Brooke,
Agree that "The number of hits [would drop] dramatically
with the changes and that must be because the low has to
remain within 15% of the 52-week high at the time."
Would be nice to check if the translation gives the same hits
as QP1, but my QP1 database crashed back when.
Good exercise for a QP1er--any volunteers?
[Those who complained at Brooke posting the scan here should note
that the QP1 scan is just as functional.]
To your other point, there is no current reason for incrementing
maup by 2--that was wrt testing for how many hits; e.g., maup > 20
and low15 > 50, where one would replace
-------
for i = 0 to -60 step -5 do
ma50:=movavg(i,50,Cl); //use it twice
if movavg(i,10,Cl)> ma50 and
ma50 > movavg(i-5,50,Cl)then
maup:=maup + 2; //need 24 to pass
endif;
next i;
--------
by
---------
for i = 0 to -60 step -5 do
ma50:=movavg(i,50,Cl); //use it twice
if movavg(i,10,Cl)> ma50 then
maup:=maup + 1;
endif;
if ma50 > movavg(i-5,50,Cl) then
maup:=maup + 1; //need 20 to pass
endif;
next i;
--------------
Bob |
