Skip to main content
Track Moving-average crossover
53 / 57
Library

2016issue C0416-21

A three-gate checklist for longs after a sharp drop

The archive allowed a long only after a golden-cross, a sharp-drop, and contraction in range or volume. It released the position with a dynamic-ma-exit instead of a fixed holding period.

  • Later tests kept only those sharp-drop longs that printed while a golden-cross remained in force.
  • A sharp-drop was a close 5% or more below the 50-day moving average.
  • The combined contraction rule allowed an entry when either range-contraction or volume-contraction appeared, so the trade count would not collapse.
  • After calendar exits of 5, 10, 15, and 20 days were compared with a close above the 10-day moving average, the dynamic-ma-exit was kept.
Entries in this reading3 entries

What the archive defined

A golden-cross was a bull regime defined as the 50-day moving average remaining above the 200-day moving average. A death-cross was a bear regime defined as the 50-day moving average remaining below the 200-day moving average.

A sharp-drop was a close 5% or more below the 50-day moving average. Range-contraction was a session whose high-low span was smaller than the prior session. Volume-contraction was a session whose volume was smaller than the prior session. A dynamic-ma-exit ended the long when price closed back above the 10-day moving average.

The first long rule

The first long rule used the S&P 500 index from 1990 and a 100000 stake. It entered after a 5% or greater close below the 50-day and 10-day moving averages, and it exited after 10 days.

Editorial reading: the earliest written long already paired the sharp-drop distance with the 10-day average, but it still released the trade on a 10-day calendar.

Confirm the 50-day versus 200-day regime

After comparing golden-cross and death-cross samples, later tests were limited to sharp drops that occurred while the 50-day average stayed above the 200-day average.

Editorial reading: this is the first gate. In the later workflow a death-cross keeps the long off.

Release with a short average, not a calendar

Fixed exits after 5, 10, 15, and 20 days were compared with an exit on a close above the 10-day moving average. That moving-average exit was kept for later filters.

Editorial reading: the later workflow ends the long with a dynamic-ma-exit rather than with a preset number of sessions.

Profit factor versus holding rule after a golden-cross dip

Fixed holds of five to twenty days after a golden-cross, 5% oversold entry all produced profit factors between 2.83 and 4.31. Exiting on a close back above the 10-day average lifted that figure to 10.41 and the win rate to 87.88 percent, which is why the study discarded a calendar exit. The values are the profit-factor column of the article's holding-period table for the S&P 500 from 1990 with a $100,000 stake.
Fixed holds of five to twenty days after a golden-cross, 5% oversold entry all produced profit factors between 2.83 and 4.31. Exiting on a close back above the 10-day average lifted that figure to 10.41 and the win rate to 87.88 percent, which is why the study discarded a calendar exit. The values are the profit-factor column of the article's holding-period table for the S&P 500 from 1990 with a $100,000 stake.S&P 500 (INX) · Daily · 1990-01-01T00:00:00.000Z to 2016-12-31T00:00:00.000Z

Every row keeps the same entry: 50-day average above the 200-day, and a close more than 5% below the 50-day average and below the 10-day average. Only the exit changes. The sample runs from 1990 through the April 2016 publication window.

Wait for range or volume to contract

Under the golden-cross and 5% oversold conditions, entries were split by whether that day's high-low range was larger or smaller than the prior day's range. The same split was applied to daily volume.

The combined procedure allowed an entry when either volume or range contracted so the trade count would not collapse. Editorial reading: this is the third gate. The long stays off while both range and volume are still expanding.

How the August 2015 walkthrough applied the gates

In the August 2015 walkthrough the buy stayed off while the close was already more than 5% below the 50-day average but volume and range were still rising. On 25 August both contracted, and the buy turned on.

That walkthrough entered at the 25 August 2015 close of 1867.61 and exited on 3 September 2015 at 1951.13 under the close-above-the-10-day-average rule.

Editorial reading: the third gate delayed the long until contraction printed, and the dynamic-ma-exit, not a 10-day calendar, closed the trade.

Educational research material, not investment advice. Historical source context does not establish present-day performance.
53 of 57 in the Moving-average crossover track
201618-19 pp.Next on Moving-average crossoverWeekly inflation-ratio crossover for commodity regimesCommodities are treated as everyday production inputs, so inflation measures are described as moving closely with food and energy prices.
All readings on this track · 57 readings
  1. 1988Constructing moving averages: weights, smoothing and crossovers
  2. 1988Constructing breadth and average trend states
  3. 1989Evaluating an always-in-the-market moving-average crossover
  4. 1989Constructing symmetric market-breadth ratio accumulators
  5. 1989Objective crossover tests of Fibonacci wave ratios
  6. 1990Volume-adjusted moving average construction
  7. 1991Constructing a mechanical crossover on a synthetic price series
  8. 1991A two-speed breadth reading for intermediate market direction
  9. 1992A Deutschemark yield map with dual-average and relative-strength timing
  10. 1992Confirming currency-fund trends with a crossover and a filter
  11. 1992A moving-average slope filter for crossover signals
  12. 1992Occupancy and split-sample tests for average crossovers
  13. 1994Gold-mining seasonality and bond-fund duration switching
  14. 1994Price oscillator from two moving averages
  15. 1995Explicit exponential weights and binary entry filters
  16. 1996Currency futures crossover with slope, bond filter, and stop
  17. 1996Two-market average crossover entry with a fixed stop
  18. 1997Construction of a filtered three-average crossover
  19. 1998Two-group exponential average compression as a trend filter
  20. 1998Constructing r-squared trend filters with dual lookbacks
  21. 1998Moving-average length is a habit, not a secret
  22. 1999Solving the close that triggers a moving-average crossover
  23. 2000Kagi yang and yin control versus crossover noise
  24. 2000Constructing simple moving average crossover filters
  25. 2000Building a vertical-horizontal filter to gate trend signals
  26. 2000Two-average crossover as a check on trend following
  27. 2003Stacked exponential-average retracement entries and extreme stops
  28. 2003Evaluating oscillator thresholds against optimized crossovers
  29. 2004Constructing a semicycle trend-quality filter
  30. 2004Commodity subgroups labeled by crossover, support, or convergence
  31. 2004Full-window evaluation of crossover trend systems
  32. 2004Two-average trend filters as a classroom critique of indicator stacking
  33. 2005Three-layer confirmation from a moving-average cross, candles, and Q-stick
  34. 2005Charting put prices beside an equity breakdown
  35. 2005Range-gated moving-average crossover construction
  36. 2007Anticipating a simple-average crossover with a threshold-close
  37. 2007Anticipating moving-average crossovers one bar ahead
  38. 2007Lead-series moving-average crossovers with a stochastic and relative strength index
  39. 2007Next-bar SMA crossover hypotheses from theoretical crossing values
  40. 2007Anticipating a moving-average crossover before confirmation
  41. 2007A three-horizon moving-average stack as a construction problem
  42. 2007Confirming trend with regression slope and r-squared
  43. 2008Constructing a multi-timeframe smoothed crossover
  44. 2008Best-day clusters versus trend filters
  45. 2008Allied markets as a confirmation gate for crossover and breakout signals
  46. 2008Weekly exponential-average crossover as a mechanical trend case study
  47. 2010Evaluating a 200-day crossover as long, short, and stand-aside rules
  48. 2010Read a 10-and-40 trend on two neighboring time frames
  49. 2012Sampling unit as a first-class parameter on dual simple moving averages
  50. 2012Constructing index-ETF entries from volatility-index persistence
  51. 2013Moving-average baselines versus crossover signals
  52. 2013Constructing a typical-price and heikin-ashi crossover as one mechanical procedure
  53. 2016A three-gate checklist for longs after a sharp drop
  54. 2016Weekly inflation-ratio crossover for commodity regimes
  55. 2017Normalized Laguerre zero-axis warning as a two-marker construction
  56. 2019Range-weighted construction of an adaptive exponential moving average
  57. 2020Construct a second-pullback entry after a moving-average crossover
All 108 readings tagged Moving-average crossover
Also on Moving-average crossover5 readings