Support Board
Date/Time: Sat, 11 Jan 2025 20:08:58 +0000
zig zag not always quite right
View Count: 1976
| [2017-01-06 17:12:03] |
| User771416 - Posts: 47 |
|
Can anyone help me understand why I'm having this issue with the Zig Zag study. Please note in the attached picture at roughly 10:37 you see the Zig Zag does not grab the low of the first up bar (1682), but instead grabs a spot a full point higher at 1683. I have the study set to use method 2, and 4 bars (I actually want 3 bars but if set to 3 the study captures most 2 bar reversals). I'm using Flex Renko bars and wondering if the ZZ is having dificulty sorting out the actual pricing. It doesn't happen all the time, but it does occur. http://www.sierrachart.com/image.php?Image=1483722438194.png |
| [2017-01-06 17:43:33] |
| |
|
That must be correct based upon the study settings and the documented method here: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?page=doc/TechnicalStudiesReference.html#ZigzagCalculationMode2 If it is not correct, precisely explain why based upon the documentation, the study settings, and the bar values. It is very unlikely the study is not functioning properly and we definitely do not believe this. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-01-06 17:44:18
|
| [2017-01-06 18:12:41] |
| User771416 - Posts: 47 |
|
I don't disagree, and i'm not saying it doesn't work. I'm asking if you can help me understand why i'm seeing what you see in the pic i attached. I'm sure there's a mathematical reason for it, but i can't figure out what that reason is. It's a Zig Zag study using calc method 2. Per the documentation it should have read the last high, and recognized the reversal (which it did). You can see that it was in an up trend, correctly recognized the reversal, and started to calculate the downtrend from the point of the last high at 1683.40. However, once in the downtrend, while it correctly recognized the reversal IT IS NOT USING THE LAST LOW as the low of that downtrend nor is it using that point as the start of the new uptrend. The length of the down trend should be 14 Ticks, not 4 ticks. Please take another look at the chart I previously attached and help me understand why the Zig Zag study is not using that last low of 1682.00 as the low of the downtrend and starting point for the subsequent uptrend. |
| [2017-01-06 18:49:17] |
| |
|
while it correctly recognized the reversal IT IS NOT USING THE LAST LOW as the low of that downtrend nor is it using that point as the start of the new uptrend.
The reversal was actually triggered on the bar where you see: L: -4. Not an earlier bar. This is why you see what you do.The best thing to do is to do a chart replay to observe what is actually happening: Replaying Charts Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-01-06 18:52:17
|
| [2017-01-06 18:55:19] |
| User771416 - Posts: 47 |
|
well that wouldn't be consistent with the documentation either as that bar's low is higher than the previous bar. Also, please note all the other reversals in that captured picture are reading correctly. In all the other instances the study correctly grabs the lowest low or highest high when i recognizes the reversal. In this particular sequence it does not. I'm trying to understand why. Perhaps if you could expound upon your statement I could better understand your reasoning for it. |
| [2017-01-06 19:01:59] |
| User771416 - Posts: 47 |
|
Is it possible that there were no ticks traded between the first green bar (a green bar with a lower low) and the bar where the "L-4T" is shown and after recognizing the reversal due to the lower low of that green bar is taking what it sees as the next traded low? And even if this is the case, it is not presenting the correct result. I'm not saying it's not doing what it was told to do, i'm asking if perhaps there's a shortcoming in the design that does not allow for this condition to occur in the Flex Renko bar. The correct result here is that that reversal to the downside should read as "L-14T HL" at the position of the lowest low at 1682 (the low of that green bar) and that the next uptrend should have started at 1682. Despite any reasons "why" it's presenting as it does, it is not correct and I'd like to understand why so i know if i can use the data or not, or just how much of a problem it will cause if left uncorrected. |
| [2017-01-06 19:04:00] |
| |
|
It is consistent with the documentation because the reversal has not yet occurred until that bar we mentioned and the low values are not being remembered until there is a downtrend. There is not anything more we can say because we do not know the the zig zag study settings. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2017-01-06 19:26:10] |
| User771416 - Posts: 47 |
|
Here are the zig zag settings: http://screencast.com/t/zDgjcMN1 With all due respect, i believe you're incorrect in your statement. the Reversal Amount for Calculation 2,3 is set to .4, the bar count for reversal is set to 4. Per the documentation, the reversal condition is true on the fourth bar because the diference between the store Last High (1683.40) and the next bar's low (1682.40) is more than the setting value of .4; next it checks the number of bars and if the number of bars is greater than or equal to the Number of Bars Required for Reversal (in this case 4) the trend is changed to down. The low of the bar that changed the direction is stored as the lowest low and in this case that should be 1682.00. This is all per your documentation. Can you please help me understand why you're saying what you're saying? What in the documentation is telling you that the down trend didn't validate until that 7th bar? |
| [2017-01-06 19:35:07] |
| User771416 - Posts: 47 |
|
so i replayed the data. And you are correct, it is not validating the downtrend on that fourth bar. But it should be, and there in lies the problem. if the reversal to a down trend is not valid on that fourth bar (presumably because the fourth bar high exceeds the "downtrend line" (which i don't know the value of), then surely the subsequent up bars SHOULD NOT validate the downtrend. Do you see my point? |
| [2017-01-06 20:30:48] |
| |
|
In regards to this, there is no way we have any idea whatsoever what is correct without knowing the settings which you only just provided: What in the documentation is telling you that the down trend didn't validate until that 7th bar?
and the next bar's low (1682.40) Being these are flex Renko bars, actually validate with the Chart Values tool the true Low of the bar you are referring to. It might not be what you expect because these are manufactured bars.There could also be a problem with the internal comparisons being done and we will change these to do what we call a formatted comparison. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-01-06 20:31:46
|
| [2017-01-06 20:36:19] |
| |
|
We realize now, that this could not be the problem: There could also be a problem with the internal comparisons being done and we will change these to do what we call a formatted comparison. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: