Not tested, but you could try by yourself with this code:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
//short term
a1=ExponentialAverage[50](high)[1]
b1=ExponentialAverage[50](low)[1]
ifclose>a1then
c1=1
Else
IFclose<b1then
c1=-1
endif
ENDIF
ifc1=-1then
D1=a1
ELSE
D1=b1
endif
a2=ExponentialAverage[100](high)[1]
b2=ExponentialAverage[100](low)[1]
ifclose>a2then
c2=1
Else
IFclose<b2then
c2=-1
endif
ENDIF
ifc2=-1then
D2=a2
ELSE
D2=b2
endif
a3=Average[200](high)[1]
b3=Average[200](low)[1]
ifclose>a3then
c3=1
Else
IFclose<b3then
c3=-1
endif
ENDIF
ifc3=-1then
D3=a3
ELSE
D3=b3
endif
ifD1<closethen
result=1
else
result=0
endif
ifD2<closethen
result1=1
else
result1=0
endif
ifD3<closethen
result2=1
else
result2=0
endif
c10=(result+result1+result2)
test=c10=3andc10[1]<>3
screener[test]
I changed the EMA200 to a MA200 (EMA200 needs much more data than a simple moving average and could not be correctly calculated by ProScreener with its 254 bars limitations).