2008issue C061-4
Weight construction beyond the N-day label
An exponential moving average assigns a leading-weight to each new observation and fades older observations through a retention-factor. The n-day-label sets that decay. It does not make the average an N-observation window.
- An exponential moving average is a weighted average. Each observation is scaled by a weight between zero and one, and those weights always sum to one.
- A simple moving average is the equal-weight case. The conventional recursive step applies a leading-weight K to the newest observation and a retention-factor of 1 minus K to the previous output.
- The n-day-label sets K or the retention-factor. It is not a promise that exactly N observations enter the average.
- Under the conventional N parameterization, the weight-distribution generally needs about 2.3 times N observations to lie within 1 percent of its limiting values.
A weighted average, not a named window
An exponential moving average is a weighted average. Each observation is scaled by a weight between zero and one, and those weights always sum to one. A simple moving average is the equal-weight case of that construction, giving every included observation the same weight.
Exponential-smoothing is a recursive forecast construction. It assigns a leading-weight to the newest observation and scales prior output by a retention-factor so older observations decay with age. A moving-average is an equal-weight average over a stated lookback. In the conventional exponential construction it can also serve as the opening block from which new weight is drawn.
How each new observation takes weight
The conventional recursive step forms the new output as the newest observation times a leading-weight K plus the previous output times the complementary factor 1 minus K. That complementary share is the retention-factor. It scales previous output and therefore how slowly older observations fade.
Unlike an N-day simple average that uses exactly N observations and drops the oldest, an exponential construction can start from a single observation and retains every observation it has acquired.
Where the leading-weight is drawn from
With K equal to 0.2, a simple-average initializer must cover at least five earlier observations if no leftover observation is to outweigh the newest observation. Two algebraic choices that meet the initializer bound K greater than 1 over N plus 1 are K equal to 2 over N plus 1, described as the more common mapping, and K equal to 1 over N.
How long the decay profile needs to settle
The weight-distribution is the full set of observation weights after the recursion is expanded. Early profiles are distorted and only later approach a smooth decaying shape. After enough observations for a smooth conventional profile, the most recent N observations carry between 86 percent and 89 percent of total weight. Under the conventional N parameterization, the weight profile generally needs about 2.3 times N observations to lie within 1 percent of its limiting values.
A modified construction and a window reading
A modified construction can start from the first observation without an initializing simple average, take incremental weight from every preceding weight, and set any retention-factor between zero and one rather than only rates implied by integer day counts. One way to make the N-day name refer to a window is to solve the retention-factor so a chosen cumulative share, illustrated at 95 percent, falls on the most recent N days.
All readings on this track · 41 readings
- 1984Matching average age across price filters
- 1984Residual-impact construction of exponential smoothers
- 1988Constructing simple and exponential moving averages as specified filters
- 1989Evaluating smoothed free reserves and funds-discount spreads
- 1990Integer construction of moving averages and exponential smoothing
- 1990Constructing incremental moving average filters
- 1991Constructing a double-smoothed stochastic oscillator
- 1991Constructing an exponential average from a smoothing weight
- 1991Constructing a double-smoothed momentum oscillator family
- 1991Competing certainty rules from exponential-average conditions
- 1991Hybrid construction of a mechanical timing system from smoothed signals
- 1991Constructing an exponential smoother from a moving-average length
- 1991Equivalent relative-strength-index constructions from a ratio and from smoothed momentum
- 1991Constructing the true strength index from double-smoothed momentum
- 1991True strength index from signed, double-smoothed momentum
- 1992Constructing exponential averages from simple lookbacks
- 1992Constructing exponential averages by the smoothing constant, startup length and lag
- 1992Nested range smoothing and windowed high-low damping
- 1992A weekly equity stance from the discount-bill spread
- 1993Double-smoothed stochastics momentum index construction
- 1993Constructing the true strength index with double exponential smoothing
- 1994Polarized fractal efficiency with a shared exponential smoother
- 1994Five-interval exponential smoothing of ten-interval signed path-efficiency
- 1994Hand-ranked price-volume series with stacked smoothing and stochastic
- 1995Range expansion filter on multi-horizon averages
- 1995The exponential smoothing constant from averaging lag
- 1997Construct a nested-average rainbow band and oscillator
- 1998Filter stacks that combine a moving average with exponential smoothing
- 2002Smoothed relative-strength construction from wilder-averaging and a price prefilter
- 2003Reverse-engineered RSI price targets
- 2004Piecewise trend quality from moving-average reversals
- 2004Nested smoothing recipes versus unaudited oscillator experiments
- 2008Weight construction beyond the N-day label
- 2010A consensus filter for objective RSI and smoothing construction
- 2012Sentiment-zone oscillator from signed closes
- 2012Classic RSI one-over-N smoothing versus the standard exponential average
- 2013Why exponential smoothing uses two over n plus one
- 2015Constructing ratio indicators with moving-average and exponential-smoothing weights
- 2015Slow relative-strength index from an exponentially smoothed price
- 2017Rebuilding the relative strength index as open-scale buy-sell pressure
- 2017Comparing Wilder and exponential smoothing inside a relative-strength index