How do you combat trendline shifting when switching TFs?

A

athlonmank8

Happens on almost all S/W and aside from going into a lower TF and overlapping the TLs is there any way to keep them from shifting when you're switching TFs?

I feel like I'm pushing a square wheel here.
 
I long since moved on from trendlines. Although, they often work...

I know the problem. My solution was to reference multiple time frames: longer TF for direction, shorter TF for entries.

Imo, the trick about channels: subsets of chartists reference and trade specific time frames. One group trades exclusively the 1 hr chart. Another group exclusively trades the 15 mins chart etc. The deeper the pockets, the longer the time frame referenced (hence, longer TF dictates direction). What I did is pull all major time frame charts (5 mins through daily, or weekly, even), draw appropriate trend-lines on each, then trade longer TF bounces, using shorter TF for entries. Specifically, S/R price levels are taken from the chart where the drawn trendline looks most 'clean' or 'right'. For example, pts 1 and 3 might be 5 to 8 bars apart on a daily chart. But when redrawn on a 1 hour chart, those same pts (1 and 3) might be 100 bars apart. No. Draw the trendline on what's most obvious and simple. Then refer to THAT chart for the specific price level. That's what everyone else is doing, imo.

Hope that makes sense. I would suggest incorporating some minor price action signals for exact entry. Ex, 4 hour trendline bounce off support + 5 mins channel breakout + first higher low = buy.
 
Thanks achilles. That makes perfect sense. I'll give that a shot.

Also, as for the longer TF for the gameplan and shorter TF for the signal, that's actually what i'm doing right now too. Works really well. I had another solution that moved away from TLs too. I'll shoot you a PM in a bit here. You probably already know it though.

For some reason I like having the physical line on the chart just so I know weather the signal is above or below the line I'm referencing (sort of anal but it's appropriate for stop placement IMO).
 
^ Yea, I know what you mean. I used to superimpose LT trendlines on ST charts. Which leads us back to the whole redraw problem... lol I think most software pick the midpoint when redrawing angled trendlines from LT to ST. Which f's it up. But ya. It takes a bit of getting used to depending on how you do it.
 
When the area you isolated from the big TF is solid and well structured it will react for a quick bounce almost all the time, rendering the small TF HL confirmation rather useless.

What I do is I enter on the touch on the big TF and when the HL is produced I trail the stop to break even.

If there's no reaction off the big TF and I lose, well, so be it, we all lose in trading. Take the loss and scan for the next setup.

However, by waitng for that small TF higher low I feel that we are just delaying what we already know and being patient to obtain a worst fill and a larger stop. Like they say, its all in the wrist, and in this case the wrist is how good the big TF analysis is.
 
Quote from achilles28:

^ Yea, I know what you mean. I used to superimpose LT trendlines on ST charts. Which leads us back to the whole redraw problem... lol I think most software pick the midpoint when redrawing angled trendlines from LT to ST. Which f's it up. But ya. It takes a bit of getting used to depending on how you do it.
More...

lol yup!! i was wondering what screwed it up, figured someone on here might know. I've learned just to live with it and expect it over the years. :)
 
Nexen has a good point about runaway bounces. I think the best thing: draw on the most obvious chart, then trade that level either with ST channel break outs, price action, moving average, retracement etc. whatever works ;)
 
In my experience, mixing the timeframes tends to give me too many conflicting signals, therefore, I opted to stick with just one and keep it simple.

Like Nexen said if the area is good, work or not the vast majority of the time, it will at least make a HL in the small timeframes.

NAD
 
Quote from achilles28:

^ Yea, I know what you mean. I used to superimpose LT trendlines on ST charts. Which leads us back to the whole redraw problem... lol I think most software pick the midpoint when redrawing angled trendlines from LT to ST. Which f's it up. But ya. It takes a bit of getting used to depending on how you do it.
More...

lol yup!! i was wondering what screwed it up, figured someone on here might know. I've learned just to live with it and expect it over the years. :)

Quote from Nexen:

When the area you isolated from the big TF is solid and well structured it will react for a quick bounce almost all the time, rendering the small TF HL confirmation rather useless.

What I do is I enter on the touch on the big TF and when the HL is produced I trail the stop to break even.

If there's no reaction off the big TF and I lose, well, so be it, we all lose in trading. Take the loss and scan for the next setup.

However, by waitng for that small TF higher low I feel that we are just delaying what we already know and being patient to obtain a worst fill and a larger stop. Like they say, its all in the wrist, and in this case the wrist is how good the big TF analysis is.
More...

Yup, i usually use PA for various things aside from just an entry.

As for reliable/consistent LT levels, that's a great idea. I've been tempted to use resting orders and add on PA for compounding but until i do more testing, i'm not there yet. I did some smaller trading with that even on smaller TFs and it worked well too. The key was tight stops :)

Thanks again for the advice guys
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top