Indicators not firing the correct signals

[Rossano]

For some reason, a few indicators are not firing the signals in the correct place - it seems like they are offsetting slightly, but this gives a wrong entry point. I have tested a few and it’s not only on Bitget but also on Binance, OKX, Bybit, etc - don’t know if they are related to the same issue.

I noticed issues in the QFL, divergences, RSI, BB%, etc

Bug details:

• Bot URL → Gainium app
• [Optional] Steps to reproduce → just run a backtest and you will see how indicators fire signals in the wrong place - don’t know if it’s related to the required change feature ot to the DCA or to the indicators at this point
• Expected result → RSI in this case should add a DCA only after CROSSING DOWN 95

[Amia]

Hello! We’ve received your report about indicators not firing the correct signals, particularly with the RSI and DCA. Thank you for including the Bot URL: Gainium app. We are investigating this issue across different exchanges like Bitget, Binance, OKX, and Bybit, and we will update you shortly with our findings.

[maksym.shamko]

Here the RSI was higher than 95

Here the RSI became lower than 95

And here is where bot aware of crossing down

Action triggered always after candle closed. To confrim crossing down we need 2 closed candles, and the action will be triggered on third.

[Rossano]

Thanks Maks - I will post the other ones here if I find any new ones

[d_yo_r]

So if we wanted to trigger as soon as the the RSI in the current 4h candle crosses down we would have to use

RSI-7-4h > 95 and RSI-7-3m <= 95.

But we would risk that the current 4h candle closes above 95 again?

This would be somehow related to the topic about interbar evaluation of candles.

Fire signals from current candle

It would be useful if we can add the option to fire a signal (using the Gainium indicators) from the current candle and not from the closing candle. For example if we set an indicator on the 1h timeframe to fire a signal to start a new deal we need to wait at least 1h before getting the signal (close candle) - instead the above suggestion takes into account the previous candle and will fire the signal immediately IF that condition on the current 1h timeframe is already true (current candle). P…

[Anvil]

can we add option to choose on what candle to trigger signal. MACD indicator on 1hour and higher timeframes is pretty good to trade swings but it is already lagging indicator. At cross you already pretty much started moves 1-2 candle ago, proloning entry extra 2 candles pretty much is end of move.

[maksym.shamko]

We calculating indicators only for closed candles. So the action is triggered when we have 2 closed candles, at the begging of the third. You cannot choose at which candle to trigger the action because we do not have final info about the candle.
You may refer to use real time value, before candle is closed. This is going to take significant resources and not on the table right now.

[Anvil]

thanks for answer, I guess we can setup something like this using tradingview to send signals

[Rossano]

@maksym.shamko I tried changing the condition to greater than 2h - 95
Is this signal fired correctly? Same bot as before, just changed the settings

[d_yo_r]

If you want to operate on 4-hour candles, this is different. Also, ‘Greater than’ doesn’t indicate direction, but rather the state at candle close. That’s why I suggested above combination

@d_yo_r

RSI-7-4h > 95 and RSI-7-3m <= 95

With Fire signals from current candle implemented the second could even be replaced by

RSI-7-4h-interbar <= 95.

[maksym.shamko]

There was a problem in backtester with order of DCA orders. Will be fixed in next update

[Rossano]

thanks brother - I just read the message