading decisions.
CNagda-MomentumX - Institutional FlowMomentumX is designed to empower traders with a deeper understanding of market movements by focusing on Institutional Flow and advanced market structure analytics. The core goal is to identify and visualize where major market participants are operating, and to translate these complex footprints into clear, actionable trading signals — all in real time.
Real-time institutional activity mapping
Actionable entry and exit signals based on live market structure
Intuitive dashboard and dynamic chart visuals
Fully customizable modules for trend, liquidity, and order blocks
Core Logic Design
At the heart of MomentumX lies a robust algorithmic engine built to capture and surface institutional trading behavior. By leveraging advanced mathematical models, the indicator calculates institutional volume ratios and price momentum to pinpoint aggressive moves from large participants.
Institutional Volume & Price Momentum:
Utilizes custom volume indicators and price change analysis to detect strong buying or selling pressure, filtering out retail noise.
Liquidity Grab Detection & Activity Zones:
The script identifies liquidity grabs by monitoring abrupt price sweeps at major support/resistance levels—often where institutions trigger stop hunts or reversals. All critical activity zones are automatically color-coded on the chart for instant recognition.
Dashboard Visualization:
A fully dynamic dashboard table overlays live scores for accumulation, distribution, strength, and weakness—giving traders a real-time scan of market health.
Trendline & Order Block Architecture:
The logic auto-detects pivot highs/lows to draw smart trendlines, while the order block system highlights key reversal areas and breaker zones—making market structure clear and actionable.
MomentumX is packed with high-performance modules, each engineered to simplify complex market behavior and enhance decision-making for traders:
Institutional Flow Signals:
Instantly identifies spots where institutional players drive momentum, using unique volume and price activity analytics.
Bullish/Bearish Liquidity Grab Detection:
Marks abrupt price moves that signal stop hunts or reversals, letting traders anticipate snap-backs or trend shifts.
Trendline Auto-Detection:
Smartly draws trendlines based on significant swing highs and lows, automatically adjusting as price evolves.
Order Block System (Rejection/Breaker):
Spots and highlights key reversal zones with order block rectangles, confirming rejections or breakouts at strategic levels.
Dashboard and Bar Coloring:
A clean dashboard overlay presents live market scores, while dynamic bar coloring makes trend, strength, and high-activity periods instantly visible.
User Input Toggles for Each Module:
Every major feature is fully customizable—enable or disable modules to match individual trading setups or preferences.
Scripting/Development
MomentumX’s scripting process is modular, enabling clarity, scalability, and fast optimization throughout development:
Initialization & Inputs:
Start by defining all user input options, module toggles, color settings, and calculation parameters—ensuring maximum flexibility early on.
Core Calculation Functions:
Script advanced institutional volume and price momentum algorithms. Build out swing length logic, market state filters, and activity scoring methods.
Detection Engines:
Develop and integrate engines for liquidity grabs, automated trendline detection, and order block identification—each with dedicated functions for speed and precision.
Visual Overlays & Plotting:
Implement powerful plotting logic for colored bars, score dashboards, trendlines, reversal zones, and liquidity markers—making every data point clear and actionable on the chart.
Testing Handlers:
Add diagnostic panels and debug outputs to refine calculations and assure accuracy in every market environment.
Sample Trade Setups (Usage)
Cnagda MomentumX delivers clarity for multiple trading styles by providing timely, actionable setups grounded in institutional behavior and market structure. Here’s how traders can leverage the indicator for confident decision-making:
Liquidity Grab Reversal
Enter trades around detected liquidity grabs when price sweeps major support/resistance and the dashboard signals a momentum shift.
Example: Wait for a bullish/Bearish grab near market lows/high, with institutional flow turning positive/negative—enter long/short for potential mean reversion.
Order Block Breakout
Trade breakouts when price cleanly rejects or flips key order block zones highlighted on the chart.
Example: Short at a marked breaker block after a rejection signal, confirmed by a downward institutional activity spike.
Trendline Continuation
Ride established market moves by entering on trendline confirmations plotted by the auto-detect system.
Example: Go long after a trendline retest, confirmed by a green bar color and dashboard strength score.
Dashboard Confirmation
Combine dashboard metrics (strength, accumulation, distribution) with bar color overlays for multi-factor entries.
Example: Enter trades only when all market signals align in real time for maximum probability.
For Short Entry check -- Weakness : For Long Entry Check - Strength With Other Indications
MomentumX is not just another indicator – it’s your edge for reading the market like an insider. By transparently mapping institutional flow, uncovering hidden liquidity zones, and color-coding every major structure shift, MomentumX transforms complexity into actionable clarity. Whether you’re scalping, swing trading, or investing, you’ll gain a decisive, real-time advantage on every chart.
Embrace smarter decisions, adapt to changing market conditions instantly, and join a new generation of technically empowered traders.
Customize, observe, and let the market reveal opportunities in a way you’ve never experienced before.
Happy Trading
BOCS Channel Scalper Indicator - Mean Reversion Alert System# BOCS Channel Scalper Indicator - Mean Reversion Alert System
## WHAT THIS INDICATOR DOES:
This is a mean reversion trading indicator that identifies consolidation channels through volatility analysis and generates alert signals when price enters entry zones near channel boundaries. **This indicator version is designed for manual trading with comprehensive alert functionality.** Unlike automated strategies, this tool sends notifications (via popup, email, SMS, or webhook) when trading opportunities occur, allowing you to manually review and execute trades. The system assumes price will revert to the channel mean, identifying scalp opportunities as price reaches extremes and preparing to bounce back toward center.
## INDICATOR VS STRATEGY - KEY DISTINCTION:
**This is an INDICATOR with alerts, not an automated strategy.** It does not execute trades automatically. Instead, it:
- Displays visual signals on your chart when entry conditions are met
- Sends customizable alerts to your device/email when opportunities arise
- Shows TP/SL levels for reference but does not place orders
- Requires you to manually enter and exit positions based on signals
- Works with all TradingView subscription levels (alerts included on all plans)
**For automated trading with backtesting**, use the strategy version. For manual control with notifications, use this indicator version.
## ALERT CAPABILITIES:
This indicator includes four distinct alert conditions that can be configured independently:
**1. New Channel Formation Alert**
- Triggers when a fresh BOCS channel is identified
- Message: "New BOCS channel formed - potential scalp setup ready"
- Use this to prepare for upcoming trading opportunities
**2. Long Scalp Entry Alert**
- Fires when price touches the long entry zone
- Message includes current price, calculated TP, and SL levels
- Notification example: "LONG scalp signal at 24731.75 | TP: 24743.2 | SL: 24716.5"
**3. Short Scalp Entry Alert**
- Fires when price touches the short entry zone
- Message includes current price, calculated TP, and SL levels
- Notification example: "SHORT scalp signal at 24747.50 | TP: 24735.0 | SL: 24762.75"
**4. Any Entry Signal Alert**
- Combined alert for both long and short entries
- Use this if you want a single alert stream for all opportunities
- Message: "BOCS Scalp Entry: at "
**Setting Up Alerts:**
1. Add indicator to chart and configure settings
2. Click the Alert (⏰) button in TradingView toolbar
3. Select "BOCS Channel Scalper" from condition dropdown
4. Choose desired alert type (Long, Short, Any, or Channel Formation)
5. Set "Once Per Bar Close" to avoid false signals during bar formation
6. Configure delivery method (popup, email, webhook for automation platforms)
7. Save alert - it will fire automatically when conditions are met
**Alert Message Placeholders:**
Alerts use TradingView's dynamic placeholder system:
- {{ticker}} = Symbol name (e.g., NQ1!)
- {{close}} = Current price at signal
- {{plot_1}} = Calculated take profit level
- {{plot_2}} = Calculated stop loss level
These placeholders populate automatically, creating detailed notification messages without manual configuration.
## KEY DIFFERENCE FROM ORIGINAL BOCS:
**This indicator is designed for traders seeking higher trade frequency.** The original BOCS indicator trades breakouts OUTSIDE channels, waiting for price to escape consolidation before entering. This scalper version trades mean reversion INSIDE channels, entering when price reaches channel extremes and betting on a bounce back to center. The result is significantly more trading opportunities:
- **Original BOCS**: 1-3 signals per channel (only on breakout)
- **Scalper Indicator**: 5-15+ signals per channel (every touch of entry zones)
- **Trade Style**: Mean reversion vs trend following
- **Hold Time**: Seconds to minutes vs minutes to hours
- **Best Markets**: Ranging/choppy conditions vs trending breakouts
This makes the indicator ideal for active day traders who want continuous alert opportunities within consolidation zones rather than waiting for breakout confirmation. However, increased signal frequency also means higher potential commission costs and requires disciplined trade selection when acting on alerts.
## TECHNICAL METHODOLOGY:
### Price Normalization Process:
The indicator normalizes price data to create consistent volatility measurements across different instruments and price levels. It calculates the highest high and lowest low over a user-defined lookback period (default 100 bars). Current close price is normalized using: (close - lowest_low) / (highest_high - lowest_low), producing values between 0 and 1 for standardized volatility analysis.
### Volatility Detection:
A 14-period standard deviation is applied to the normalized price series to measure price deviation from the mean. Higher standard deviation values indicate volatility expansion; lower values indicate consolidation. The indicator uses ta.highestbars() and ta.lowestbars() to identify when volatility peaks and troughs occur over the detection period (default 14 bars).
### Channel Formation Logic:
When volatility crosses from a high level to a low level (ta.crossover(upper, lower)), a consolidation phase begins. The indicator tracks the highest and lowest prices during this period, which become the channel boundaries. Minimum duration of 10+ bars is required to filter out brief volatility spikes. Channels are rendered as box objects with defined upper and lower boundaries, with colored zones indicating entry areas.
### Entry Signal Generation:
The indicator uses immediate touch-based entry logic. Entry zones are defined as a percentage from channel edges (default 20%):
- **Long Entry Zone**: Bottom 20% of channel (bottomBound + channelRange × 0.2)
- **Short Entry Zone**: Top 20% of channel (topBound - channelRange × 0.2)
Long signals trigger when candle low touches or enters the long entry zone. Short signals trigger when candle high touches or enters the short entry zone. Visual markers (arrows and labels) appear on chart, and configured alerts fire immediately.
### Cooldown Filter:
An optional cooldown period (measured in bars) prevents alert spam by enforcing minimum spacing between consecutive signals. If cooldown is set to 3 bars, no new long alert will fire until 3 bars after the previous long signal. Long and short cooldowns are tracked independently, allowing both directions to signal within the same period.
### ATR Volatility Filter:
The indicator includes a multi-timeframe ATR filter to avoid alerts during low-volatility conditions. Using request.security(), it fetches ATR values from a specified timeframe (e.g., 1-minute ATR while viewing 5-minute charts). The filter compares current ATR to a user-defined minimum threshold:
- If ATR ≥ threshold: Alerts enabled
- If ATR < threshold: No alerts fire
This prevents notifications during dead zones where mean reversion is unreliable due to insufficient price movement. The ATR status is displayed in the info table with visual confirmation (✓ or ✗).
### Take Profit Calculation:
Two TP methods are available:
**Fixed Points Mode**:
- Long TP = Entry + (TP_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
- Short TP = Entry - (TP_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
**Channel Percentage Mode**:
- Long TP = Entry + (ChannelRange × TP_Percent)
- Short TP = Entry - (ChannelRange × TP_Percent)
Default 50% targets the channel midline, a natural mean reversion target. These levels are displayed as visual lines with labels and included in alert messages for reference when manually placing orders.
### Stop Loss Placement:
Stop losses are calculated just outside the channel boundary by a user-defined tick offset:
- Long SL = ChannelBottom - (SL_Offset_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
- Short SL = ChannelTop + (SL_Offset_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
This logic assumes channel breaks invalidate the mean reversion thesis. SL levels are displayed on chart and included in alert notifications as suggested stop placement.
### Channel Breakout Management:
Channels are removed when price closes more than 10 ticks outside boundaries. This tolerance prevents premature channel deletion from minor breaks or wicks, allowing the mean reversion setup to persist through small boundary violations.
## INPUT PARAMETERS:
### Channel Settings:
- **Nested Channels**: Allow multiple overlapping channels vs single channel
- **Normalization Length**: Lookback for high/low calculation (1-500, default 100)
- **Box Detection Length**: Period for volatility detection (1-100, default 14)
### Scalping Settings:
- **Enable Long Scalps**: Toggle long alert generation on/off
- **Enable Short Scalps**: Toggle short alert generation on/off
- **Entry Zone % from Edge**: Size of entry zone (5-50%, default 20%)
- **SL Offset (Ticks)**: Distance beyond channel for stop (1+, default 5)
- **Cooldown Period (Bars)**: Minimum spacing between alerts (0 = no cooldown)
### ATR Filter:
- **Enable ATR Filter**: Toggle volatility filter on/off
- **ATR Timeframe**: Source timeframe for ATR (1, 5, 15, 60 min, etc.)
- **ATR Length**: Smoothing period (1-100, default 14)
- **Min ATR Value**: Threshold for alert enablement (0.1+, default 10.0)
### Take Profit Settings:
- **TP Method**: Choose Fixed Points or % of Channel
- **TP Fixed (Ticks)**: Static distance in ticks (1+, default 30)
- **TP % of Channel**: Dynamic target as channel percentage (10-100%, default 50%)
### Appearance:
- **Show Entry Zones**: Toggle zone labels on channels
- **Show Info Table**: Display real-time indicator status
- **Table Position**: Corner placement (Top Left/Right, Bottom Left/Right)
- **Long Color**: Customize long signal color (default: darker green for readability)
- **Short Color**: Customize short signal color (default: red)
- **TP/SL Colors**: Customize take profit and stop loss line colors
- **Line Length**: Visual length of TP/SL reference lines (5-200 bars)
## VISUAL INDICATORS:
- **Channel boxes** with semi-transparent fill showing consolidation zones
- **Colored entry zones** labeled "LONG ZONE ▲" and "SHORT ZONE ▼"
- **Entry signal arrows** below/above bars marking long/short alerts
- **TP/SL reference lines** with emoji labels (⊕ Entry, 🎯 TP, 🛑 SL)
- **Info table** showing channel status, last signal, entry/TP/SL prices, risk/reward ratio, and ATR filter status
- **Visual confirmation** when alerts fire via on-chart markers synchronized with notifications
## HOW TO USE:
### For 1-3 Minute Scalping with Alerts (NQ/ES):
- ATR Timeframe: "1" (1-minute)
- ATR Min Value: 10.0 (for NQ), adjust per instrument
- Entry Zone %: 20-25%
- TP Method: Fixed Points, 20-40 ticks
- SL Offset: 5-10 ticks
- Cooldown: 2-3 bars to reduce alert spam
- **Alert Setup**: Configure "Any Entry Signal" for combined long/short notifications
- **Execution**: When alert fires, verify chart visuals, then manually place limit order at entry zone with provided TP/SL levels
### For 5-15 Minute Day Trading with Alerts:
- ATR Timeframe: "5" or match chart
- ATR Min Value: Adjust to instrument (test 8-15 for NQ)
- Entry Zone %: 20-30%
- TP Method: % of Channel, 40-60%
- SL Offset: 5-10 ticks
- Cooldown: 3-5 bars
- **Alert Setup**: Configure separate "Long Scalp Entry" and "Short Scalp Entry" alerts if you trade directionally based on bias
- **Execution**: Review channel structure on alert, confirm ATR filter shows ✓, then enter manually
### For 30-60 Minute Swing Scalping with Alerts:
- ATR Timeframe: "15" or "30"
- ATR Min Value: Lower threshold for broader market
- Entry Zone %: 25-35%
- TP Method: % of Channel, 50-70%
- SL Offset: 10-15 ticks
- Cooldown: 5+ bars or disable
- **Alert Setup**: Use "New Channel Formation" to prepare for setups, then "Any Entry Signal" for execution alerts
- **Execution**: Larger timeframes allow more analysis time between alert and entry
### Webhook Integration for Semi-Automation:
- Configure alert webhook URL to connect with platforms like TradersPost, TradingView Paper Trading, or custom automation
- Alert message includes all necessary order parameters (direction, entry, TP, SL)
- Webhook receives structured data when signal fires
- External platform can auto-execute based on alert payload
- Still maintains manual oversight vs full strategy automation
## USAGE CONSIDERATIONS:
- **Manual Discipline Required**: Alerts provide opportunities but execution requires judgment. Not all alerts should be taken - consider market context, trend, and channel quality
- **Alert Timing**: Alerts fire on bar close by default. Ensure "Once Per Bar Close" is selected to avoid false signals during bar formation
- **Notification Delivery**: Mobile/email alerts may have 1-3 second delay. For immediate execution, use desktop popups or webhook automation
- **Cooldown Necessity**: Without cooldown, rapidly touching price action can generate excessive alerts. Start with 3-bar cooldown and adjust based on alert volume
- **ATR Filter Impact**: Enabling ATR filter dramatically reduces alert count but improves quality. Track filter status in info table to understand when you're receiving fewer alerts
- **Commission Awareness**: High alert frequency means high potential trade count. Calculate if your commission structure supports frequent scalping before acting on all alerts
## COMPATIBLE MARKETS:
Works on any instrument with price data including stock indices (NQ, ES, YM, RTY), individual stocks, forex pairs (EUR/USD, GBP/USD), cryptocurrency (BTC, ETH), and commodities. Volume-based features are not included in this indicator version. Multi-timeframe ATR requires higher-tier TradingView subscription for request.security() functionality on timeframes below chart timeframe.
## KNOWN LIMITATIONS:
- **Indicator does not execute trades** - alerts are informational only; you must manually place all orders
- **Alert delivery depends on TradingView infrastructure** - delays or failures possible during platform issues
- **No position tracking** - indicator doesn't know if you're in a trade; you must manage open positions independently
- **TP/SL levels are reference only** - you must manually set these on your broker platform; they are not live orders
- **Immediate touch entry can generate many alerts** in choppy zones without adequate cooldown
- **Channel deletion at 10-tick breaks** may be too aggressive or lenient depending on instrument tick size
- **ATR filter from lower timeframes** requires TradingView Premium/Pro+ for request.security()
- **Mean reversion logic fails** in strong breakout scenarios - alerts will fire but trades may hit stops
- **No partial closing capability** - full position management is manual; you determine scaling out
- **Alerts do not account for gaps** or overnight price changes; morning alerts may be stale
## RISK DISCLOSURE:
Trading involves substantial risk of loss. This indicator provides signals for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Mean reversion strategies can experience extended drawdowns during trending markets. Alerts are not guaranteed to be profitable and should be combined with your own analysis. Stop losses may not fill at intended levels during extreme volatility or gaps. Never trade with capital you cannot afford to lose. Consider consulting a licensed financial advisor before making trading decisions. Always verify alerts against current market conditions before executing trades manually.
## ACKNOWLEDGMENT & CREDITS:
This indicator is built upon the channel detection methodology created by **AlgoAlpha** in the "Smart Money Breakout Channels" indicator. Full credit and appreciation to AlgoAlpha for pioneering the normalized volatility approach to identifying consolidation patterns. The core channel formation logic using normalized price standard deviation is AlgoAlpha's original contribution to the TradingView community.
Enhancements to the original concept include: mean reversion entry logic (vs breakout), immediate touch-based alert generation, comprehensive alert condition system with customizable notifications, multi-timeframe ATR volatility filtering, cooldown period for alert management, dual TP methods (fixed points vs channel percentage), visual TP/SL reference lines, and real-time status monitoring table. This indicator version is specifically designed for manual traders who prefer alert-based decision making over automated execution.
BOCS Channel Scalper Strategy - Automated Mean Reversion System# BOCS Channel Scalper Strategy - Automated Mean Reversion System
## WHAT THIS STRATEGY DOES:
This is an automated mean reversion trading strategy that identifies consolidation channels through volatility analysis and executes scalp trades when price enters entry zones near channel boundaries. Unlike breakout strategies, this system assumes price will revert to the channel mean, taking profits as price bounces back from extremes. Position sizing is fully customizable with three methods: fixed contracts, percentage of equity, or fixed dollar amount. Stop losses are placed just outside channel boundaries with take profits calculated either as fixed points or as a percentage of channel range.
## KEY DIFFERENCE FROM ORIGINAL BOCS:
**This strategy is designed for traders seeking higher trade frequency.** The original BOCS indicator trades breakouts OUTSIDE channels, waiting for price to escape consolidation before entering. This scalper version trades mean reversion INSIDE channels, entering when price reaches channel extremes and betting on a bounce back to center. The result is significantly more trading opportunities:
- **Original BOCS**: 1-3 signals per channel (only on breakout)
- **Scalper Version**: 5-15+ signals per channel (every touch of entry zones)
- **Trade Style**: Mean reversion vs trend following
- **Hold Time**: Seconds to minutes vs minutes to hours
- **Best Markets**: Ranging/choppy conditions vs trending breakouts
This makes the scalper ideal for active day traders who want continuous opportunities within consolidation zones rather than waiting for breakout confirmation. However, increased trade frequency also means higher commission costs and requires tighter risk management.
## TECHNICAL METHODOLOGY:
### Price Normalization Process:
The strategy normalizes price data to create consistent volatility measurements across different instruments and price levels. It calculates the highest high and lowest low over a user-defined lookback period (default 100 bars). Current close price is normalized using: (close - lowest_low) / (highest_high - lowest_low), producing values between 0 and 1 for standardized volatility analysis.
### Volatility Detection:
A 14-period standard deviation is applied to the normalized price series to measure price deviation from the mean. Higher standard deviation values indicate volatility expansion; lower values indicate consolidation. The strategy uses ta.highestbars() and ta.lowestbars() to identify when volatility peaks and troughs occur over the detection period (default 14 bars).
### Channel Formation Logic:
When volatility crosses from a high level to a low level (ta.crossover(upper, lower)), a consolidation phase begins. The strategy tracks the highest and lowest prices during this period, which become the channel boundaries. Minimum duration of 10+ bars is required to filter out brief volatility spikes. Channels are rendered as box objects with defined upper and lower boundaries, with colored zones indicating entry areas.
### Entry Signal Generation:
The strategy uses immediate touch-based entry logic. Entry zones are defined as a percentage from channel edges (default 20%):
- **Long Entry Zone**: Bottom 20% of channel (bottomBound + channelRange × 0.2)
- **Short Entry Zone**: Top 20% of channel (topBound - channelRange × 0.2)
Long signals trigger when candle low touches or enters the long entry zone. Short signals trigger when candle high touches or enters the short entry zone. This captures mean reversion opportunities as price reaches channel extremes.
### Cooldown Filter:
An optional cooldown period (measured in bars) prevents signal spam by enforcing minimum spacing between consecutive signals. If cooldown is set to 3 bars, no new long signal will fire until 3 bars after the previous long signal. Long and short cooldowns are tracked independently, allowing both directions to signal within the same period.
### ATR Volatility Filter:
The strategy includes a multi-timeframe ATR filter to avoid trading during low-volatility conditions. Using request.security(), it fetches ATR values from a specified timeframe (e.g., 1-minute ATR while trading on 5-minute charts). The filter compares current ATR to a user-defined minimum threshold:
- If ATR ≥ threshold: Trading enabled
- If ATR < threshold: No signals fire
This prevents entries during dead zones where mean reversion is unreliable due to insufficient price movement.
### Take Profit Calculation:
Two TP methods are available:
**Fixed Points Mode**:
- Long TP = Entry + (TP_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
- Short TP = Entry - (TP_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
**Channel Percentage Mode**:
- Long TP = Entry + (ChannelRange × TP_Percent)
- Short TP = Entry - (ChannelRange × TP_Percent)
Default 50% targets the channel midline, a natural mean reversion target. Larger percentages aim for opposite channel edge.
### Stop Loss Placement:
Stop losses are placed just outside the channel boundary by a user-defined tick offset:
- Long SL = ChannelBottom - (SL_Offset_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
- Short SL = ChannelTop + (SL_Offset_Ticks × syminfo.mintick)
This logic assumes channel breaks invalidate the mean reversion thesis. If price breaks through, the range is no longer valid and position exits.
### Trade Execution Logic:
When entry conditions are met (price in zone, cooldown satisfied, ATR filter passed, no existing position):
1. Calculate entry price at zone boundary
2. Calculate TP and SL based on selected method
3. Execute strategy.entry() with calculated position size
4. Place strategy.exit() with TP limit and SL stop orders
5. Update info table with active trade details
The strategy enforces one position at a time by checking strategy.position_size == 0 before entry.
### Channel Breakout Management:
Channels are removed when price closes more than 10 ticks outside boundaries. This tolerance prevents premature channel deletion from minor breaks or wicks, allowing the mean reversion setup to persist through small boundary violations.
### Position Sizing System:
Three methods calculate position size:
**Fixed Contracts**:
- Uses exact contract quantity specified in settings
- Best for futures traders (e.g., "trade 2 NQ contracts")
**Percentage of Equity**:
- position_size = (strategy.equity × equity_pct / 100) / close
- Dynamically scales with account growth
**Cash Amount**:
- position_size = cash_amount / close
- Maintains consistent dollar exposure regardless of price
## INPUT PARAMETERS:
### Position Sizing:
- **Position Size Type**: Choose Fixed Contracts, % of Equity, or Cash Amount
- **Number of Contracts**: Fixed quantity per trade (1-1000)
- **% of Equity**: Percentage of account to allocate (1-100%)
- **Cash Amount**: Dollar value per position ($100+)
### Channel Settings:
- **Nested Channels**: Allow multiple overlapping channels vs single channel
- **Normalization Length**: Lookback for high/low calculation (1-500, default 100)
- **Box Detection Length**: Period for volatility detection (1-100, default 14)
### Scalping Settings:
- **Enable Long Scalps**: Toggle long entries on/off
- **Enable Short Scalps**: Toggle short entries on/off
- **Entry Zone % from Edge**: Size of entry zone (5-50%, default 20%)
- **SL Offset (Ticks)**: Distance beyond channel for stop (1+, default 5)
- **Cooldown Period (Bars)**: Minimum spacing between signals (0 = no cooldown)
### ATR Filter:
- **Enable ATR Filter**: Toggle volatility filter on/off
- **ATR Timeframe**: Source timeframe for ATR (1, 5, 15, 60 min, etc.)
- **ATR Length**: Smoothing period (1-100, default 14)
- **Min ATR Value**: Threshold for trade enablement (0.1+, default 10.0)
### Take Profit Settings:
- **TP Method**: Choose Fixed Points or % of Channel
- **TP Fixed (Ticks)**: Static distance in ticks (1+, default 30)
- **TP % of Channel**: Dynamic target as channel percentage (10-100%, default 50%)
### Appearance:
- **Show Entry Zones**: Toggle zone labels on channels
- **Show Info Table**: Display real-time strategy status
- **Table Position**: Corner placement (Top Left/Right, Bottom Left/Right)
- **Color Settings**: Customize long/short/TP/SL colors
## VISUAL INDICATORS:
- **Channel boxes** with semi-transparent fill showing consolidation zones
- **Colored entry zones** labeled "LONG ZONE ▲" and "SHORT ZONE ▼"
- **Entry signal arrows** below/above bars marking long/short entries
- **Active TP/SL lines** with emoji labels (⊕ Entry, 🎯 TP, 🛑 SL)
- **Info table** showing position status, channel state, last signal, entry/TP/SL prices, and ATR status
## HOW TO USE:
### For 1-3 Minute Scalping (NQ/ES):
- ATR Timeframe: "1" (1-minute)
- ATR Min Value: 10.0 (for NQ), adjust per instrument
- Entry Zone %: 20-25%
- TP Method: Fixed Points, 20-40 ticks
- SL Offset: 5-10 ticks
- Cooldown: 2-3 bars
- Position Size: 1-2 contracts
### For 5-15 Minute Day Trading:
- ATR Timeframe: "5" or match chart
- ATR Min Value: Adjust to instrument (test 8-15 for NQ)
- Entry Zone %: 20-30%
- TP Method: % of Channel, 40-60%
- SL Offset: 5-10 ticks
- Cooldown: 3-5 bars
- Position Size: Fixed contracts or 5-10% equity
### For 30-60 Minute Swing Scalping:
- ATR Timeframe: "15" or "30"
- ATR Min Value: Lower threshold for broader market
- Entry Zone %: 25-35%
- TP Method: % of Channel, 50-70%
- SL Offset: 10-15 ticks
- Cooldown: 5+ bars or disable
- Position Size: % of equity recommended
## BACKTEST CONSIDERATIONS:
- Strategy performs best in ranging, mean-reverting markets
- Strong trending markets produce more stop losses as price breaks channels
- ATR filter significantly reduces trade count but improves quality during low volatility
- Cooldown period trades signal quantity for signal quality
- Commission and slippage materially impact sub-5-minute timeframe performance
- Shorter timeframes require tighter entry zones (15-20%) to catch quick reversions
- % of Channel TP adapts better to varying channel sizes than fixed points
- Fixed contract sizing recommended for consistent risk per trade in futures
**Backtesting Parameters Used**: This strategy was developed and tested using realistic commission and slippage values to provide accurate performance expectations. Recommended settings: Commission of $1.40 per side (typical for NQ futures through discount brokers), slippage of 2 ticks to account for execution delays on fast-moving scalp entries. These values reflect real-world trading costs that active scalpers will encounter. Backtest results without proper cost simulation will significantly overstate profitability.
## COMPATIBLE MARKETS:
Works on any instrument with price data including stock indices (NQ, ES, YM, RTY), individual stocks, forex pairs (EUR/USD, GBP/USD), cryptocurrency (BTC, ETH), and commodities. Volume-based features require data feed with volume information but are optional for core functionality.
## KNOWN LIMITATIONS:
- Immediate touch entry can fire multiple times in choppy zones without adequate cooldown
- Channel deletion at 10-tick breaks may be too aggressive or lenient depending on instrument tick size
- ATR filter from lower timeframes requires higher-tier TradingView subscription (request.security limitation)
- Mean reversion logic fails in strong breakout scenarios leading to stop loss hits
- Position sizing via % of equity or cash amount calculates based on close price, may differ from actual fill price
- No partial closing capability - full position exits at TP or SL only
- Strategy does not account for gap openings or overnight holds
## RISK DISCLOSURE:
Trading involves substantial risk of loss. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This strategy is for educational purposes and backtesting only. Mean reversion strategies can experience extended drawdowns during trending markets. Stop losses may not fill at intended levels during extreme volatility or gaps. Thoroughly test on historical data and paper trade before risking real capital. Use appropriate position sizing and never risk more than you can afford to lose. Consider consulting a licensed financial advisor before making trading decisions. Automated trading systems can malfunction - monitor all live positions actively.
## ACKNOWLEDGMENT & CREDITS:
This strategy is built upon the channel detection methodology created by **AlgoAlpha** in the "Smart Money Breakout Channels" indicator. Full credit and appreciation to AlgoAlpha for pioneering the normalized volatility approach to identifying consolidation patterns. The core channel formation logic using normalized price standard deviation is AlgoAlpha's original contribution to the TradingView community.
Enhancements to the original concept include: mean reversion entry logic (vs breakout), immediate touch-based signals, multi-timeframe ATR volatility filtering, flexible position sizing (fixed/percentage/cash), cooldown period filtering, dual TP methods (fixed points vs channel percentage), automated strategy execution with exit management, and real-time position monitoring table.
ATR Enhanced [DCAUT]█ ATR Enhanced
📊 OVERVIEW
Standard ATR uses only RMA smoothing, while ATR Enhanced provides 20+ professional smoothing algorithms , offering precise volatility measurement solutions for different trading scenarios and market environments.
💡 CORE VALUE
- 20+ algorithm choices : SMA, EMA, RMA, WMA, HMA, T3, KAMA, FRAMA, Kalman Filter, etc.
📋 PARAMETER SETUP
ATR Length : Calculation period (default: 14)
Moving Average Type : Choose the most suitable smoothing method from 20+ algorithms
🎨 COLOR CODING
Green : Rising volatility
Red : Falling volatility
