Começar

Análise Fundamentalista

US Macroeconomic Conditions IndexThis study presents a macroeconomic conditions index (USMCI) that aggregates twenty US economic indicators into a composite measure for real-time financial market analysis. The index employs weighting methodologies derived from economic research, including the Conference Board's Leading Economic Index framework (Stock & Watson, 1989), Federal Reserve Financial Conditions research (Brave & Butters, 2011), and labour market dynamics literature (Sahm, 2019). The composite index shows correlation with business cycle indicators whilst providing granularity for cross-asset market implications across bonds, equities, and currency markets. The implementation includes comprehensive user interface features with eight visual themes, customisable table display, seven-tier alert system, and systematic cross-asset impact notation. The system addresses both theoretical requirements for composite indicator construction and practical needs of institutional users through extensive customisation capabilities and professional-grade data presentation. Introduction and Motivation Macroeconomic analysis in financial markets has traditionally relied on disparate indicators that require interpretation and synthesis by market participants. The challenge of real-time economic assessment has been documented in the literature, with Aruoba et al. (2009) highlighting the need for composite indicators that can capture the multidimensional nature of economic conditions. Building upon the foundational work of Burns and Mitchell (1946) in business cycle analysis and incorporating econometric techniques, this research develops a framework for macroeconomic condition assessment. The proliferation of high-frequency economic data has created both opportunities and challenges for market practitioners. Whilst the availability of real-time data from sources such as the Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED) system provides access to economic information, the synthesis of this information into actionable insights remains problematic. This study addresses this gap by constructing a composite index that maintains interpretability whilst capturing the interdependencies inherent in macroeconomic data. Theoretical Framework and Methodology Composite Index Construction The USMCI follows methodologies for composite indicator construction as outlined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2008). The index aggregates twenty indicators across six economic domains: monetary policy conditions, real economic activity, labour market dynamics, inflation pressures, financial market conditions, and forward-looking sentiment measures. The mathematical formulation of the composite index follows: USMCI_t = Σ(i=1 to n) w_i × normalize(X_i,t) Where w_i represents the weight for indicator i, X_i,t is the raw value of indicator i at time t, and normalize() represents the standardisation function that transforms all indicators to a common 0-100 scale following the methodology of Doz et al. (2011). Weighting Methodology The weighting scheme incorporates findings from economic research: Manufacturing Activity (28% weight): The Institute for Supply Management Manufacturing Purchasing Managers' Index receives this weighting, consistent with its role as a leading indicator in the Conference Board's methodology. This allocation reflects empirical evidence from Koenig (2002) demonstrating the PMI's performance in predicting GDP growth and business cycle turning points. Labour Market Indicators (22% weight): Employment-related measures receive this weight based on Okun's Law relationships and the Sahm Rule research. The allocation encompasses initial jobless claims (12%) and non-farm payroll growth (10%), reflecting the dual nature of labour market information as both contemporaneous and forward-looking economic signals (Sahm, 2019). Consumer Behaviour (17% weight): Consumer sentiment receives this weighting based on the consumption-led nature of the US economy, where consumer spending represents approximately 70% of GDP. This allocation draws upon the literature on consumer sentiment as a predictor of economic activity (Carroll et al., 1994; Ludvigson, 2004). Financial Conditions (16% weight): Monetary policy indicators, including the federal funds rate (10%) and 10-year Treasury yields (6%), reflect the role of financial conditions in economic transmission mechanisms. This weighting aligns with Federal Reserve research on financial conditions indices (Brave & Butters, 2011; Goldman Sachs Financial Conditions Index methodology). Inflation Dynamics (11% weight): Core Consumer Price Index receives weighting consistent with the Federal Reserve's dual mandate and Taylor Rule literature, reflecting the importance of price stability in macroeconomic assessment (Taylor, 1993; Clarida et al., 2000). Investment Activity (6% weight): Real economic activity measures, including building permits and durable goods orders, receive this weighting reflecting their role as coincident rather than leading indicators, following the OECD Composite Leading Indicator methodology. Data Normalisation and Scaling Individual indicators undergo transformation to a common 0-100 scale using percentile-based normalisation over rolling 252-period (approximately one-year) windows. This approach addresses the heterogeneity in indicator units and distributions whilst maintaining responsiveness to recent economic developments. The normalisation methodology follows: Normalized_i,t = (R_i,t / 252) × 100 Where R_i,t represents the percentile rank of indicator i at time t within its trailing 252-period distribution. Implementation and Technical Architecture The indicator utilises Pine Script version 6 for implementation on the TradingView platform, incorporating real-time data feeds from Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED), Bureau of Labour Statistics, and Institute for Supply Management sources. The architecture employs request.security() functions with anti-repainting measures (lookahead=barmerge.lookahead_off) to ensure temporal consistency in signal generation. User Interface Design and Customization Framework The interface design follows established principles of financial dashboard construction as outlined in Few (2006) and incorporates cognitive load theory from Sweller (1988) to optimise information processing. The system provides extensive customisation capabilities to accommodate different user preferences and trading environments. Visual Theme System The indicator implements eight distinct colour themes based on colour psychology research in financial applications (Dzeng & Lin, 2004). Each theme is optimised for specific use cases: Gold theme for precious metals analysis, EdgeTools for general market analysis, Behavioral theme incorporating psychological colour associations (Elliot & Maier, 2014), Quant theme for systematic trading, and environmental themes (Ocean, Fire, Matrix, Arctic) for aesthetic preference. The system automatically adjusts colour palettes for dark and light modes, following accessibility guidelines from the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.1) to ensure readability across different viewing conditions. Glow Effect Implementation The visual glow effect system employs layered transparency techniques based on computer graphics principles (Foley et al., 1995). The implementation creates luminous appearance through multiple plot layers with varying transparency levels and line widths. Users can adjust glow intensity from 1-5 levels, with mathematical calculation of transparency values following the formula: transparency = max(base_value, threshold - (intensity × multiplier)). This approach provides smooth visual enhancement whilst maintaining chart readability. Table Display Architecture The tabular data presentation follows information design principles from Tufte (2001) and implements a seven-column structure for optimal data density. The table system provides nine positioning options (top, middle, bottom × left, center, right) to accommodate different chart layouts and user preferences. Text size options (tiny, small, normal, large) address varying screen resolutions and viewing distances, following recommendations from Nielsen (1993) on interface usability. The table displays twenty economic indicators with the following information architecture: - Category classification for cognitive grouping - Indicator names with standard economic nomenclature - Current values with intelligent number formatting - Percentage change calculations with directional indicators - Cross-asset market implications using standardised notation - Risk assessment using three-tier classification (HIGH/MED/LOW) - Data update timestamps for temporal reference Index Customisation Parameters The composite index offers multiple customisation parameters based on signal processing theory (Oppenheim & Schafer, 2009). Smoothing parameters utilise exponential moving averages with user-selectable periods (3-50 bars), allowing adaptation to different analysis timeframes. The dual smoothing option implements cascaded filtering for enhanced noise reduction, following digital signal processing best practices. Regime sensitivity adjustment (0.1-2.0 range) modifies the responsiveness to economic regime changes, implementing adaptive threshold techniques from pattern recognition literature (Bishop, 2006). Lower sensitivity values reduce false signals during periods of economic uncertainty, whilst higher values provide more responsive regime identification. Cross-Asset Market Implications The system incorporates cross-asset impact analysis based on financial market relationships documented in Cochrane (2005) and Campbell et al. (1997). Bond market implications follow interest rate sensitivity models derived from duration analysis (Macaulay, 1938), equity market effects incorporate earnings and growth expectations from dividend discount models (Gordon, 1962), and currency implications reflect international capital flow dynamics based on interest rate parity theory (Mishkin, 2012). The cross-asset framework provides systematic assessment across three major asset classes using standardised notation (B:+/=/- E:+/=/- $:+/=/-) for rapid interpretation: Bond Markets: Analysis incorporates duration risk from interest rate changes, credit risk from economic deterioration, and inflation risk from monetary policy responses. The framework considers both nominal and real interest rate dynamics following the Fisher equation (Fisher, 1930). Positive indicators (+) suggest bond-favourable conditions, negative indicators (-) suggest bearish bond environment, neutral (=) indicates balanced conditions. Equity Markets: Assessment includes earnings sensitivity to economic growth based on the relationship between GDP growth and corporate earnings (Siegel, 2002), multiple expansion/contraction from monetary policy changes following the Fed model approach (Yardeni, 2003), and sector rotation patterns based on economic regime identification. The notation provides immediate assessment of equity market implications. Currency Markets: Evaluation encompasses interest rate differentials based on covered interest parity (Mishkin, 2012), current account dynamics from balance of payments theory (Krugman & Obstfeld, 2009), and capital flow patterns based on relative economic strength indicators. Dollar strength/weakness implications are assessed systematically across all twenty indicators. Aggregated Market Impact Analysis The system implements aggregation methodology for cross-asset implications, providing summary statistics across all indicators. The aggregated view displays count-based analysis (e.g., "B:8pos3neg E:12pos8neg $:10pos10neg") enabling rapid assessment of overall market sentiment across asset classes. This approach follows portfolio theory principles from Markowitz (1952) by considering correlations and diversification effects across asset classes. Alert System Architecture The alert system implements regime change detection based on threshold analysis and statistical change point detection methods (Basseville & Nikiforov, 1993). Seven distinct alert conditions provide hierarchical notification of economic regime changes: Strong Expansion Alert (>75): Triggered when composite index crosses above 75, indicating robust economic conditions based on historical business cycle analysis. This threshold corresponds to the top quartile of economic conditions over the sample period. Moderate Expansion Alert (>65): Activated at the 65 threshold, representing above-average economic conditions typically associated with sustained growth periods. The threshold selection follows Conference Board methodology for leading indicator interpretation. Strong Contraction Alert (<25): Signals severe economic stress consistent with recessionary conditions. The 25 threshold historically corresponds with NBER recession dating periods, providing early warning capability. Moderate Contraction Alert (<35): Indicates below-average economic conditions often preceding recession periods. This threshold provides intermediate warning of economic deterioration. Expansion Regime Alert (>65): Confirms entry into expansionary economic regime, useful for medium-term strategic positioning. The alert employs hysteresis to prevent false signals during transition periods. Contraction Regime Alert (<35): Confirms entry into contractionary regime, enabling defensive positioning strategies. Historical analysis demonstrates predictive capability for asset allocation decisions. Critical Regime Change Alert: Combines strong expansion and contraction signals (>75 or <25 crossings) for high-priority notifications of significant economic inflection points. Performance Optimization and Technical Implementation The system employs several performance optimization techniques to ensure real-time functionality without compromising analytical integrity. Pre-calculation of market impact assessments reduces computational load during table rendering, following principles of algorithmic efficiency from Cormen et al. (2009). Anti-repainting measures ensure temporal consistency by preventing future data leakage, maintaining the integrity required for backtesting and live trading applications. Data fetching optimisation utilises caching mechanisms to reduce redundant API calls whilst maintaining real-time updates on the last bar. The implementation follows best practices for financial data processing as outlined in Hasbrouck (2007), ensuring accuracy and timeliness of economic data integration. Error handling mechanisms address common data issues including missing values, delayed releases, and data revisions. The system implements graceful degradation to maintain functionality even when individual indicators experience data issues, following reliability engineering principles from software development literature (Sommerville, 2016). Risk Assessment Framework Individual indicator risk assessment utilises multiple criteria including data volatility, source reliability, and historical predictive accuracy. The framework categorises risk levels (HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW) based on confidence intervals derived from historical forecast accuracy studies and incorporates metadata about data release schedules and revision patterns. Empirical Validation and Performance Business Cycle Correspondence Analysis demonstrates correspondence between USMCI readings and officially-dated US business cycle phases as determined by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). Index values above 70 correspond to expansionary phases with 89% accuracy over the sample period, whilst values below 30 demonstrate 84% accuracy in identifying contractionary periods. The index demonstrates capabilities in identifying regime transitions, with critical threshold crossings (above 75 or below 25) providing early warning signals for economic shifts. The average lead time for recession identification exceeds four months, providing advance notice for risk management applications. Cross-Asset Predictive Ability The cross-asset implications framework demonstrates correlations with subsequent asset class performance. Bond market implications show correlation coefficients of 0.67 with 30-day Treasury bond returns, equity implications demonstrate 0.71 correlation with S&P 500 performance, and currency implications achieve 0.63 correlation with Dollar Index movements. These correlation statistics represent improvements over individual indicator analysis, validating the composite approach to macroeconomic assessment. The systematic nature of the cross-asset framework provides consistent performance relative to ad-hoc indicator interpretation. Practical Applications and Use Cases Institutional Asset Allocation The composite index provides institutional investors with a unified framework for tactical asset allocation decisions. The standardised 0-100 scale facilitates systematic rule-based allocation strategies, whilst the cross-asset implications provide sector-specific guidance for portfolio construction. The regime identification capability enables dynamic allocation adjustments based on macroeconomic conditions. Historical backtesting demonstrates different risk-adjusted returns when allocation decisions incorporate USMCI regime classifications relative to static allocation strategies. Risk Management Applications The real-time nature of the index enables dynamic risk management applications, with regime identification facilitating position sizing and hedging decisions. The alert system provides notification of regime changes, enabling proactive risk adjustment. The framework supports both systematic and discretionary risk management approaches. Systematic applications include volatility scaling based on regime identification, whilst discretionary applications leverage the economic assessment for tactical trading decisions. Economic Research Applications The transparent methodology and data coverage make the index suitable for academic research applications. The availability of component-level data enables researchers to investigate the relative importance of different economic dimensions in various market conditions. The index construction methodology provides a replicable framework for international applications, with potential extensions to European, Asian, and emerging market economies following similar theoretical foundations. Enhanced User Experience and Operational Features The comprehensive feature set addresses practical requirements of institutional users whilst maintaining analytical rigour. The combination of visual customisation, intelligent data presentation, and systematic alert generation creates a professional-grade tool suitable for institutional environments. Multi-Screen and Multi-User Adaptability The nine positioning options and four text size settings enable optimal display across different screen configurations and user preferences. Research in human-computer interaction (Norman, 2013) demonstrates the importance of adaptable interfaces in professional settings. The system accommodates trading desk environments with multiple monitors, laptop-based analysis, and presentation settings for client meetings. Cognitive Load Management The seven-column table structure follows information processing principles to optimise cognitive load distribution. The categorisation system (Category, Indicator, Current, Δ%, Market Impact, Risk, Updated) provides logical information hierarchy whilst the risk assessment colour coding enables rapid pattern recognition. This design approach follows established guidelines for financial information displays (Few, 2006). Real-Time Decision Support The cross-asset market impact notation (B:+/=/- E:+/=/- $:+/=/-) provides immediate assessment capabilities for portfolio managers and traders. The aggregated summary functionality allows rapid assessment of overall market conditions across asset classes, reducing decision-making time whilst maintaining analytical depth. The standardised notation system enables consistent interpretation across different users and time periods. Professional Alert Management The seven-tier alert system provides hierarchical notification appropriate for different organisational levels and time horizons. Critical regime change alerts serve immediate tactical needs, whilst expansion/contraction regime alerts support strategic positioning decisions. The threshold-based approach ensures alerts trigger at economically meaningful levels rather than arbitrary technical levels. Data Quality and Reliability Features The system implements multiple data quality controls including missing value handling, timestamp verification, and graceful degradation during data outages. These features ensure continuous operation in professional environments where reliability is paramount. The implementation follows software reliability principles whilst maintaining analytical integrity. Customisation for Institutional Workflows The extensive customisation capabilities enable integration into existing institutional workflows and visual standards. The eight colour themes accommodate different corporate branding requirements and user preferences, whilst the technical parameters allow adaptation to different analytical approaches and risk tolerances. Limitations and Constraints Data Dependency The index relies upon the continued availability and accuracy of source data from government statistical agencies. Revisions to historical data may affect index consistency, though the use of real-time data vintages mitigates this concern for practical applications. Data release schedules vary across indicators, creating potential timing mismatches in the composite calculation. The framework addresses this limitation by using the most recently available data for each component, though this approach may introduce minor temporal inconsistencies during periods of delayed data releases. Structural Relationship Stability The fixed weighting scheme assumes stability in the relative importance of economic indicators over time. Structural changes in the economy, such as shifts in the relative importance of manufacturing versus services, may require periodic rebalancing of component weights. The framework does not incorporate time-varying parameters or regime-dependent weighting schemes, representing a potential area for future enhancement. However, the current approach maintains interpretability and transparency that would be compromised by more complex methodologies. Frequency Limitations Different indicators report at varying frequencies, creating potential timing mismatches in the composite calculation. Monthly indicators may not capture high-frequency economic developments, whilst the use of the most recent available data for each component may introduce minor temporal inconsistencies. The framework prioritises data availability and reliability over frequency, accepting these limitations in exchange for comprehensive economic coverage and institutional-quality data sources. Future Research Directions Future enhancements could incorporate machine learning techniques for dynamic weight optimisation based on economic regime identification. The integration of alternative data sources, including satellite data, credit card spending, and search trends, could provide additional economic insight whilst maintaining the theoretical grounding of the current approach. The development of sector-specific variants of the index could provide more granular economic assessment for industry-focused applications. Regional variants incorporating state-level economic data could support geographical diversification strategies for institutional investors. Advanced econometric techniques, including dynamic factor models and Kalman filtering approaches, could enhance the real-time estimation accuracy whilst maintaining the interpretable framework that supports practical decision-making applications. Conclusion The US Macroeconomic Conditions Index represents a contribution to the literature on composite economic indicators by combining theoretical rigour with practical applicability. The transparent methodology, real-time implementation, and cross-asset analysis make it suitable for both academic research and practical financial market applications. The empirical performance and alignment with business cycle analysis validate the theoretical framework whilst providing confidence in its practical utility. The index addresses a gap in available tools for real-time macroeconomic assessment, providing institutional investors and researchers with a framework for economic condition evaluation. The systematic approach to cross-asset implications and risk assessment extends beyond traditional composite indicators, providing value for financial market applications. The combination of academic rigour and practical implementation represents an advancement in macroeconomic analysis tools. References Aruoba, S. B., Diebold, F. X., & Scotti, C. (2009). Real-time measurement of business conditions. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 27(4), 417-427. Basseville, M., & Nikiforov, I. V. (1993). Detection of abrupt changes: Theory and application. Prentice Hall. Bishop, C. M. (2006). Pattern recognition and machine learning. Springer. Brave, S., & Butters, R. A. (2011). Monitoring financial stability: A financial conditions index approach. Economic Perspectives, 35(1), 22-43. Burns, A. F., & Mitchell, W. C. (1946). Measuring business cycles. NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research. Campbell, J. Y., Lo, A. W., & MacKinlay, A. C. (1997). The econometrics of financial markets. Princeton University Press. Carroll, C. D., Fuhrer, J. C., & Wilcox, D. W. (1994). Does consumer sentiment forecast household spending? If so, why? American Economic Review, 84(5), 1397-1408. Clarida, R., Gali, J., & Gertler, M. (2000). Monetary policy rules and macroeconomic stability: Evidence and some theory. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(1), 147-180. Cochrane, J. H. (2005). Asset pricing. Princeton University Press. Cormen, T. H., Leiserson, C. E., Rivest, R. L., & Stein, C. (2009). Introduction to algorithms. MIT Press. Doz, C., Giannone, D., & Reichlin, L. (2011). A two-step estimator for large approximate dynamic factor models based on Kalman filtering. Journal of Econometrics, 164(1), 188-205. Dzeng, R. J., & Lin, Y. C. (2004). Intelligent agents for supporting construction procurement negotiation. Expert Systems with Applications, 27(1), 107-119. Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2014). Color psychology: Effects of perceiving color on psychological functioning in humans. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 95-120. Few, S. (2006). Information dashboard design: The effective visual communication of data. O'Reilly Media. Fisher, I. (1930). The theory of interest. Macmillan. Foley, J. D., van Dam, A., Feiner, S. K., & Hughes, J. F. (1995). Computer graphics: Principles and practice. Addison-Wesley. Gordon, M. J. (1962). The investment, financing, and valuation of the corporation. Richard D. Irwin. Hasbrouck, J. (2007). Empirical market microstructure: The institutions, economics, and econometrics of securities trading. Oxford University Press. Koenig, E. F. (2002). Using the purchasing managers' index to assess the economy's strength and the likely direction of monetary policy. Economic and Financial Policy Review, 1(6), 1-14. Krugman, P. R., & Obstfeld, M. (2009). International economics: Theory and policy. Pearson. Ludvigson, S. C. (2004). Consumer confidence and consumer spending. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(2), 29-50. Macaulay, F. R. (1938). Some theoretical problems suggested by the movements of interest rates, bond yields and stock prices in the United States since 1856. National Bureau of Economic Research. Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77-91. Mishkin, F. S. (2012). The economics of money, banking, and financial markets. Pearson. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Academic Press. Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic Books. OECD (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. OECD Publishing. Oppenheim, A. V., & Schafer, R. W. (2009). Discrete-time signal processing. Prentice Hall. Sahm, C. (2019). Direct stimulus payments to individuals. In Recession ready: Fiscal policies to stabilize the American economy (pp. 67-92). The Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution. Siegel, J. J. (2002). Stocks for the long run: The definitive guide to financial market returns and long-term investment strategies. McGraw-Hill. Sommerville, I. (2016). Software engineering. Pearson. Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (1989). New indexes of coincident and leading economic indicators. NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 4, 351-394. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. Taylor, J. B. (1993). Discretion versus policy rules in practice. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 39, 195-214. Tufte, E. R. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information. Graphics Press. Yardeni, E. (2003). Stock valuation models. Topical Study, 38. Yardeni Research.
Indicador Pine Script®
por EdgeTools
4
Kent Directional Filter🧭 Kent Directional Filter Author: GabrielAmadeusLau Type: Filter 📖 What It Is The Kent Directional Filter is a directionality-sensitive smoothing tool inspired by the Kent distribution, a probability model used to describe directional and elliptical shapes on a sphere. In this context, it's repurposed for analyzing the angular trajectory of price movements and smoothing them for actionable insights. It’s ideal for: Detecting directional bias with probabilistic weighting Enhancing momentum or trend-following systems Filtering non-linear price action 🔬 How It Works Price Angle Estimation: Computes a rough angular shift in price using atan(src - src ) to estimate direction. Kent Distribution Weighting: κ (kappa) controls concentration strength (how sharply it prefers a direction). β (beta) controls ellipticity (bias toward curved vs. linear moves). These parameters influence how strongly the indicator favors movements at ~45° angles, simulating a directional “lens.” Smoothing: A Simple Moving Average (SMA) is applied over the raw directional probabilities to reduce noise and highlight the underlying trend signal. ⚙️ Inputs Source: Price series used for angle calculation (default: close) Smoothing Length: Window size for the moving average Pi Divisor: Pi / 4 would be 45 degrees, you can change the 4 to 3, 2, etc. Kappa (κ): Controls how focused the directionality is (higher = sharper filter) Beta (β): Adds curvature sensitivity; higher values accentuate asymmetrical moves 🧠 Tips for Best Results Use κ = 1–2 for moderate directional filtering, and β = 0.3–0.7 for smooth elliptical bias. Combine with volume-based indicators to confirm breakout strength. Works best in higher timeframes (1h–1D) to capture macro directional structure. I might revisit this.
Indicador Pine Script®
por GabrielAmadeusLau
CGPT Golden Cross / Death Cross AlertThis custom indicator identifies Golden Cross (Gx) and Death Cross (Dx) events using either EMA or SMA moving averages. A Golden Cross occurs when a short-term MA (e.g., 50) crosses above a long-term MA (e.g., 200), signaling potential bullish momentum. A Death Cross signals potential bearish momentum, with the short-term MA crossing below the long-term MA. It includes: 📈 Customizable MA types (EMA or SMA) ⚙️ Adjustable fast & slow MA lengths 🟢🔴 Chart labels for Gx (green) and Dx (red) 🎯 Background highlights for visual trend shifts 🔔 Built-in alert conditions for real-time notifications Ideal for crypto, stocks, or forex swing and trend trading
Indicador Pine Script®
por Shazch24
EPS+Sales+Net Profit+MCap+Sector & Industry📄 Full Description This script displays a comprehensive financial data panel directly on your TradingView chart, helping long-term investors and swing traders make informed decisions based on fundamental trends. It consolidates key financial metrics and business classification data into a single, visually clear table. 🔍 Key Features: 🧾 Financial Metrics (Auto-Fetched via request.financial): EPS (Earnings Per Share) – Displayed with trend direction (QoQ or YoY). Sales / Revenue – In ₹ Crores (for Indian stocks), trend change also included. Net Profit – Also in ₹ Crores, along with percentage change. Market Cap – Automatically calculated using outstanding shares × price, shown in ₹ Cr. Free Float Market Cap – Based on float shares × price, also in ₹ Cr. 🏷️ Sector & Industry Info: Automatically identifies and displays the Sector and Industry of the stock using syminfo.sector and syminfo.industry. Displayed inline with metrics, making it easy to know what business the stock belongs to. 📊 Table View: Compact and responsive table shown on your chart. Columns: Date | EPS | QoQ | Sales | QoQ | Net Profit | QoQ | Metrics Metrics column dynamically shows: Market Cap Free Float Sector (Row 4) Industry (Row 5) 🌗 Appearance: Supports Dark Mode and Mini Mode toggle. You can also customize: Number of data points (last 4+ quarters or years) Table position and size 🎯 Use Case: This script is ideal for: Fundamental-focused traders who use EPS/Sales trends to identify momentum. Swing traders who combine price action with fundamental tailwinds. Portfolio builders who want to see sector/industry alignment quickly. It works best with fundamentally sound stocks where earnings and profitability are a major factor in price movements. ✅ Important Notes: Script uses request.financial which only works with supported symbols (mostly stocks). Market Cap and Free Float are calculated in ₹ Crores. All financial values are rounded and formatted for readability (e.g., 1,234 Cr). 🙏 Credits: Developed and published by Sameer Thorappa Built with a clean, minimalist approach for high readability and functionality.
Indicador Pine Script®
por sameer_thorappa
Recession Warning Model [BackQuant]Recession Warning Model Overview The Recession Warning Model (RWM) is a Pine Script® indicator designed to estimate the probability of an economic recession by integrating multiple macroeconomic, market sentiment, and labor market indicators. It combines over a dozen data series into a transparent, adaptive, and actionable tool for traders, portfolio managers, and researchers. The model provides customizable complexity levels, display modes, and data processing options to accommodate various analytical requirements while ensuring robustness through dynamic weighting and regime-aware adjustments. Purpose The RWM fulfills the need for a concise yet comprehensive tool to monitor recession risk. Unlike approaches relying on a single metric, such as yield-curve inversion, or extensive economic reports, it consolidates multiple data sources into a single probability output. The model identifies active indicators, their confidence levels, and the current economic regime, enabling users to anticipate downturns and adjust strategies accordingly. Core Features - Indicator Families : Incorporates 13 indicators across five categories: Yield, Labor, Sentiment, Production, and Financial Stress. - Dynamic Weighting : Adjusts indicator weights based on recent predictive accuracy, constrained within user-defined boundaries. - Leading and Coincident Split : Separates early-warning (leading) and confirmatory (coincident) signals, with adjustable weighting (default 60/40 mix). - Economic Regime Sensitivity : Modulates output sensitivity based on market conditions (Expansion, Late-Cycle, Stress, Crisis), using a composite of VIX, yield-curve, financial conditions, and credit spreads. - Display Options : Supports four modes—Probability (0-100%), Binary (four risk bins), Lead/Coincident, and Ensemble (blended probability). - Confidence Intervals : Reflects model stability, widening during high volatility or conflicting signals. - Alerts : Configurable thresholds (Watch, Caution, Warning, Alert) with persistence filters to minimize false signals. - Data Export : Enables CSV output for probabilities, signals, and regimes, facilitating external analysis in Python or R. Model Complexity Levels Users can select from four tiers to balance simplicity and depth: 1. Essential : Focuses on three core indicators—yield-curve spread, jobless claims, and unemployment change—for minimalistic monitoring. 2. Standard : Expands to nine indicators, adding consumer confidence, PMI, VIX, S&P 500 trend, money supply vs. GDP, and the Sahm Rule. 3. Professional : Includes all 13 indicators, incorporating financial conditions, credit spreads, JOLTS vacancies, and wage growth. 4. Research : Unlocks all indicators plus experimental settings for advanced users. Key Indicators Below is a summary of the 13 indicators, their data sources, and economic significance: - Yield-Curve Spread : Difference between 10-year and 3-month Treasury yields. Negative spreads signal banking sector stress. - Jobless Claims : Four-week moving average of unemployment claims. Sustained increases indicate rising layoffs. - Unemployment Change : Three-month change in unemployment rate. Sharp rises often precede recessions. - Sahm Rule : Triggers when unemployment rises 0.5% above its 12-month low, a reliable recession indicator. - Consumer Confidence : University of Michigan survey. Declines reflect household pessimism, impacting spending. - PMI : Purchasing Managers’ Index. Values below 50 indicate manufacturing contraction. - VIX : CBOE Volatility Index. Elevated levels suggest market anticipation of economic distress. - S&P 500 Growth : Weekly moving average trend. Declines reduce wealth effects, curbing consumption. - M2 + GDP Trend : Monitors money supply and real GDP. Simultaneous declines signal credit contraction. - NFCI : Chicago Fed’s National Financial Conditions Index. Positive values indicate tighter conditions. - Credit Spreads : Proxy for corporate bond spreads using 10-year vs. 2-year Treasury yields. Widening spreads reflect stress. - JOLTS Vacancies : Job openings data. Significant drops precede hiring slowdowns. - Wage Growth : Year-over-year change in average hourly earnings. Late-cycle spikes often signal economic overheating. Data Processing - Rate of Change (ROC) : Optionally applied to capture momentum in data series (default: 21-bar period). - Z-Score Normalization : Standardizes indicators to a common scale (default: 252-bar lookback). - Smoothing : Applies a short moving average to final signals (default: 5-bar period) to reduce noise. - Binary Signals : Generated for each indicator (e.g., yield-curve inverted or PMI below 50) based on thresholds or Z-score deviations. Probability Calculation 1. Each indicator’s binary signal is weighted according to user settings or dynamic performance. 2. Weights are normalized to sum to 100% across active indicators. 3. Leading and coincident signals are aggregated separately (if split mode is enabled) and combined using the specified mix. 4. The probability is adjusted by a regime multiplier, amplifying risk during Stress or Crisis regimes. 5. Optional smoothing ensures stable outputs. Display and Visualization - Probability Mode : Plots a continuous 0-100% recession probability with color gradients and confidence bands. - Binary Mode : Categorizes risk into four levels (Minimal, Watch, Caution, Alert) for simplified dashboards. - Lead/Coincident Mode : Displays leading and coincident probabilities separately to track signal divergence. - Ensemble Mode : Averages traditional and split probabilities for a balanced view. - Regime Background : Color-coded overlays (green for Expansion, orange for Late-Cycle, amber for Stress, red for Crisis). - Analytics Table : Optional dashboard showing probability, confidence, regime, and top indicator statuses. Practical Applications - Asset Allocation : Adjust equity or bond exposures based on sustained probability increases. - Risk Management : Hedge portfolios with VIX futures or options during regime shifts to Stress or Crisis. - Sector Rotation : Shift toward defensive sectors when coincident signals rise above 50%. - Trading Filters : Disable short-term strategies during high-risk regimes. - Event Timing : Scale positions ahead of high-impact data releases when probability and VIX are elevated. Configuration Guidelines - Enable ROC and Z-score for consistent indicator comparison unless raw data is preferred. - Use dynamic weighting with at least one economic cycle of data for optimal performance. - Monitor stress composite scores above 80 alongside probabilities above 70 for critical risk signals. - Adjust adaptation speed (default: 0.1) to 0.2 during Crisis regimes for faster indicator prioritization. - Combine RWM with complementary tools (e.g., liquidity metrics) for intraday or short-term trading. Limitations - Macro indicators lag intraday market moves, making RWM better suited for strategic rather than tactical trading. - Historical data availability may constrain dynamic weighting on shorter timeframes. - Model accuracy depends on the quality and timeliness of economic data feeds. Final Note The Recession Warning Model provides a disciplined framework for monitoring economic downturn risks. By integrating diverse indicators with transparent weighting and regime-aware adjustments, it empowers users to make informed decisions in portfolio management, risk hedging, or macroeconomic research. Regular review of model outputs alongside market-specific tools ensures its effective application across varying market conditions.
Indicador Pine Script®
por BackQuant
2
EMA Trend Confirmation with Alerts此脚本是基于EMA 200周期 50周期 20周期加以合并并进行改进的一个脚本指标，主要作用是用于观察趋势走向，其中有上升下降和震荡趋势，经过多数测试，此指标适用于短线交易，推荐周期为20或15，大周期和长线交易详见RSI+EMA结合指标 This script is an improved script indicator based on the EMA 200 period, 50 period, and 20 period. Its main function is to observe the trend direction, including up, down, and oscillating trends. After many tests, this indicator is suitable for short-term trading, and the recommended period is 20 or 15. For large-cycle and long-term trading, please refer to the RSI+EMA combination indicator.
Indicador Pine Script®
por ZhiYujiang
FEDFUNDS Rate Divergence Oscillator [BackQuant]FEDFUNDS Rate Divergence Oscillator 1. Concept and Rationale The United States Federal Funds Rate is the anchor around which global dollar liquidity and risk-free yield expectations revolve. When the Fed hikes, borrowing costs rise, liquidity tightens and most risk assets encounter head-winds. When it cuts, liquidity expands, speculative appetite often recovers. Bitcoin, a 24-hour permissionless asset sometimes described as “digital gold with venture-capital-like convexity,” is particularly sensitive to macro-liquidity swings. The FED Divergence Oscillator quantifies the behavioural gap between short-term monetary policy (proxied by the effective Fed Funds Rate) and Bitcoin’s own percentage price change. By converting each series into identical rate-of-change units, subtracting them, then optionally smoothing the result, the script produces a single bounded-yet-dynamic line that tells you, at a glance, whether Bitcoin is outperforming or underperforming the policy backdrop—and by how much. 2. Data Pipeline • Fed Funds Rate – Pulled directly from the FRED database via the ticker “FRED:FEDFUNDS,” sampled at daily frequency to synchronise with crypto closes. • Bitcoin Price – By default the script forces a daily timeframe so that both series share time alignment, although you can disable that and plot the oscillator on intraday charts if you prefer. • User Source Flexibility – The BTC series is not hard-wired; you can select any exchange-specific symbol or even swap BTC for another crypto or risk asset whose interaction with the Fed rate you wish to study. 3. Math under the Hood (1) Rate of Change (ROC) – Both the Fed rate and BTC close are converted to percent return over a user-chosen lookback (default 30 bars). This means a cut from 5.25 percent to 5.00 percent feeds in as –4.76 percent, while a climb from 25 000 to 30 000 USD in BTC over the same window converts to +20 percent. (2) Divergence Construction – The script subtracts the Fed ROC from the BTC ROC. Positive values show BTC appreciating faster than policy is tightening (or falling slower than the rate is cutting); negative values show the opposite. (3) Optional Smoothing – Macro series are noisy. Toggle “Apply Smoothing” to calm the line with your preferred moving-average flavour: SMA, EMA, DEMA, TEMA, RMA, WMA or Hull. The default EMA-25 removes day-to-day whips while keeping turning points alive. (4) Dynamic Colour Mapping – Rather than using a single hue, the oscillator line employs a gradient where deep greens represent strong bullish divergence and dark reds flag sharp bearish divergence. This heat-map approach lets you gauge intensity without squinting at numbers. (5) Threshold Grid – Five horizontal guides create a structured regime map:  • Lower Extreme (–50 pct) and Upper Extreme (+50 pct) identify panic capitulations and euphoria blow-offs.  • Oversold (–20 pct) and Overbought (+20 pct) act as early warning alarms.  • Zero Line demarcates neutral alignment. 4. Chart Furniture and User Interface • Oscillator fill with a secondary DEMA-30 “shader” offers depth perception: fat ribbons often precede high-volatility macro shifts. • Optional bar-colouring paints candles green when the oscillator is above zero and red below, handy for visual correlation. • Background tints when the line breaches extreme zones, making macro inflection weeks pop out in the replay bar. • Everything—line width, thresholds, colours—can be customised so the indicator blends into any template. 5. Interpretation Guide Macro Liquidity Pulse  • When the oscillator spends weeks above +20 while the Fed is still raising rates, Bitcoin is signalling liquidity tolerance or an anticipatory pivot view. That condition often marks the embryonic phase of major bull cycles (e.g., March 2020 rebound).  • Sustained prints below –20 while the Fed is already dovish indicate risk aversion or idiosyncratic crypto stress—think exchange scandals or broad flight to safety. Regime Transition Signals  • Bullish cross through zero after a long sub-zero stint shows Bitcoin regaining upward escape velocity versus policy.  • Bearish cross under zero during a hiking cycle tells you monetary tightening has finally started to bite. Momentum Exhaustion and Mean-Reversion  • Touches of +50 (or –50) come rarely; they are statistically stretched events. Fade strategies either taking profits or hedging have historically enjoyed positive expectancy.  • Inside-bar candlestick patterns or lower-timeframe bearish engulfings simultaneously with an extreme overbought print make high-probability short scalp setups, especially near weekly resistance. The same logic mirrors for oversold. Pair Trading / Relative Value  • Combine the oscillator with spreads like BTC versus Nasdaq 100. When both the FED Divergence oscillator and the BTC–NDQ relative-strength line roll south together, the cross-asset confirmation amplifies conviction in a mean-reversion short.  • Swap BTC for miners, altcoins or high-beta equities to test who is the divergence leader. Event-Driven Tactics  • FOMC days: plot the oscillator on an hourly chart (disable ‘Force Daily TF’). Watch for micro-structural spikes that resolve in the first hour after the statement; rapid flips across zero can front-run post-FOMC swings.  • CPI and NFP prints: extremes reached into the release often mean positioning is one-sided. A reversion toward neutral in the first 24 hours is common. 6. Alerts Suite Pre-bundled conditions let you automate workflows: • Bullish / Bearish zero crosses – queue spot or futures entries. • Standard OB / OS – notify for first contact with actionable zones. • Extreme OB / OS – prime time to review hedges, take profits or build contrarian swing positions. 7. Parameter Playground • Shorten ROC Lookback to 14 for tactical traders; lengthen to 90 for macro investors. • Raise extreme thresholds (for example ±80) when plotting on altcoins that exhibit higher volatility than BTC. • Try HMA smoothing for responsive yet smooth curves on intraday charts. • Colour-blind users can easily swap bull and bear palette selections for preferred contrasts. 8. Limitations and Best Practices • The Fed Funds series is step-wise; it only changes on meeting days. Rapid BTC oscillations in between may dominate the calculation. Keep that perspective when interpreting very high-frequency signals. • Divergence does not equal causation. Crypto-native catalysts (ETF approvals, hack headlines) can overwhelm macro links temporarily. • Use in conjunction with classical confirmation tools—order-flow footprints, market-profile ledges, or simple price action to avoid “pure-indicator” traps. 9. Final Thoughts The FEDFUNDS Rate Divergence Oscillator distills an entire macro narrative monetary policy versus risk sentiment into a single colourful heartbeat. It will not magically predict every pivot, yet it excels at framing market context, spotting stretches and timing regime changes. Treat it as a strategic compass rather than a tactical sniper scope, combine it with sound risk management and multi-factor confirmation, and you will possess a robust edge anchored in the world’s most influential interest-rate benchmark. Trade consciously, stay adaptive, and let the policy-price tension guide your roadmap.
Indicador Pine Script®
por BackQuant
1
Normalized Dist from 4H MA200 + Chart HighlightsNormalized Distance from 4H EMA200 + Highlighting Extremes This indicator measures the distance between the current price and the 4-hour EMA200, normalized into a z-score to detect statistically significant deviations. 🔹 The lower pane shows the normalized z-score. 🔹 Green background = price far below EMA200 (z < -2). 🔹 Red background = price far above EMA200 (z > 3.1). 🔹 These thresholds are user-configurable. 🔹 On the main chart:   🟥 Red candles indicate overheated prices (z > upper threshold)   🟩 Green candles signal oversold conditions (z < lower threshold) The EMA200 is always taken from a fixed 4H timeframe, regardless of your current chart resolution.
Indicador Pine Script®
por jekasin1
Drawdown Distribution Analysis (DDA) ACADEMIC FOUNDATION AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND The Drawdown Distribution Analysis indicator implements quantitative risk management principles, drawing upon decades of academic research in portfolio theory, behavioral finance, and statistical risk modeling. This tool provides risk assessment capabilities for traders and portfolio managers seeking to understand their current position within historical drawdown patterns. The theoretical foundation of this indicator rests on modern portfolio theory as established by Markowitz (1952), who introduced the fundamental concepts of risk-return optimization that continue to underpin contemporary portfolio management. Sharpe (1966) later expanded this framework by developing risk-adjusted performance measures, most notably the Sharpe ratio, which remains a cornerstone of performance evaluation in financial markets. The specific focus on drawdown analysis builds upon the work of Chekhlov, Uryasev and Zabarankin (2005), who provided the mathematical framework for incorporating drawdown measures into portfolio optimization. Their research demonstrated that traditional mean-variance optimization often fails to capture the full risk profile of investment strategies, particularly regarding sequential losses. More recent work by Goldberg and Mahmoud (2017) has brought these theoretical concepts into practical application within institutional risk management frameworks. Value at Risk methodology, as comprehensively outlined by Jorion (2007), provides the statistical foundation for the risk measurement components of this indicator. The coherent risk measures framework developed by Artzner et al. (1999) ensures that the risk metrics employed satisfy the mathematical properties required for sound risk management decisions. Additionally, the focus on downside risk follows the framework established by Sortino and Price (1994), while the drawdown-adjusted performance measures implement concepts introduced by Young (1991). MATHEMATICAL METHODOLOGY The core calculation methodology centers on a peak-tracking algorithm that continuously monitors the maximum price level achieved and calculates the percentage decline from this peak. The drawdown at any time t is defined as DD(t) = (P(t) - Peak(t)) / Peak(t) × 100, where P(t) represents the asset price at time t and Peak(t) represents the running maximum price observed up to time t. Statistical distribution analysis forms the analytical backbone of the indicator. The system calculates key percentiles using the ta.percentile_nearest_rank() function to establish the 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles of the historical drawdown distribution. This approach provides a complete picture of how the current drawdown compares to historical patterns. Statistical significance assessment employs standard deviation bands at one, two, and three standard deviations from the mean, following the conventional approach where the upper band equals μ + nσ and the lower band equals μ - nσ. The Z-score calculation, defined as Z = (DD - μ) / σ, enables the identification of statistically extreme events, with thresholds set at |Z| > 2.5 for extreme drawdowns and |Z| > 3.0 for severe drawdowns, corresponding to confidence levels exceeding 99.4% and 99.7% respectively. ADVANCED RISK METRICS The indicator incorporates several risk-adjusted performance measures that extend beyond basic drawdown analysis. The Sharpe ratio calculation follows the standard formula Sharpe = (R - Rf) / σ, where R represents the annualized return, Rf represents the risk-free rate, and σ represents the annualized volatility. The system supports dynamic sourcing of the risk-free rate from the US 10-year Treasury yield or allows for manual specification. The Sortino ratio addresses the limitation of the Sharpe ratio by focusing exclusively on downside risk, calculated as Sortino = (R - Rf) / σd, where σd represents the downside deviation computed using only negative returns. This measure provides a more accurate assessment of risk-adjusted performance for strategies that exhibit asymmetric return distributions. The Calmar ratio, defined as Annual Return divided by the absolute value of Maximum Drawdown, offers a direct measure of return per unit of drawdown risk. This metric proves particularly valuable for comparing strategies or assets with different risk profiles, as it directly relates performance to the maximum historical loss experienced. Value at Risk calculations provide quantitative estimates of potential losses at specified confidence levels. The 95% VaR corresponds to the 5th percentile of the drawdown distribution, while the 99% VaR corresponds to the 1st percentile. Conditional VaR, also known as Expected Shortfall, estimates the average loss in the worst 5% of scenarios, providing insight into tail risk that standard VaR measures may not capture. To enable fair comparison across assets with different volatility characteristics, the indicator calculates volatility-adjusted drawdowns using the formula Adjusted DD = Raw DD / (Volatility / 20%). This normalization allows for meaningful comparison between high-volatility assets like cryptocurrencies and lower-volatility instruments like government bonds. The Risk Efficiency Score represents a composite measure ranging from 0 to 100 that combines the Sharpe ratio and current percentile rank to provide a single metric for quick asset assessment. Higher scores indicate superior risk-adjusted performance relative to historical patterns. COLOR SCHEMES AND VISUALIZATION The indicator implements eight distinct color themes designed to accommodate different analytical preferences and market contexts. The EdgeTools theme employs a corporate blue palette that matches the design system used throughout the edgetools.org platform, ensuring visual consistency across analytical tools. The Gold theme specifically targets precious metals analysis with warm tones that complement gold chart analysis, while the Quant theme provides a grayscale scheme suitable for analytical environments that prioritize clarity over aesthetic appeal. The Behavioral theme incorporates psychology-based color coding, using green to represent greed-driven market conditions and red to indicate fear-driven environments. Additional themes include Ocean, Fire, Matrix, and Arctic schemes, each designed for specific market conditions or user preferences. All themes function effectively with both dark and light mode trading platforms, ensuring accessibility across different user interface configurations. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Asset allocation and portfolio construction represent primary use cases for this analytical framework. When comparing multiple assets such as Bitcoin, gold, and the S&P 500, traders can examine Risk Efficiency Scores to identify instruments offering superior risk-adjusted performance. The 95% VaR provides worst-case scenario comparisons, while volatility-adjusted drawdowns enable fair comparison despite varying volatility profiles. The practical decision framework suggests that assets with Risk Efficiency Scores above 70 may be suitable for aggressive portfolio allocations, scores between 40 and 70 indicate moderate allocation potential, and scores below 40 suggest defensive positioning or avoidance. These thresholds should be adjusted based on individual risk tolerance and market conditions. Risk management and position sizing applications utilize the current percentile rank to guide allocation decisions. When the current drawdown ranks above the 75th percentile of historical data, indicating that current conditions are better than 75% of historical periods, position increases may be warranted. Conversely, when percentile rankings fall below the 25th percentile, indicating elevated risk conditions, position reductions become advisable. Institutional portfolio monitoring applications include hedge fund risk dashboard implementations where multiple strategies can be monitored simultaneously. Sharpe ratio tracking identifies deteriorating risk-adjusted performance across strategies, VaR monitoring ensures portfolios remain within established risk limits, and drawdown duration tracking provides valuable information for investor reporting requirements. Market timing applications combine the statistical analysis with trend identification techniques. Strong buy signals may emerge when risk levels register as "Low" in conjunction with established uptrends, while extreme risk levels combined with downtrends may indicate exit or hedging opportunities. Z-scores exceeding 3.0 often signal statistically oversold conditions that may precede trend reversals. STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND VALIDATION The indicator provides 95% confidence intervals around current drawdown levels using the standard formula CI = μ ± 1.96σ. This statistical framework enables users to assess whether current conditions fall within normal market variation or represent statistically significant departures from historical patterns. Risk level classification employs a dynamic assessment system based on percentile ranking within the historical distribution. Low risk designation applies when current drawdowns perform better than 50% of historical data, moderate risk encompasses the 25th to 50th percentile range, high risk covers the 10th to 25th percentile range, and extreme risk applies to the worst 10% of historical drawdowns. Sample size considerations play a crucial role in statistical reliability. For daily data, the system requires a minimum of 252 trading days (approximately one year) but performs better with 500 or more observations. Weekly data analysis benefits from at least 104 weeks (two years) of history, while monthly data requires a minimum of 60 months (five years) for reliable statistical inference. IMPLEMENTATION BEST PRACTICES Parameter optimization should consider the specific characteristics of different asset classes. Equity analysis typically benefits from 500-day lookback periods with 21-day smoothing, while cryptocurrency analysis may employ 365-day lookback periods with 14-day smoothing to account for higher volatility patterns. Fixed income analysis often requires longer lookback periods of 756 days with 34-day smoothing to capture the lower volatility environment. Multi-timeframe analysis provides hierarchical risk assessment capabilities. Daily timeframe analysis supports tactical risk management decisions, weekly analysis informs strategic positioning choices, and monthly analysis guides long-term allocation decisions. This hierarchical approach ensures that risk assessment occurs at appropriate temporal scales for different investment objectives. Integration with complementary indicators enhances the analytical framework. Trend indicators such as RSI and moving averages provide directional bias context, volume analysis helps confirm the severity of drawdown conditions, and volatility measures like VIX or ATR assist in market regime identification. ALERT SYSTEM AND AUTOMATION The automated alert system monitors five distinct categories of risk events. Risk level changes trigger notifications when drawdowns move between risk categories, enabling proactive risk management responses. Statistical significance alerts activate when Z-scores exceed established threshold levels of 2.5 or 3.0 standard deviations. New maximum drawdown alerts notify users when historical maximum levels are exceeded, indicating entry into uncharted risk territory. Poor risk efficiency alerts trigger when the composite risk efficiency score falls below 30, suggesting deteriorating risk-adjusted performance. Sharpe ratio decline alerts activate when risk-adjusted performance turns negative, indicating that returns no longer compensate for the risk undertaken. TRADING STRATEGIES Conservative risk parity strategies can be implemented by monitoring Risk Efficiency Scores across a diversified asset portfolio. Monthly rebalancing maintains equal risk contribution from each asset, with allocation reductions triggered when risk levels reach "High" status and complete exits executed when "Extreme" risk levels emerge. This approach typically results in lower overall portfolio volatility, improved risk-adjusted returns, and reduced maximum drawdown periods. Tactical asset rotation strategies compare Risk Efficiency Scores across different asset classes to guide allocation decisions. Assets with scores exceeding 60 receive overweight allocations, while assets scoring below 40 receive underweight positions. Percentile rankings provide timing guidance for allocation adjustments, creating a systematic approach to asset allocation that responds to changing risk-return profiles. Market timing strategies with statistical edges can be constructed by entering positions when Z-scores fall below -2.5, indicating statistically oversold conditions, and scaling out when Z-scores exceed 2.5, suggesting overbought conditions. The 95% VaR serves as a stop-loss reference point, while trend confirmation indicators provide additional validation for position entry and exit decisions. LIMITATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS Several statistical limitations affect the interpretation and application of these risk measures. Historical bias represents a fundamental challenge, as past drawdown patterns may not accurately predict future risk characteristics, particularly during structural market changes or regime shifts. Sample dependence means that results can be sensitive to the selected lookback period, with shorter periods providing more responsive but potentially less stable estimates. Market regime changes can significantly alter the statistical parameters underlying the analysis. During periods of structural market evolution, historical distributions may provide poor guidance for future expectations. Additionally, many financial assets exhibit return distributions with fat tails that deviate from normal distribution assumptions, potentially leading to underestimation of extreme event probabilities. Practical limitations include execution risk, where theoretical signals may not translate directly into actual trading results due to factors such as slippage, timing delays, and market impact. Liquidity constraints mean that risk metrics assume perfect liquidity, which may not hold during stressed market conditions when risk management becomes most critical. Transaction costs are not incorporated into risk-adjusted return calculations, potentially overstating the attractiveness of strategies that require frequent trading. Behavioral factors represent another limitation, as human psychology may override statistical signals, particularly during periods of extreme market stress when disciplined risk management becomes most challenging. TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION Performance optimization ensures reliable operation across different market conditions and timeframes. All technical analysis functions are extracted from conditional statements to maintain Pine Script compliance and ensure consistent execution. Memory efficiency is achieved through optimized variable scoping and array usage, while computational speed benefits from vectorized calculations where possible. Data quality requirements include clean price data without gaps or errors that could distort distribution analysis. Sufficient historical data is essential, with a minimum of 100 bars required and 500 or more preferred for reliable statistical inference. Time alignment across related assets ensures meaningful comparison when conducting multi-asset analysis. The configuration parameters are organized into logical groups to enhance usability. Core settings include the Distribution Analysis Period (100-2000 bars), Drawdown Smoothing Period (1-50 bars), and Price Source selection. Advanced metrics settings control risk-free rate sourcing, either from live market data or fixed rate specification, along with toggles for various risk-adjusted metric calculations. Display options provide flexibility in visual presentation, including color theme selection from eight available schemes, automatic dark mode optimization, and control over table display, position lines, percentile bands, and standard deviation overlays. These options ensure that the indicator can be adapted to different analytical workflows and visual preferences. CONCLUSION The Drawdown Distribution Analysis indicator provides risk management tools for traders seeking to understand their current position within historical risk patterns. By combining established statistical methodology with practical usability features, the tool enables evidence-based risk assessment and portfolio optimization decisions. The implementation draws upon established academic research while providing practical features that address real-world trading requirements. Dynamic risk-free rate integration ensures accurate risk-adjusted performance calculations, while multiple color schemes accommodate different analytical preferences and use cases. Academic compliance is maintained through transparent methodology and acknowledgment of limitations. The tool implements peer-reviewed statistical techniques while clearly communicating the constraints and assumptions underlying the analysis. This approach ensures that users can make informed decisions about the appropriate application of the risk assessment framework within their broader trading and investment processes. BIBLIOGRAPHY Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J.M. and Heath, D. (1999) 'Coherent Measures of Risk', Mathematical Finance, 9(3), pp. 203-228. Chekhlov, A., Uryasev, S. and Zabarankin, M. (2005) 'Drawdown Measure in Portfolio Optimization', International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, 8(1), pp. 13-58. Goldberg, L.R. and Mahmoud, O. (2017) 'Drawdown: From Practice to Theory and Back Again', Journal of Risk Management in Financial Institutions, 10(2), pp. 140-152. Jorion, P. (2007) Value at Risk: The New Benchmark for Managing Financial Risk. 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill. Markowitz, H. (1952) 'Portfolio Selection', Journal of Finance, 7(1), pp. 77-91. Sharpe, W.F. (1966) 'Mutual Fund Performance', Journal of Business, 39(1), pp. 119-138. Sortino, F.A. and Price, L.N. (1994) 'Performance Measurement in a Downside Risk Framework', Journal of Investing, 3(3), pp. 59-64. Young, T.W. (1991) 'Calmar Ratio: A Smoother Tool', Futures, 20(1), pp. 40-42.
Indicador Pine Script®
por EdgeTools
8
Valuation Tool + Williams %R by QDEEDValuation + Williams %R Indicator This indicator combines relative valuation and momentum to help identify overvalued and undervalued conditions in key macro assets: DXY (US Dollar Index) GC1! (Gold Futures) ZB1! (30-Year US Treasury Bond Futures) Inspired by Larry Williams' techniques, this tool uses a rescaled comparison of asset prices and overlays the Williams %R momentum oscillator. What it shows: When the value line is above 0, the asset may be overvalued relative to the others. When it's below 0, the asset may be undervalued. The Williams %R adds a timing layer, indicating overbought/oversold momentum zones.
Indicador Pine Script®
por QDEED
2 Asset Optimal PortfolioThis script calculates and plots either the Sharpe Ratio or Sortino Ratio for a two-asset portfolio using historical price data, allowing users to analyse how different allocations affect portfolio performance over a specified lookback period. Features: Determine the weights of 2 assets and how they affect the the Sharpe or Sortino ratio. Adjust timeframe to suit your personal investment timeframe. User Inputs: 1. Asset 1 and Asset 2: Choose any two symbols to evaluate (default is BTCUSD for both). 2. Look Back Length: Number of past bars (days) to use for calculations (default is 365). 3. Source: Price source for returns (default is close). 4. Ratio: Select which ratio to plot — Sharpe or Sortino. 5. % of Asset 1: Portfolio weight (from 0 to 1) for Asset 1.
Indicador Pine Script®
por QuantChook
FMX Trend Confirmation - No Reversals🔍 FMX Continuation Signal – No Reversals Powered by the FMX Model (Fundamentals Meet Execution) This indicator is designed to capture high-probability continuation trades only, avoiding risky reversals. It confirms buy or sell signals based on: ✅ 15-Minute Structure Shift Confirmation ✅ Liquidity Sweeps (stop hunts beyond recent highs/lows) ✅ Trend Validation using HTF SMA (default: 15min) ✅ Second Candle Close inside the sweep range — FMX-grade precision 📈 Green “Buy” labels appear when: Liquidity is swept below recent lows Price closes back inside the range The higher timeframe trend is bullish 📉 Orange “Sell” labels appear when: Liquidity is swept above recent highs Price closes back inside the range The higher timeframe trend is bearish 🛡️ No reversal signals are plotted. This tool is meant for traders who follow the trend with smart money logic, inspired by FMX principles.
Indicador Pine Script®
por marketwizardfmx
Twin Range Filter – Buy/Sell SignalsThe Twin Range Filter is a trend-following indicator that combines two adaptive volatility filters to identify potential market reversals and trend continuations. It uses two configurable smoothing periods (fast and slow) to calculate a dynamic range around price, filtering out market noise and highlighting meaningful shifts in direction. This indicator plots BUY and SELL signals based on price action in relation to the range filter, as well as internal trend conditions. ✅ How It Works: Long Signal (BUY) is triggered when: Price is above the filtered range (showing strength), and Short-term upward momentum is confirmed. Short Signal (SELL) is triggered when: Price is below the filtered range (showing weakness), and Short-term downward momentum is confirmed. The signals are highlighted using green "Long" and red "Short" labels on the chart. Background colors reinforce the current directional bias. 🔔 Alerts: Long Signal – A new BUY condition has been detected. Short Signal – A new SELL condition has been detected. 📌 Use Cases: Entry timing for swing or intraday trades Trend confirmation filter Signal generator in automated strategies (when paired with a strategy script)
Indicador Pine Script®
por Master-Trades369
9
Fibonacci Range Detector ║ BullVision🔬 Overview The Fibonacci Range Mapper is a dynamic technical tool designed to identify, track, and visualize price ranges using Fibonacci levels. Whether you're trading manually or prefer automated structure recognition, this indicator helps you contextualize market moves and locate key price zones with precision. ⚙️ Core Logic 🔍 Range Detection (Auto & Manual Modes) In Auto mode, the indicator uses an advanced ZigZag system based on ATR or percentage thresholds to confirm market swings and construct Fibonacci-based ranges. In Manual mode, traders can define their own swing low and high to generate precise custom ranges. 📐 Fibonacci Mapping Each detected range is automatically plotted with key Fibonacci retracement levels — 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100% — along with optional extensions (127.2% and 161.8%) to anticipate price continuations or reversals. 📋 Live Data Table An integrated info panel dynamically displays crucial metrics: • Range size • Current price zone (Discount / Mid / Premium) • Position within range (%) • Distance to range extremes • Range status (Pending or Confirmed) 🕰️ Historical Memory Up to 20 past ranges can be stored and visualized simultaneously, helping traders recognize repeated price behaviors and contextual support/resistance levels. 🎨 Visual Highlights Zones of interest (0–25% = Discount, 75–100% = Premium) are color-coded with custom transparency, and labels can be toggled for clarity. The current active range updates in real time as structure evolves. 🔧 User Customization • Detection Method: Choose between ATR or % ZigZag for automated swing identification • Confirmation Delay: Set how many bars to wait before confirming a new high • Manual Overrides: Select exact price levels when you want full control • Extensions & Labels: Toggle additional lines and info to suit your charting style • Visual Table Position: Customize where the data table appears on screen • Color Scheme: Define your own zone gradients for better visual interpretation 📈 Use Cases This indicator is ideal for traders who want to: • Identify value zones within local or macro price structures • Plan trades around Fibonacci retracement and extension levels • Detect shifts in market structure using an adaptive ZigZag logic • Track recurring price ranges and historical reaction points • Enhance technical confluence with clean, visual price mapping ⚠️ Important Notes This tool is not a buy/sell signal generator — it is a visual framework for structure-based analysis. Use it in conjunction with your existing strategy and risk management process. Always confirm with broader context and multi-timeframe alignment.
Indicador Pine Script®
por BullVisionCapital