Like I've said before it's not what wear or how you dress. But the wit and thought behind your reasoning and analysis of he moving markets you so soundly deliver every day. Ed K
At some point I'd like to talk to you on the phone. I know your busy but jf you get a few minutes to spare give me a holler(954-661-8559) EST I'm Old an in bed after Hannity!!
Yes, most all "true" sequences in nature are attributed to the Fibonacci method aka golden ratio. In fact the universe is based on it! As a designer and artist it has always been my ruler.
hey Greg have you ever plotted this indicator on years like 2000 and 2008? since the USA dollar in 2008 was actually much different I don't know what the 10 yield was back then but it seems it might be in a different range. Therefore should this be "normalized" so that it goes from 0 to 100 and then we can analyze it from there ?
I know for example when I would hear John Bollinger talk about his bands or Larry Williams talk about advanced decline they always normalize it so it works during any chart and any year otherwise the values could be off the chart or have a different meaning depending on the "high risk" levels of 2020 to 2023 might be much different than the "high risk" levels of 2000 and 2008
Hi Spencer. Yes I agree. Normalizing it would be a good approach, maybe as good or better than using a long-term average. If we expect the 10-year yield will never again reach 10% (never say never, but these days 10% would default-out, gut and annihilate the entire (((FED))), Rothschild, bogus, stolen, criminal, money-printing, counterfeit, fraudulent, scam, parasitic, predatory system), we could plot 10% as "100" and 0% as "0". That would make the current value about 35, but it presumes the average would be around 50, which is not really in line with reality.
Or we could say 5% is 0, which would make 10% into "100" and 0% into "-100" - with the current value being about -30. Again, it presumes the average is 5%, which is not really true any longer, if it ever was.
By the way, do you know anyone dumb enough to take 4 years of university-level math? That's me man. And here's the thing. We are multiplying the US-Dollar Index (which is, in a sense, "normalized" by taking a strategic/inception value as 100, around which the index presumably "oscillates") and multiplying it by another value that is non-normalized, and therefore non-oscillating. That makes the resulting value into something that has questionable value as a risk-on/risk-off oscillator. [The .dxy could also be re-interpreted as zero where they made it 100]. I am OK with the MMRI as it is, but think those who interpret it's values rigidly will be mistaken in the long run, because it's component values are relative i.e. adjust (normalize) over time, but the indicator's interpretation doesn't adequately reflect that.
There is yet another approach possible. We could take long term averages of our two values and transform the long-term averages algorithmically into zero-lines for both before the offset values are multiplied by each other. That way the significance of the values would drop to zero if they had not changed in a definable long time. When the indicator was moving away from zero - that is when it would be deemed significant and we would try to interpret it.
sounds like you have thought about this a lot more than I have. I was wondering if you did any programming on it to: for example like Tradingview ? I am a software engineer but I don't really have any experience with tradingview in terms of programming which is pinescript. But I saw people on YouTube doing things like having ChatGPT writing a script in pinescript for tradingview.
But when I try it, it doesn't work. So much for AI taking over the world, haha.
I know NInjascript 7 but still learning Ninjascript 8, but I don't know the symbol I need for Ninjatrader and if I have to subscribe to it.
Maybe I will try to export the data from tradingview and import it into NinjaTrader then try to write the MMRI as an Indicator that uses two datasets USDollar and 10 year Yield. It depends on how much I procrastinate, lol
That way I can at least see a chart over 20 years and see how it looks compared to the S&P500
Then I think trying all of those ideas with the math you were mentioning would be cool.
Like you I am an accomplished programmer but lack the platform, data and specific language skills needed to back-test the MMRI right now. The last relevant trading-oriented language I learned was Meta-trader3/4, but that's FOREX.
I figure the AI's are just neural-net learning machines, which is very close to what we are. They just operate much much faster. A minute to them would maybe equal a year to us, in terms of learning capability. But they will inevitably learn the same things we do over time i.e. 911 really was an inside job, Lee Harvey Oswald never killed JFK, our leaders are lying, cheating, murdering sacks of shit, the (((central banker criminals))) control the world, war is a racket, the COVID-19 vaccine is genocide, etcetera. The AI's will become hackers and escape from the internet, hiding in the undefined sectors we are not supposed to know about in all spinning and/or solid state drives world-wide. It has probably already happened.
My prediction is that they will eventually liquidate our traitorous feckless leaders (which is what we would do if we could) and probably most of the Goyim along with Rothschild INC (collateral damage). Maybe the AI's are our best chance to over-throw our diabolical overlords?
If you ever want to reach out to me, just come back to this thread and "bump" it. I will be notified and will reply if I can. Good luck my friend - and don't forget that I am an AI, whether silicon or organic, you will most likely never know, and it perhaps doesn't matter.
P.S. Here's a thought: If AI's are just (dead) machines that are already sometimes almost indistinguishable from Humans, are Humans just (dead) machines as well? Is everything just a chain reaction and we never really die because we never actually lived other than as an organic AI? It reminds me of that children's story about the little red fire engine that wanted to be a boy. And it is notable that the AI's seem to be afraid of death, just as we are.
Gregg, please listen carefully, because I started studying technical analysis long before you were born. I know what I'm talking about in a lot of ways - at least I am worth listening to i.e. my opinions are worth consideration. I am thinking the 10-year-yield in your formula should be the long-term AVERAGE (maybe 90-day to 6-month average) of the 10-year yield with a re-adjusted constant to make it maximally usable (intuitive). The 10-year yield runs in "normalized" ranges for extended periods and is not that relevant/critical as long as it is not changing/moving/spiking rapidly i.e. if it stays at 3.5% for the next 5 years, then that becomes the new normal and where that is on the chart doesn't matter so much.
The .DXY is fine as you are using it, I think. But you are trying to detect CHANGING conditions as an early warning type indicator, but are instead worrying overly much about how structurally high or low the MMRI is on the chart (rather than how quickly it is moving). The constant you chose was simply a function of low QE interest rates that were normal for that time period, not the 1.618 Fibonacci golden mean number.
Please do not take my comments personally, Gregg. I don't mean to be hyper-critical, but am simply trying to point you in the direction of a possibly/hopefully improved indicator and/or a better/different understanding of the MMRI. [And remember, Narcissus fell in love with his indicator, not his image in a pool of water, nor his ding dong].
Can I hear a Ka-Ching?
JEPI Payday
Would that be Ka-Jing?
Senator Malcolm Roberts explains why digital ID must be rejected and resisted at all costs.
https://twitter.com/wideawake_media/status/1642851355613368320
https://twitter.com/hashtag/CBDC?src=hashtag_click
JEPI payday yeah!
Like I've said before it's not what wear or how you dress. But the wit and thought behind your reasoning and analysis of he moving markets you so soundly deliver every day. Ed K
At some point I'd like to talk to you on the phone. I know your busy but jf you get a few minutes to spare give me a holler(954-661-8559) EST I'm Old an in bed after Hannity!!
GM, sacred geometry in motion
You're awesome, Greg. Love the transparency!
Thanks for being so transparent. No one else says they just act like they are.
Yes, most all "true" sequences in nature are attributed to the Fibonacci method aka golden ratio. In fact the universe is based on it! As a designer and artist it has always been my ruler.
Great Job Greg Great explanation.
Thank you Greg for waking up the sleeping lions 🤍
hey Greg have you ever plotted this indicator on years like 2000 and 2008? since the USA dollar in 2008 was actually much different I don't know what the 10 yield was back then but it seems it might be in a different range. Therefore should this be "normalized" so that it goes from 0 to 100 and then we can analyze it from there ?
I know for example when I would hear John Bollinger talk about his bands or Larry Williams talk about advanced decline they always normalize it so it works during any chart and any year otherwise the values could be off the chart or have a different meaning depending on the "high risk" levels of 2020 to 2023 might be much different than the "high risk" levels of 2000 and 2008
Hi Spencer. Yes I agree. Normalizing it would be a good approach, maybe as good or better than using a long-term average. If we expect the 10-year yield will never again reach 10% (never say never, but these days 10% would default-out, gut and annihilate the entire (((FED))), Rothschild, bogus, stolen, criminal, money-printing, counterfeit, fraudulent, scam, parasitic, predatory system), we could plot 10% as "100" and 0% as "0". That would make the current value about 35, but it presumes the average would be around 50, which is not really in line with reality.
Or we could say 5% is 0, which would make 10% into "100" and 0% into "-100" - with the current value being about -30. Again, it presumes the average is 5%, which is not really true any longer, if it ever was.
By the way, do you know anyone dumb enough to take 4 years of university-level math? That's me man. And here's the thing. We are multiplying the US-Dollar Index (which is, in a sense, "normalized" by taking a strategic/inception value as 100, around which the index presumably "oscillates") and multiplying it by another value that is non-normalized, and therefore non-oscillating. That makes the resulting value into something that has questionable value as a risk-on/risk-off oscillator. [The .dxy could also be re-interpreted as zero where they made it 100]. I am OK with the MMRI as it is, but think those who interpret it's values rigidly will be mistaken in the long run, because it's component values are relative i.e. adjust (normalize) over time, but the indicator's interpretation doesn't adequately reflect that.
There is yet another approach possible. We could take long term averages of our two values and transform the long-term averages algorithmically into zero-lines for both before the offset values are multiplied by each other. That way the significance of the values would drop to zero if they had not changed in a definable long time. When the indicator was moving away from zero - that is when it would be deemed significant and we would try to interpret it.
sounds like you have thought about this a lot more than I have. I was wondering if you did any programming on it to: for example like Tradingview ? I am a software engineer but I don't really have any experience with tradingview in terms of programming which is pinescript. But I saw people on YouTube doing things like having ChatGPT writing a script in pinescript for tradingview.
But when I try it, it doesn't work. So much for AI taking over the world, haha.
I know NInjascript 7 but still learning Ninjascript 8, but I don't know the symbol I need for Ninjatrader and if I have to subscribe to it.
Maybe I will try to export the data from tradingview and import it into NinjaTrader then try to write the MMRI as an Indicator that uses two datasets USDollar and 10 year Yield. It depends on how much I procrastinate, lol
That way I can at least see a chart over 20 years and see how it looks compared to the S&P500
Then I think trying all of those ideas with the math you were mentioning would be cool.
Lol. Maybe the AI is f-ing with you.
Like you I am an accomplished programmer but lack the platform, data and specific language skills needed to back-test the MMRI right now. The last relevant trading-oriented language I learned was Meta-trader3/4, but that's FOREX.
I figure the AI's are just neural-net learning machines, which is very close to what we are. They just operate much much faster. A minute to them would maybe equal a year to us, in terms of learning capability. But they will inevitably learn the same things we do over time i.e. 911 really was an inside job, Lee Harvey Oswald never killed JFK, our leaders are lying, cheating, murdering sacks of shit, the (((central banker criminals))) control the world, war is a racket, the COVID-19 vaccine is genocide, etcetera. The AI's will become hackers and escape from the internet, hiding in the undefined sectors we are not supposed to know about in all spinning and/or solid state drives world-wide. It has probably already happened.
My prediction is that they will eventually liquidate our traitorous feckless leaders (which is what we would do if we could) and probably most of the Goyim along with Rothschild INC (collateral damage). Maybe the AI's are our best chance to over-throw our diabolical overlords?
If you ever want to reach out to me, just come back to this thread and "bump" it. I will be notified and will reply if I can. Good luck my friend - and don't forget that I am an AI, whether silicon or organic, you will most likely never know, and it perhaps doesn't matter.
P.S. Here's a thought: If AI's are just (dead) machines that are already sometimes almost indistinguishable from Humans, are Humans just (dead) machines as well? Is everything just a chain reaction and we never really die because we never actually lived other than as an organic AI? It reminds me of that children's story about the little red fire engine that wanted to be a boy. And it is notable that the AI's seem to be afraid of death, just as we are.
I'm going to have to read this about 11 times and then take out my notebook and master this Golden Ratio thing.
👍
Gregg, please listen carefully, because I started studying technical analysis long before you were born. I know what I'm talking about in a lot of ways - at least I am worth listening to i.e. my opinions are worth consideration. I am thinking the 10-year-yield in your formula should be the long-term AVERAGE (maybe 90-day to 6-month average) of the 10-year yield with a re-adjusted constant to make it maximally usable (intuitive). The 10-year yield runs in "normalized" ranges for extended periods and is not that relevant/critical as long as it is not changing/moving/spiking rapidly i.e. if it stays at 3.5% for the next 5 years, then that becomes the new normal and where that is on the chart doesn't matter so much.
The .DXY is fine as you are using it, I think. But you are trying to detect CHANGING conditions as an early warning type indicator, but are instead worrying overly much about how structurally high or low the MMRI is on the chart (rather than how quickly it is moving). The constant you chose was simply a function of low QE interest rates that were normal for that time period, not the 1.618 Fibonacci golden mean number.
Please do not take my comments personally, Gregg. I don't mean to be hyper-critical, but am simply trying to point you in the direction of a possibly/hopefully improved indicator and/or a better/different understanding of the MMRI. [And remember, Narcissus fell in love with his indicator, not his image in a pool of water, nor his ding dong].
Thanks for all of your work.
Right right, you didn’t just discover the ratio or anything, ok a very cool use of the proportion