Price is noisy. The goal is to find a way to significantly reduce noise without introducing much lag. Hence the interest in adaptive moving averages, several of which unquestionably outperform conventional MAs in the smoothness versus lag trade-off. No serious trader is going for zero lag; that's unrealistic. But low lag is very feasible.Quote from monti1a:
I never understood the incessant need by novice traders to use a zero-lag moving average.....zero-lag to what???? price???
Just use price....duh
So they're claiming that conventional averages are more accurate than the adaptives. That doesn't make sense to me. And how do you measure smoothness? I know it isn't easy because I've yet to see anybody do it.Quote from kiwi_trader:
You could measure accuracy by doing a statistical analysis of price vs the ma ... perhaps sqrt of average distance squared. Smoothness wouldn't be too hard either.
========Quote from Robertwiz:
Hello,
Two questions:
1. Has anyone ever had any experience using the Jurik Adaptive Moving Average? If so, how useful and effective is it?
2. What Adaptive type moving average if any actually can truly adapt to the market.
I would appreciate your thoughts on this matter?
Thanks
Quote from GTS:
Undoubtedly it has to do with their over-the-top anti-piracy method which probably don't work under Win7.