I look only at INTC (Intel) 15s candlesticks. As such, I use advanced chart tools/price filtering of 0.1% in both fields, and when I click OK, it does indeed color the spikes with the "filtered color" as expected (I use white). However, as the chart continues to run along, I see spikes which are not colored with the "filtered color", and so I wonder whether price filtering is working... ? When I then change both fields from an existing 0.1 to a new more liberal 0.11 (just to make a change which is even "wider" than the previous filter), and click OK, then I see the filtered color as the chart updates, for the previously erroneously colored spikes which should have appeared filtered on the chart.
So, one of two things is going wrong here:
1) Either the chart is simply not coloring the candlestick spikes with the "filtered color" as price runs along continuously, or, much worse...
2) Price filtering is not working on an ongoing basis, as it should be.
I suspect that it's a charting problem only, and that underlying filtering is working, because my Parabolic SAR triggers malfunction when outlying spikes appear in price. I need tight underlying price filtering to avoid that happening, and INTC trades tightly with a penny spread most of the time.
Please look into this as part of the 7.5 release. I'll post a reply if I see evidence which of the two hypothesis is true. THANKS!
So, one of two things is going wrong here:
1) Either the chart is simply not coloring the candlestick spikes with the "filtered color" as price runs along continuously, or, much worse...
2) Price filtering is not working on an ongoing basis, as it should be.
I suspect that it's a charting problem only, and that underlying filtering is working, because my Parabolic SAR triggers malfunction when outlying spikes appear in price. I need tight underlying price filtering to avoid that happening, and INTC trades tightly with a penny spread most of the time.
Please look into this as part of the 7.5 release. I'll post a reply if I see evidence which of the two hypothesis is true. THANKS!
Comment