Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

jswanson

Reducing Whipsaws - Two Simple Methods

Recommended Posts

Let's take a look at a simple moving average crossover system and see if we can improve it. Specifically, can we improve the moving average system's performance by reducing the number of whipsaws during those dreaded range bound markets? Whipsaws occur when a market moves from a trending mode to a consolidation mode. During this consolidation mode the system gets whipsawed from long to short creating a string of losing trades. Long trades suddenly reverse hitting your stop. Likewise for short trades. These 'false signals' can destroy your equity curve. In this article I'm going to present two simple methods to improve the simple moving average crossover system. These ideas can easily be implemented into your trading systems and may provide a great starting point for a trend following system.

 

Baseline System

 

Our baseline system will consist of two simple moving averages (SMA) executed on a daily chart of the Euro futures. I'm picking the Euro because it has demonstrated solid trending characteristics as opposed to the stock index markets which tend to be mean reverting. If you will recall, signals are generated when a faster moving average (trigger SMA or trigger line) crosses a slower moving average (slow SMA or slow line).

 

Slow SMA 50 period

Trigger SMA 3 period

 

Go Long when trigger crosses above Slow SMA

Go Short when trigger crosses under Slow SMA

 

Dates Tested: May 2001 - September 30, 2011

Commissions & Slippage: $26 deducted per trade

Number of Contracts: 1

 

For those using TradeStation the Baseline System was created by inserting two strategies into the chart that were provided by TradeStation. Below are the two strategies. The first one controls the long entry (LE) rules and the second one controls the short entry (SE) rules. You can see the input fields contain the three and the fifty for the two different periods for our moving averages. Buy using these provided strategies you can build a moving average crossover strategy within seconds without any coding skills.

 

Base_System_Strategys.png

 

BASELINE SYSTEM EQUITY CURVE

 

Base_System_EQ_Curve.png

 

These two simple rules produce a trading system that is actually profitable over the long term. This is a testimate to the trending characteristics of the Euro futures market. However, there are periods of large drawdowns and long periods where no new equity highs are created. It’s not likely anyone would actually trade this. The image below shows a recent period from 2011 when the Euro entered a consolidation phase during the summer months of June through August. During this time our Baseline System produced a string of eight consecutive losing trades.

 

WHIPSAW SUMMER 2011

 

Whipsaw.png

 

IMPROVEMENT #1: DELAYED ENTRY

 

With this entry method we are going to delay our entry into the market after the trigger line crosses the slow SMA. So, when the trigger line crosses the slow SMA we do not open our position right away. We delay for several bars. Let’s say we wait for 10 bars after the cross occurs. On the tenth bar after the signal we see if price is still above the slow SMA (for a long entry) and enter at the open of the 11th. If price is below our slow SMA we don’t open a new position. By doing this we eliminate some whipsaws at the expense of entering the trade later than the original SMA cross. The idea behind this method is if a new bull market is about to start, price should not fall back below the slow SMA. In short, it’s another way to measure the amount of conviction for the next market phase. However, we will keep the exit the same. When an EMA cross occurs we always close our open position. We only apply the delay when opening a new position.

 

Delay_Entry_System_EQ_Curve.png

 

The equity curve with our delayed entry actually moves the entire equity curve above the zero line. Fewer trades are taken and we reduce the total net profit. The equity curve also appears a little less jagged implying a slightly more smoother climb up. Below is an image showing the whipsaw summer time period in 2011. You will notice we have reduced the number of whipsaws from eight to five. Just during these few months we reduced the number of false entries by three.

 

WHIPSAW SUMMER 2011

 

Whipsaw_Delay.png

 

IMPROVEMENT #2: TRADING BANDS

 

Unlike the standard moving average crossover where the trigger line must simply cross the slow SMA, our trigger line must now demonstrate conviction by crossing beyond the slow SMA. For example, picture another band above the slow SMA that is 1 ATR above the slow SMA. In order to open a new long position we require the trigger line to penetrate that ATR band above the slow line. Now picture another band that is one ATR below the SMA. This band represents our short trigger when we open a short position. We hope to eliminate some whipsaws by delaying our entry and forcing the market to show us some strength.

 

Some of you may have already noticed that what we have is a Keltner Channel. A Keltner Channel is nothing more than a moving average (slow SMA) with an upper band X number of ATRs above and below the slow SMA. The upper and lower bands act as the trigger to enter either a long position or a short position. The bands adapt to expanding volatility requiring more price conviction to initiate a new position. Likewise, these bands contract during lower volatility times. Thus, the entry and exit rules are more dynamic to a changing market than a simple moving average crossover.

 

Band_Entry_System_EQ_Curve.png

 

The equity graph does not look too much different than our 10-bar delayed entry system. The entire equity curve is shifted a little closer to the zero line and it appears there are fewer trades. Below is the same time period showing the Band System has reduced the number of false signals from eight to two. This is a great improvement over the Baseline System.

 

WHIPSAW SUMMER 2011

 

Whipsaw_Band.png

 

SUMMARY

 

Each of the two methods improved the results of the original Baseline System. Looking at the graph below we can see performance statistics such as profit factor, percent winners and average trade net profit all increased. The Band Entry produced the best overall statistics. However, the maximum drawdown did not change much. We certainly don’t have a trading system that is tradable with real money, but we accomplished our mission. We reduced the number of whipsaws with our Delayed Entry System and Band Entry System. You can see this by looking at the number of trades taken by each system and the percent winning trades.

 

MA-Improvement-Summary.png

 

Code Download

 

The band trading system is rather simple, but the delayed entry is a bit more tricky. If you would like a copy of the EasyLanguage code (text file) you can download it here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  hansjs said:
Hi Jeff,

Thanks sharing the system.

 

Is it possible/does it make sense to trade the system intraday? And if so what timeframe can you recommend?

 

While I did not test intra-day I will say this: my experience tells me that intra day with such a strategy will not work. In short, the smaller the timeframe the more noise there is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The moving averages method simply does not adapt quickly to accomodate significant changes in volatility....especially for the intraday time frame..Keltner is a bit better but still no cigar (in my opinion)...

 

What does work is Bollinger Bands properly applied...because (obviously) they respond quicly to changes in local volatility. After a long period of testing, I am using them in my class with very nice results....

 

I think the bottom line is that people have to take the time to research and learn about the technical issues. Most will not committ to that kind of effort, because it requires a delay between the time you start and any possible improvement...I have been working on this for almost 8 months on and off, and only now seeing the benefits....

 

Edit

Swanson you are one of the few who posts, then reads the responses and thanks me for trying to add value to the conversation. I appreciate that...here is a chart of tonight's Bollinger Band reversal trade...the mechanism is simple....you wait for price to test the BB and then move in your desired direction...(of course there is more to it, but I leave that to your discretion). What I like about it is that you know quickly if you are wrong...In my Globex class, we are looking at about 72.9% favorable entries (and outcomes) using this method over nearly 170 data points. We are in forward testing at this point.

 

 

Good luck

 

Steve

5aa710b1c9583_BBreversalentry.thumb.PNG.58fe049c027fa1619410a557dcf6e373.PNG

Edited by steve46

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I am new here, but thought I could offer a way out of the whipsaw problem.

I use the moving average on the high price for longs, and on the low price for short trades.

If the price trades between the high and low SMA, it is generally found to be ranging sideways where you are prone to whipsaws.

 

For my day trading, I look for price to cross the high sma. I use period 5 for the sma.

Maybe you could put this on the charts, and adjust the sma period to suit your trading style.

I hope this will work for you guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.