using HULL ma in a code for an indicator

• 06/08/2019 at 5:16 PM #100216
  robertogozzi

  There’s no difference in v10.3 because 7 and 8, as from documentation, are not supported, while ProBuilder returns an error message.

  v11 will support the HULL and other averages, but only when using their correct name, not AVERAGE, at least at present.

  1 user thanked author for this post.

  reb

  

  robertogozzi

  Moderator

  Topics: 69

  Replies: 16469

  Been thanked: 3643 times
  06/08/2019 at 7:25 PM #100229
  GraHal

  reb wrote:

  no difference with a “normal ” average

  Yeah well I remembered after, I got the Simple Average also … I then added the 8 to give the Hull Average.

  

  GraHal

  Participant

  Topics: 204

  Replies: 8399

  Been thanked: 2041 times
  06/08/2019 at 9:46 PM #100234
  GraHal

  I raised a Topic on this anomaly a few weeks ago … follow the link below.

  GraHal wrote:

  Simplified Creation does not create the correct code for … No 7 Zero Lag Exponential and No 8 – Hull

  1 user thanked author for this post.

  Suzu Yuk

  

  GraHal

  Participant

  Topics: 204

  Replies: 8399

  Been thanked: 2041 times
  06/10/2019 at 10:16 AM #100298
  robertogozzi

  With some rounding modifications this code works perfectly, exactly the same as the native HULL average on v11:

  HULL moving average

  // HullMA, the Hull Moving Average (same as v11): // Period = 14 p1 = round(sqrt(Period) - 0.5) p2 = round((Period/2) - 0.5) inner = (2*weightedaverage[p2](close)) - weightedaverage[Period](close) S = weightedaverage[p1](inner) return S

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

  //         HullMA, the Hull Moving Average (same as v11): // Period = 14 p1     = round(sqrt(Period) - 0.5) p2     = round((Period/2) - 0.5) inner  = (2*weightedaverage[p2](close)) - weightedaverage[Period](close) S      = weightedaverage[p1](inner) return S

   

  

  robertogozzi

  Moderator

  Topics: 69

  Replies: 16469

  Been thanked: 3643 times
  06/10/2019 at 10:41 AM #100302
  GraHal

  robertogozzi wrote:

  are not supported, while ProBuilder returns an error message.

  I don’t get an error message using Hull Average as Average [14, 8]  … even on Demo Forward Test (using Real data).

  

  GraHal

  Participant

  Topics: 204

  Replies: 8399

  Been thanked: 2041 times
  06/10/2019 at 11:28 AM #100303
  robertogozzi

  I always got an error messager on ProBuilder.

  ProOrder should run smoothly, but I think you’ll get the same result as “0” (I did not test it, though).

  

  robertogozzi

  Moderator

  Topics: 69

  Replies: 16469

  Been thanked: 3643 times
  06/10/2019 at 4:09 PM #100323
  reb

  Thanks mates for your help

  

  reb

  Participant

  Topics: 15

  Replies: 157

  Been thanked: 27 times
  06/10/2019 at 6:25 PM #100335
  GraHal

  Deffo not the same as the Simple MA.

  Attached lower curve is the Average [14, 8] then I duplicated the System and changed to Average [14, 0] and the top curve is the result.

  I think PRT have implemented the Hull average ahead of time into v 10.3

  

  GraHal

  Participant

  Topics: 204

  Replies: 8399

  Been thanked: 2041 times
• Author
  Posts