1992issue C071-8
Constructing a damping-index trend filter
A two-window ratio of average high-low span can sit in front of a mechanical entry so the system waits for contracting extremes and a displaced trend check before it acts, then exits at a short lookback extreme.
- The damping-index compares the recent five-bar average high-minus-low span with the preceding five-bar span and treats any reading below 1 as strong damping.
- Damping is not the same as volatility, because volatility can change while highs and lows fail to draw closer together.
- Long and short entries stay closed until the index, a near-term close through a two-bar average, and a trend-confirmation-window are all true.
- The same four-bar-extreme-stop both protects and exits, while an operator-veto can still skip a poorly defined or already-extended setup.
Contracting highs and lows as their own measure
This archive note reconstructs a damping-index so contracting highs and lows can be coded as a ratio, then used as a gate in front of a rule-based entry. The mechanical trading system stays flat until compression and trend alignment are both present, and it finishes with a four-bar-extreme-stop.
After a news shock that moves price without shifting supply and demand, the construction is motivated by a cobweb-adjustment. That zigzag is a supply-and-demand path in which price overshoots and then damps toward balance as producers and buyers respond with a lag. The cycle can be as short as a few minutes or as long as a multi-year production cycle.
Building the damping-index
The damping-index is a two-window ratio of average high-low span. It is built as the recent five-bar average high-minus-low span divided by the preceding five-bar span. Averaging lengths can be changed, but the published construction uses two consecutive five-bar windows.
The index is described as typically ranging from about 0.5 to 2 or 3. Any reading below 1 is treated as a strong detection of damping. The ratio flags contracting extremes when the recent window is narrower than the prior window.
Damping is distinguished from volatility because volatility can expand or contract without highs and lows drawing closer together. Quiet range and contracting extremes are therefore not coded as the same condition.
Entries that wait for compression and trend
A long signal requires a non-zero denominator, a damping-index below 1, a close above the average high of the prior two bars, and a trend-confirmation-window in which the average low of the last three bars is above the average high of a four-bar window starting ten bars earlier.
A short signal requires a damping-index below 1, a close below the average low of the prior two bars, and a trend-confirmation-window in which the average high of the last three bars is below the average low of a four-bar window starting ten bars earlier.
The trend-confirmation-window is that displaced comparison of recent average lows or highs against an earlier window. It requires the compression to occur inside an existing directional bias. Until the index and that displaced check are jointly true, the rule-based entry does not fire.
Closing the procedure at a four-bar extreme
Longs are protected and exited at the lowest low of the last four bars. Shorts are protected and exited at the highest high of the last four bars. That four-bar-extreme-stop is both the protective level and the exit, and it is the short lookback extreme that closes the procedure.
The same rules as a watchlist
Intraday examples present the same rules as a watchlist. An operator-veto still lets the operator skip a mechanically generated signal when the contracting pattern is poorly defined or the move has already extended.
All readings on this track · 33 readings
- 1988Opening-range brackets, a two-bar trend filter, and bounded stops
- 1990Bezier-curve price trend filter
- 1992Constructing a damping-index trend filter
- 1992Building a random walk index trend filter
- 1992Phase diagrams for moving-average trend filters
- 1993Volume-weighted change smoothing and trend ranking
- 1993Concurrent highest-low filter with a largest-low-fall trigger
- 1994Unit-invariant trend filters and the c-test
- 1995Constructing cup and cap entries with a three-bar net line
- 1997Why a daily timing evaluation depends on interval, lookbacks, and the fitting objective
- 2001A volume budget clock for trend-segment construction
- 2001Keep three jobs separate when you test a composite score
- 2002Evaluating the weekly four-percent close filter as a market-state procedure
- 2003Constructing a confirmed zigzag trend filter
- 2004Decompose high, low, and close into separate forecast streams
- 2005Three-state moving-average breakout bar coloring
- 2005Constructing a volume and move-adjusted trend filter
- 2005A fifty-day average breakout as a trend permission filter
- 2005Current-bar inclusion can mute a stochastic channel break
- 2006A stochastic oscillator gated by a long-term exponential average
- 2010A construction test for a modified volume-price trend filter
- 2011Constructing a Spearman rank trend filter
- 2013Constructing a repeated-median slope as a resistant trend filter
- 2014Combining a relative-strength index and trend filters for oversold setups
- 2014Price-rooted lookbacks for a relative strength index, a moving average, and a trend filter
- 2015Evaluating next-session intermarket range forecasts
- 2018Read the intermarket weight matrix first, then the predicted moving-average filter
- 2018Constructing the stiffness trend filter from moving-average holds
- 2018The averaging kernel and the lagged trend gate are separate specifications
- 2019A trend filter is not ready to compare until portfolio constraints are written down
- 2019Lookback, threshold, and position-capacity for a stiffness trend-filter
- 2020Combining a trend filter with a moving average and a stochastic oscillator
- 2020Constructing a relative-strength oscillator with a rank-agreement trend filter