Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
By Quantum Blog (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Gaps, part 3

Tuesday, October 25, 2016 6:24
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Recently I've come to realise that I've made quite a mistake calculating the 'fill' ratio for the gaps. It's time to correct it, before somebody will embarrass me in the comments ;-) .The problem is that I've used asymmetric boundaries when calculating the  statistics. By doing this, the statistics shift in favor of the nearest stop. The closer the stop, the higher the chances of hitting it, but by no means does this mean profit. And previous close is usually not far from the open so chances of hitting it are quite high.
To make statistics fair, I've set the levels symmetric around the open, like this:
gap = open-prevClose
winLevel = open+gap
lossLevel = open-gap

With this calculation* the chances are quite different and closer to my results using the intraday data:
down gap: 52% fill
up gap: 48% fill

*geek note: when both win and loss levels are reached for the same day, it is counted both as win and loss (with daily ohlc data there is no way of knowing which one was reached first) . Data for SPY Feb.2000- Feb-2011.

Code: dumbGaps.m

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.