Ehlers Phasor Analysis (PHASOR)# PHASOR: Phasor Analysis (Ehlers)
## Overview and Purpose
The Phasor Analysis indicator, developed by John Ehlers, represents an advanced cycle analysis tool that identifies the phase of the dominant cycle component in a time series through complex signal processing techniques. This sophisticated indicator uses correlation-based methods to determine the real and imaginary components of the signal, converting them to a continuous phase angle that reveals market cycle progression. Unlike traditional oscillators, the Phasor provides unwrapped phase measurements that accumulate continuously, offering unique insights into market timing and cycle behavior.
## Core Concepts
* **Complex Signal Analysis** — Uses real and imaginary components to determine cycle phase
* **Correlation-Based Detection** — Employs Ehlers' correlation method for robust phase estimation
* **Unwrapped Phase Tracking** — Provides continuous phase accumulation without discontinuities
* **Anti-Regression Logic** — Prevents phase angle from moving backward under specific conditions
Market Applications:
* **Cycle Timing** — Precise identification of cycle peaks and troughs
* **Market Regime Analysis** — Distinguishes between trending and cycling market conditions
* **Turning Point Detection** — Advanced warning system for potential market reversals
## Common Settings and Parameters
| Parameter | Default | Function | When to Adjust |
|-----------|---------|----------|----------------|
| Period | 28 | Fixed cycle period for correlation analysis | Match to expected dominant cycle length |
| Source | Close | Price series for phase calculation | Use typical price or other smoothed series |
| Show Derived Period | false | Display calculated period from phase rate | Enable for adaptive period analysis |
| Show Trend State | false | Display trend/cycle state variable | Enable for regime identification |
## Calculation and Mathematical Foundation
**Technical Formula:**
**Stage 1: Correlation Analysis**
For period $n$ and source $x_t$:
Real component correlation with cosine wave:
$$R = \frac{n \sum x_t \cos\left(\frac{2\pi t}{n}\right) - \sum x_t \sum \cos\left(\frac{2\pi t}{n}\right)}{\sqrt{D_{cos}}}$$
Imaginary component correlation with negative sine wave:
$$I = \frac{n \sum x_t \left(-\sin\left(\frac{2\pi t}{n}\right)\right) - \sum x_t \sum \left(-\sin\left(\frac{2\pi t}{n}\right)\right)}{\sqrt{D_{sin}}}$$
where $D_{cos}$ and $D_{sin}$ are normalization denominators.
**Stage 2: Phase Angle Conversion**
$$\theta_{raw} = \begin{cases}
90° - \arctan\left(\frac{I}{R}\right) \cdot \frac{180°}{\pi} & \text{if } R eq 0 \\
0° & \text{if } R = 0, I > 0 \\
180° & \text{if } R = 0, I \leq 0
\end{cases}$$
**Stage 3: Phase Unwrapping**
$$\theta_{unwrapped}(t) = \theta_{unwrapped}(t-1) + \Delta\theta$$
where $\Delta\theta$ is the normalized phase difference.
**Stage 4: Ehlers' Anti-Regression Condition**
$$\theta_{final}(t) = \begin{cases}
\theta_{final}(t-1) & \text{if regression conditions met} \\
\theta_{unwrapped}(t) & \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}$$
**Derived Calculations:**
Derived Period: $P_{derived} = \frac{360°}{\Delta\theta_{final}}$ (clamped to )
Trend State:
$$S_{trend} = \begin{cases}
1 & \text{if } \Delta\theta \leq 6° \text{ and } |\theta| \geq 90° \\
-1 & \text{if } \Delta\theta \leq 6° \text{ and } |\theta| < 90° \\
0 & \text{if } \Delta\theta > 6°
\end{cases}$$
> 🔍 **Technical Note:** The correlation-based approach provides robust phase estimation even in noisy market conditions, while the unwrapping mechanism ensures continuous phase tracking across cycle boundaries.
## Interpretation Details
* **Phasor Angle (Primary Output):**
- **+90°**: Potential cycle peak region
- **0°**: Mid-cycle ascending phase
- **-90°**: Potential cycle trough region
- **±180°**: Mid-cycle descending phase
* **Phase Progression:**
- Continuous upward movement → Normal cycle progression
- Phase stalling → Potential cycle extension or trend development
- Rapid phase changes → Cycle compression or volatility spike
* **Derived Period Analysis:**
- Period < 10 → High-frequency cycle dominance
- Period 15-40 → Typical swing trading cycles
- Period > 50 → Trending market conditions
* **Trend State Variable:**
- **+1**: Long trend conditions (slow phase change in extreme zones)
- **-1**: Short trend or consolidation (slow phase change in neutral zones)
- **0**: Active cycling (normal phase change rate)
## Applications
* **Cycle-Based Trading:**
- Enter long positions near -90° crossings (cycle troughs)
- Enter short positions near +90° crossings (cycle peaks)
- Exit positions during mid-cycle phases (0°, ±180°)
* **Market Timing:**
- Use phase acceleration for early trend detection
- Monitor derived period for cycle length changes
- Combine with trend state for regime-appropriate strategies
* **Risk Management:**
- Adjust position sizes based on cycle clarity (derived period stability)
- Implement different risk parameters for trending vs. cycling regimes
- Use phase velocity for stop-loss placement timing
## Limitations and Considerations
* **Parameter Sensitivity:**
- Fixed period assumption may not match actual market cycles
- Requires cycle period optimization for different markets and timeframes
- Performance degrades when multiple cycles interfere
* **Computational Complexity:**
- Correlation calculations over full period windows
- Multiple mathematical transformations increase processing requirements
- Real-time implementation requires efficient algorithms
* **Market Conditions:**
- Most effective in markets with clear cyclical behavior
- May provide false signals during strong trending periods
- Requires sufficient historical data for correlation analysis
Complementary Indicators:
* MESA Adaptive Moving Average (cycle-based smoothing)
* Dominant Cycle Period indicators
* Detrended Price Oscillator (cycle identification)
## References
1. Ehlers, J.F. "Cycle Analytics for Traders." Wiley, 2013.
2. Ehlers, J.F. "Cybernetic Analysis for Stocks and Futures." Wiley, 2004.
אינדיקטורים ואסטרטגיות
Ehlers Autocorrelation Periodogram (EACP)# EACP: Ehlers Autocorrelation Periodogram
## Overview and Purpose
Developed by John F. Ehlers (Technical Analysis of Stocks & Commodities, Sep 2016), the Ehlers Autocorrelation Periodogram (EACP) estimates the dominant market cycle by projecting normalized autocorrelation coefficients onto Fourier basis functions. The indicator blends a roofing filter (high-pass + Super Smoother) with a compact periodogram, yielding low-latency dominant cycle detection suitable for adaptive trading systems. Compared with Hilbert-based methods, the autocorrelation approach resists aliasing and maintains stability in noisy price data.
EACP answers a central question in cycle analysis: “What period currently dominates the market?” It prioritizes spectral power concentration, enabling downstream tools (adaptive moving averages, oscillators) to adjust responsively without the lag present in sliding-window techniques.
## Core Concepts
* **Roofing Filter:** High-pass plus Super Smoother combination removes low-frequency drift while limiting aliasing.
* **Pearson Autocorrelation:** Computes normalized lag correlation to remove amplitude bias.
* **Fourier Projection:** Sums cosine and sine terms of autocorrelation to approximate spectral energy.
* **Gain Normalization:** Automatic gain control prevents stale peaks from dominating power estimates.
* **Warmup Compensation:** Exponential correction guarantees valid output from the very first bar.
## Implementation Notes
**This is not a strict implementation of the TASC September 2016 specification.** It is a more advanced evolution combining the core 2016 concept with techniques Ehlers introduced later. The fundamental Wiener-Khinchin theorem (power spectral density = Fourier transform of autocorrelation) is correctly implemented, but key implementation details differ:
### Differences from Original 2016 TASC Article
1. **Dominant Cycle Calculation:**
- **2016 TASC:** Uses peak-finding to identify the period with maximum power
- **This Implementation:** Uses Center of Gravity (COG) weighted average over bins where power ≥ 0.5
- **Rationale:** COG provides smoother transitions and reduces susceptibility to noise spikes
2. **Roofing Filter:**
- **2016 TASC:** Simple first-order high-pass filter
- **This Implementation:** Canonical 2-pole high-pass with √2 factor followed by Super Smoother bandpass
- **Formula:** `hp := (1-α/2)²·(p-2p +p ) + 2(1-α)·hp - (1-α)²·hp `
- **Rationale:** Evolved filtering provides better attenuation and phase characteristics
3. **Normalized Power Reporting:**
- **2016 TASC:** Reports peak power across all periods
- **This Implementation:** Reports power specifically at the dominant period
- **Rationale:** Provides more meaningful correlation between dominant cycle strength and normalized power
4. **Automatic Gain Control (AGC):**
- Uses decay factor `K = 10^(-0.15/diff)` where `diff = maxPeriod - minPeriod`
- Ensures K < 1 for proper exponential decay of historical peaks
- Prevents stale peaks from dominating current power estimates
### Performance Characteristics
- **Complexity:** O(N²) where N = (maxPeriod - minPeriod)
- **Implementation:** Uses `var` arrays with native PineScript historical operator ` `
- **Warmup:** Exponential compensation (§2 pattern) ensures valid output from bar 1
### Related Implementations
This refined approach aligns with:
- TradingView TASC 2025.02 implementation by blackcat1402
- Modern Ehlers cycle analysis techniques post-2016
- Evolved filtering methods from *Cycle Analytics for Traders*
The code is mathematically sound and production-ready, representing a refined version of the autocorrelation periodogram concept rather than a literal translation of the 2016 article.
## Common Settings and Parameters
| Parameter | Default | Function | When to Adjust |
|-----------|---------|----------|---------------|
| Min Period | 8 | Lower bound of candidate cycles | Increase to ignore microstructure noise; decrease for scalping. |
| Max Period | 48 | Upper bound of candidate cycles | Increase for swing analysis; decrease for intraday focus. |
| Autocorrelation Length | 3 | Averaging window for Pearson correlation | Set to 0 to match lag, or enlarge for smoother spectra. |
| Enhance Resolution | true | Cubic emphasis to highlight peaks | Disable when a flatter spectrum is desired for diagnostics. |
**Pro Tip:** Keep `(maxPeriod - minPeriod)` ≤ 64 to control $O(n^2)$ inner loops and maintain responsiveness on lower timeframes.
## Calculation and Mathematical Foundation
**Explanation:**
1. Apply roofing filter to `source` using coefficients $\alpha_1$, $a_1$, $b_1$, $c_1$, $c_2$, $c_3$.
2. For each lag $L$ compute Pearson correlation $r_L$ over window $M$ (default $L$).
3. For each period $p$, project onto Fourier basis:
$C_p=\sum_{n=2}^{N} r_n \cos\left(\frac{2\pi n}{p}\right)$ and $S_p=\sum_{n=2}^{N} r_n \sin\left(\frac{2\pi n}{p}\right)$.
4. Power $P_p=C_p^2+S_p^2$, smoothed then normalized via adaptive peak tracking.
5. Dominant cycle $D=\frac{\sum p\,\tilde P_p}{\sum \tilde P_p}$ over bins where $\tilde P_p≥0.5$, warmup-compensated.
**Technical formula:**
```
Step 1: hp_t = ((1-α₁)/2)(src_t - src_{t-1}) + α₁ hp_{t-1}
Step 2: filt_t = c₁(hp_t + hp_{t-1})/2 + c₂ filt_{t-1} + c₃ filt_{t-2}
Step 3: r_L = (M Σxy - Σx Σy) / √
Step 4: P_p = (Σ_{n=2}^{N} r_n cos(2πn/p))² + (Σ_{n=2}^{N} r_n sin(2πn/p))²
Step 5: D = Σ_{p∈Ω} p · ĤP_p / Σ_{p∈Ω} ĤP_p with warmup compensation
```
> 🔍 **Technical Note:** Warmup uses $c = 1 / (1 - (1 - \alpha)^{k})$ to scale early-cycle estimates, preventing low values during initial bars.
## Interpretation Details
- **Primary Dominant Cycle:**
- High $D$ (e.g., > 30) implies slow regime; adaptive MAs should lengthen.
- Low $D$ (e.g., < 15) signals rapid oscillations; shorten lookback windows.
- **Normalized Power:**
- Values > 0.8 indicate strong cycle confidence; consider cyclical strategies.
- Values < 0.3 warn of flat spectra; favor trend or volatility approaches.
- **Regime Shifts:**
- Rapid drop in $D$ alongside rising power often precedes volatility expansion.
- Divergence between $D$ and price swings may highlight upcoming breakouts.
## Limitations and Considerations
- **Spectral Leakage:** Limited lag range can smear peaks during abrupt volatility shifts.
- **O(n²) Segment:** Although constrained (≤ 60 loops), wide period spans increase computation.
- **Stationarity Assumption:** Autocorrelation presumes quasi-stationary cycles; regime changes reduce accuracy.
- **Latency in Noise:** Even with roofing, extremely noisy assets may require higher `avgLength`.
- **Downtrend Bias:** Negative trends may clip high-pass output; ensure preprocessing retains signal.
## References
* Ehlers, J. F. (2016). “Past Market Cycles.” *Technical Analysis of Stocks & Commodities*, 34(9), 52-55.
* Thinkorswim Learning Center. “Ehlers Autocorrelation Periodogram.”
* Fab MacCallini. “autocorrPeriodogram.R.” GitHub repository.
* QuantStrat TradeR Blog. “Autocorrelation Periodogram for Adaptive Lookbacks.”
* TradingView Script by blackcat1402. “Ehlers Autocorrelation Periodogram (Updated).”
NY Midnight High/Low Arrows (Auto-Show)🇺🇸 English Explanation
This indicator automatically marks the daily high and low of the New York session.
It draws arrows (▼▲) at the highest and lowest prices after New York midnight (00:00),
and can optionally display small horizontal dotted lines at those levels.
It helps traders identify daily liquidity zones and key turning points in price action.
🇸🇦 الشرح بالعربية
هذا المؤشر يحدد القمة والقاع اليومية لجلسة نيويورك بشكل تلقائي.
يرسم أسهماً (▼▲) عند أعلى وأدنى سعر بعد منتصف الليل بتوقيت نيويورك (00:00)،
ويمكنه أيضًا عرض خطوط أفقية منقطة صغيرة عند تلك المستويات.
يساعد المتداول في معرفة مناطق السيولة اليومية ونقاط الانعكاس المهمة في حركة السعر.
BB LONG 2BX & FVB StrategyThis Strategy is optimized for the 2h timeframe. Happy Charting and you're welcome!
**BB LONG 2BX & FVB Strategy – Simple Text Guide**
---
### **What It Does**
A **long-only trading strategy** that:
- Enters on **strong upward momentum**
- Adds a second position when the trend gets stronger
- Takes profits in parts at **smart price levels**
- Exits fully if the trend weakens or reverses
---
### **Main Tools Used**
| Tool | Simple Meaning |
|------|----------------|
| **B-Xtrender (Oscillator)** | Measures speed of price move. Above 0 = bullish, below 0 = bearish |
| **Weekly & Monthly Timeframes** | Checks if higher timeframes agree with the trade |
| **Red ATR Line** | A moving stop-loss that follows price up |
| **Fair Value Bands (1x, 2x, 3x)** | Profit targets that adjust to market volatility |
---
### **When It Enters a Trade (Long)**
**First Entry:**
- Weekly momentum is **rising**
- Monthly momentum is **positive or increasing**
- No current position
**Second Entry (Pyramiding):**
- Already in trade
- Price breaks **above the Red ATR line** → add same size again
(Max 2 total entries)
---
### **When It Takes Profit (Scaling Out)**
| Level | Action |
|-------|--------|
| **1x Band** | Sell **50%** when price pulls back from this level |
| **2x Band** | Sell **50%** when price pulls back from this level |
| **3x Band** | **Exit everything** when price pulls back from this level |
> You can hit 1x and 2x **multiple times** – it will keep taking 50% each time
---
### **When It Exits Fully (Closes Everything)**
1. Price **closes below Red ATR line**
2. Weekly momentum shows **2 red bars in a row, both falling**
3. Weekly momentum **crosses below zero** AND price is below Red ATR
4. Weekly momentum **drops sharply** (more than 25 points in one bar)
> After full exit, it **won’t re-enter** unless price comes back below 2x band
---
### **Alerts You Get**
Every time price **touches** a profit band, you get an alert:
- “Price touched 1x band from below”
- “Price touched 1x band from above”
- Same for **2x** and **3x**
> One alert per touch, per bar
---
### **On the Chart – What You See**
- **Histogram bars (weekly momentum)**
Lime = up, Red = down
**Yellow highlight** = warning (exit soon)
- **Red broken line** = stop-loss level
- **Blue line** = fair middle price
- **Orange, Purple, Pink lines** = 1x, 2x, 3x profit targets
---
### **Best Used On**
- Daily or 4-hour charts
- Strong trending assets (like Bitcoin, Tesla, S&P 500)
---
### **Quick Rules Summary**
| Do This | When |
|--------|------|
| **Enter** | Weekly up + monthly support |
| **Add more** | Price breaks above Red line |
| **Take 50% profit** | Price pulls back from 1x or 2x |
| **Exit all** | Red line break, weak momentum, or 3x hit |
---
**Simple Idea:**
**Ride strong trends, add when confirmed, take profits in chunks, cut losses fast.**
Strong PivotsThis finds pivots based on your inputs (number of candles back and forward that are above or below the range of the potential pivot points) and then optionally changes the color to help you visually identify the pivot. You can also specify pivots as strong pivots if they reverse in 1 time segment beyond a certain percentage (wick % of full candle range).
For example, if the pivot is at a high point but has a green body candle and a wick > 35% of the candle, it will change the body color to red to help visually understand that the candle can be considered a strong part of the downtrend, regardless of it closing green. This will help your mind interpret the top pivot candle as part of the potential trend reversal for the following candles and could even be used as part of your strategy ruleset.
Devils Mark Plus Volume Imbalance Multi TimeframeFollowing the success of the devil marks multi timeframe indicator I decided to add volume imbalance. Devils mark code remains unchanged here.
Functionality of the Devils mark remains the same as in when a candle prints without a wick at either end it indicates an area of price imbalance and it is assumed that the market will want to re-balance this level at some point in the future.
The same can be said for volume imbalances where 2 adjacent candles bodies don't meet. Again it it assumed the market will come back at some point to readdress this imbalance. Once mitigated the volume imbalance will be removed by the indicator.
These areas are best used to add confluence to trade ideas and shouldn't be used to formulate trade ideas on their own.
A table is included for easy reference.
Please note that data for timeframes lower than the current timeframe will not be shown. It is also worth noting that data on much higher timeframes than the current chart timeframe may not be shown due to data restrictions. If in doubt go up a timeframe !
I hope you find this indicator useful.
FDF — EMAs+VWAP with setup & entry (stable scale)the 9 and 21, vwap - and support an restianst, marking each entry when it pulling in our out to the 21. used 90% of the candle over the 21
BullishBuzz ORB – CALL/PUT with Chart Alerts (Final)⚙️ The Bullish BuzzBot System
1️⃣ Data Feeds (Input Layer)
BuzzBot connects to live market data through TradingView’s chart engine (or via API for more advanced builds).
It continuously pulls:
Price data (open, high, low, close per bar)
Volume
RSI, MACD, VWAP, EMA 9/21 values
Timestamps & bar intervals (1m, 5m, 15m)
That’s the raw fuel — the same data you’d use for charting.
2️⃣ Indicator Engine (Signal Layer)
This is where the logic lives — it calculates conditions in real time.
BuzzBot checks for patterns like:
EMA 9/21 Cross: detects momentum shift
VWAP Reclaim or Reject: confirms intraday bias
RSI < 50 or > 70: momentum confirmation
MACD Cross: trend continuation signal
Volume > 2x average: validates conviction
Reactive Curvature Smoother Moving Average IndicatorSummary in one paragraph
RCS MA is a reactive curvature smoother for any liquid instrument on intraday through swing timeframes. It helps you act only when context strengthens by adapting its window length with a normalized path energy score and by smoothing with robust residual weights over a quadratic fit, then optionally blending a capped one step forecast. Add it to a clean chart and watch the single colored line. Shapes can shift while a bar forms and settle on close. For conservative use, judge on bar close.
Scope and intent
• Markets: major FX pairs, index futures, large cap equities, liquid crypto
• Timeframes: one minute to daily
• Purpose: reduce lag in trends while resisting chop and outliers
• Limits: indicator only, no orders
Originality and usefulness
• Novelty: adaptive window selection by minimizing normalized path energy with directionality bias, plus Huber weighted residuals and curvature aware penalty, finished with a mintick capped forecast blend
• Failure modes addressed: whipsaws from fixed length MAs and outlier spikes that pull means
• Testable: Inputs expose all components and optional diagnostics show chosen length, directionality, and energy
• Portable yardstick: forecast cap uses mintick to stay symbol aware
Method overview in plain language
Base measures
• Range span of the tested window and a path energy defined as the sum of squared price increments, normalized by span
Components
Adaptive window chooser: scans L between Min and Max using an energy over trend score and picks the lowest score
Robust smoother: fits a quadratic to the last L bars, computes residuals, applies Huber weights and an exponential residual penalty scaled down when curvature is high
Forecast blend: projects one step ahead from the quadratic, caps displacement by a multiple of mintick, blends by user weight
Fusion rule
• Final line equals robust mean plus optional capped forecast blend
Signal rule
• Visual bias only: color turns lime when close is above the line, red otherwise
What you will see on the chart
• One colored line that tightens in trends and relaxes in chop
• Optional debug overlays for core value, chosen L, directionality, and energy
• Optional last bar label with L, directionality, and energy
• Reminder: drawings can move intrabar and settle on close
Inputs with guidance
Setup
• Source: price series to smooth
Logic
• Min window l_min. Typical 5 to 21. Higher increases stability, adds lag
• Max window l_max. Typical 40 to 128. Higher reduces noise, adds lag ceiling
• Length step grid_step. Typical 1 to 8. Smaller is finer and heavier
• Trend bias trend_bias. Typical 0.50 to 0.80. Higher favors trend persistence
• Residual penalty lambda_base. Typical 0.8 to 2.0. Higher downweights large residuals more
• Huber threshold huber_k. Typical 1.5 to 3.0. Higher admits more outliers
• Curvature guard curv_guard. Typical 0.3 to 1.0. Higher reduces influence when curve is tight
• Forecast blend lead_blend. 0 disables. Typical 0.10 to 0.40
• Forecast cap lead_limit. Typical 1 to 5 minticks
• Show chosen L and metrics show_debug. Diagnostics toggle
Optional: enable diagnostics to see length, direction, and energy
Realism and responsible publication
• No performance claims. Past results never guarantee future outcomes
• Shapes can move while bars are open and settle on close
• Use on standard candles for analysis and combine with your own risk process
Honest limitations and failure modes
• Very quiet regimes can reduce energy contrast, length selection may hover near the bounds
• Gap heavy symbols can disrupt quadratic fit on the window edges
• Excessive forecast blend may look anticipatory; use low values and the cap
COT Index Indicator 1) One‑liner
My version of the OTC COT Index indicator: a 0–120 oscillator built from CFTC COT data that shows where Commercial, Noncommercial, and Nonreportable net positions sit relative to recent extremes.
2) Short paragraph
This is my version of the OTC COT Index indicator. It converts CFTC Commitments of Traders (COT) net positions into a normalized 0–120 oscillator for each trader group—Commercials, Noncommercials, and Nonreportables—so you can quickly see when positioning is near recent highs or lows. Data comes from TradingView’s official COT library and supports both “Futures Only” and “Futures and Options” reports.
3) Compact bullets
What: My version of the OTC COT Index indicator
Why: Quickly spot when trader groups are near positioning extremes
Data: CFTC COT via TradingView/LibraryCOT/2; Futures Only or Futures & Options
How: Index = 120 × (Current − Min) ÷ (Max − Min) over a configurable lookback
Plots: Commercials (blue), Noncommercials (orange), Nonreportables (red)
Lines: Overbought, Midline, Oversold, optional 0/100, upper/lower bounds
Note: Values are relative to the chosen window; not trading advice
4) Publication‑ready (sections)
Overview
My version of the OTC COT Index indicator. It turns CFTC COT positioning into a 0–120 oscillator per trader group (Commercials, Noncommercials, Nonreportables) to highlight relative extremes.
Data source
CFTC Commitments of Traders via TradingView’s official library (TradingView/LibraryCOT/2).
Supports “Futures Only” and “Futures and Options.”
Method
Net positions = Longs − Shorts.
Index = 120 × (Current Net − Min(Net, Lookback)) ÷ (Max(Net, Lookback) − Min(Net, Lookback)).
Inputs
Weeks Look Back (normalization window)
Weeks Look Back for Historical Hi/Los (longer reference)
Report Type selection
Visuals
Three indexes by trader group, plus reference levels (OB/OS, Midline, optional 0/100).
Notes
Some symbols map to specific CFTC codes for reliability.
If no relevant COT data exists for the symbol, the script reports it clearly.
If you want this adapted to a specific platform’s character limits (e.g., TradingView’s publish dialog), tell me the target length and I’ll trim it to fit.
8 Médias Exponenciais (Config.)This indicator provides a highly flexible system of eight fully customizable moving averages (MAs), allowing traders to visualize short-, medium-, and long-term market trends with precision and adaptability. Each of the eight moving averages can be independently configured by the user, both in period length and type — supporting either Simple Moving Average (SMA) or Exponential Moving Average (EMA).
Fixed Dollar Risk LinesFixed Dollar Risk Lines is a utility indicator that converts a user-defined dollar risk into price distance and plots risk lines above and below the current price for popular futures contracts. It helps you place stops or entries at a consistent dollar risk per trade, regardless of the market’s tick value or tick size.
What it does:
-You choose a dollar amount to risk (e.g., $100) and a futures contract (ES, NQ, GC, YM, RTY, PL, SI, CL, BTC).
The script automatically:
-Looks up the contract’s tick value and tick size
-Converts your dollar risk into number of ticks
-Converts ticks into price distance
Plots:
-Long Risk line below current price
-Short Risk line above current price
-Optional labels show exact price levels and an information table summarizes your settings.
Key features
-Consistent dollar risk across instruments
-Supports major futures contracts with built‑in tick values and sizes
-Toggle Long and Short risk lines independently
-Customizable line width and colors (lines and labels)
-Right‑axis price level display for quick reading
-Compact info table with contract, risk, and computed prices
Typical use
-Long setups: use the green line as a stop level below entry to match your chosen dollar risk.
-Short setups: use the red line as a stop level above entry to match your chosen dollar risk.
-Quickly compare how the same dollar risk translates to distance on different contracts.
Inputs
-Risk Amount (USD)
-Futures Contract (ES, NQ, GC, YM, RTY, PL, SI, CL, BTC)
-Show Long/Short lines (toggles)
-Line Width
-Colors for lines and labels
Notes
-Designed for futures symbols that match the listed contracts’ tick specs. If your symbol has different tick value/size than the defaults, results will differ.
-Intended for educational/informational use; not financial advice.
-This tool streamlines risk placement so you can focus on execution while keeping dollar risk consistent across markets.
F & W SMC Alerthis script is a custom TradingView indicator designed to combine elements of a trend‑following VWAP approach (inspired by the “Fabio” strategy) with a smart‑money‑concepts framework (inspired by Waqar Asim). Here’s what it does:
* **Directional bias:** It calculates a 15‑minute VWAP and compares the current 15‑minute close to it. When price is above the 15‑minute VWAP, the script assumes a long bias; when below, a short bias. This reflects the trend‑following aspect of the Fabio strategy.
* **Liquidity sweeps:** Using recent pivot highs and lows on the current timeframe, it identifies when price takes out a recent high (for potential longs) or low (for potential shorts). This represents a “liquidity sweep” — a fake breakout that collects stops and signals a possible reversal or continuation.
* **Break of structure (BOS):** After a sweep, the script confirms that price is breaking away from the swept level (i.e., higher than recent highs for longs or lower than recent lows for shorts). This BOS confirmation helps avoid false signals.
* **Entry filters:** For a long setup, the bias must be long, there must be a liquidity sweep followed by a BOS, and price must reclaim the current‑timeframe VWAP. For a short setup, the opposite conditions apply (short bias, sweep + BOS to the downside, and price rejecting the VWAP).
* **Alerts and plot:** It provides two alert conditions (“Fabio‑Waqar Long Setup” and “Fabio‑Waqar Short Setup”) that you can attach to notifications. It also plots the intraday VWAP on your chart for visual reference.
In short, this script watches for a confluence of trend direction, liquidity sweeps, structural shifts, and VWAP reclaim/rejection, and then notifies you when those conditions align. You can use it as an alerting tool to identify high‑probability setups based on these combined strategies.
Relative Valuation OscillatorThis is a Relative Valuation Oscillator (RVO) this is attempt of replication OTC Valuation - a sophisticated multi-asset comparison indicator designed to measure whether the current asset is overvalued or undervalued relative to up to three reference assets.
Overview
The RVO compares the current chart's asset against reference assets (default: 30-Year Treasury Bonds, Gold, and US Dollar Index) to determine relative strength and valuation extremes. It outputs normalized oscillator values ranging from -100 (undervalued) to +100 (overvalued).
Key Features
Multiple Calculation Methods
The indicator offers 5 different calculation approaches:
Simple Ratio - Normalized ratio deviation from average
Percentage Difference - Percentage change comparison
Ratio Z-Score - Standard deviation-based comparison
Rate of Change Comparison - Momentum differential analysis (default)
Normalized Ratio - Min-max normalized ratio
Configurable Reference Assets
Asset 1: Default ZB (30-Year Treasury Bond Futures) - tracks interest rate sensitivity
Asset 2: Default GC (Gold Futures) - tracks safe-haven and inflation dynamics
Asset 3: Default DXY (US Dollar Index) - tracks currency strength
Each asset can be enabled/disabled independently
Fully customizable symbols
Visual Components
Multiple oscillator lines - One for each active reference asset (color-coded)
Average line - Combined signal from all active assets
Overbought/Oversold zones - Configurable threshold levels (default: ±80)
Zero line - Neutral valuation reference
Background coloring - Visual zones for extreme conditions
Signal line - Optional smoothed average
Entry markers - Long/short signals at key reversals
Signal Generation
Crossover alerts - When crossing overbought/oversold levels
Entry signals - Reversals from extreme zones
Divergence detection - Bullish/bearish divergences between price and oscillator
Zero-line crosses - Trend strength changes
Customization Options
Lookback period (10-500): Controls statistical calculation window
Normalization period (50-1000): Determines scaling sensitivity
Smoothing toggle: Optional EMA/SMA smoothing with adjustable period
Visual customization: Colors, levels, and display options
Information Table
Real-time dashboard showing:
Average oscillator value
Current status (Overvalued/Undervalued/Neutral)
Current asset price
Individual values for each active reference asset
Use Cases
Mean reversion trading - Identify extreme relative valuations for reversal trades
Sector rotation - Compare assets within similar categories
Hedging strategies - Understand correlation dynamics
Multi-asset analysis - Simultaneously compare against bonds, commodities, and currencies
Divergence trading - Spot price/oscillator divergences
Trading Strategy Applications
Long signals: When oscillator crosses above oversold level (asset recovering from undervaluation)
Short signals: When oscillator crosses below overbought level (asset declining from overvaluation)
Confirmation: Use multiple reference assets for stronger signals
Risk management: Avoid trading when all assets show neutral readings
This indicator is particularly useful for traders who want to incorporate inter-market analysis and relative strength concepts into their trading decisions, especially in OTC (Over-The-Counter) and futures markets.
Fabio + Waqar SMC AlertThis script is a custom TradingView indicator designed to combine elements of a trend‑following VWAP approach (inspired by the “Fabio” strategy) with a smart‑money‑concepts framework (inspired by Waqar Asim). Here’s what it does:
* **Directional bias:** It calculates a 15‑minute VWAP and compares the current 15‑minute close to it. When price is above the 15‑minute VWAP, the script assumes a long bias; when below, a short bias. This reflects the trend‑following aspect of the Fabio strategy.
* **Liquidity sweeps:** Using recent pivot highs and lows on the current timeframe, it identifies when price takes out a recent high (for potential longs) or low (for potential shorts). This represents a “liquidity sweep” — a fake breakout that collects stops and signals a possible reversal or continuation.
* **Break of structure (BOS):** After a sweep, the script confirms that price is breaking away from the swept level (i.e., higher than recent highs for longs or lower than recent lows for shorts). This BOS confirmation helps avoid false signals.
* **Entry filters:** For a long setup, the bias must be long, there must be a liquidity sweep followed by a BOS, and price must reclaim the current‑timeframe VWAP. For a short setup, the opposite conditions apply (short bias, sweep + BOS to the downside, and price rejecting the VWAP).
* **Alerts and plot:** It provides two alert conditions (“Fabio‑Waqar Long Setup” and “Fabio‑Waqar Short Setup”) that you can attach to notifications. It also plots the intraday VWAP on your chart for visual reference.
In short, this script watches for a confluence of trend direction, liquidity sweeps, structural shifts, and VWAP reclaim/rejection, and then notifies you when those conditions align. You can use it as an alerting tool to identify high‑probability setups based on these combined strategies.
Directional EMA - For Loop | Lyro RSDirectional EMA - For Loop | Lyro RS
Introduction
This indicator combines multi-type moving averages, loop-based momentum scoring, and divergence detection for adaptive trend and reversal analysis.
Key Features:
Multiple Moving Average Selection System: Choose from 16 different MA types - HMA, ALMA and JMA etc. To match your style best.
For Loop Based Scoring: Uses a From / To system to calculate cumulative buying/selling pressure across recent price action.
Signal Threshold: Long / Short threshold levels to control the sensitivity for different market conditions.
Divergence Detection: Regular bullish / bearish with clear labels for potential reversal points.
Clean Visuals: Multiple color themes with table and color based indicator line for easy reading.
How It Works:
Core Calculation: The indicator first creates a directional signal by comparing price to your selected moving average, normalized for current volatility.
Loop Analysis: This signal feeds into a for-loop that scores recent price history, generating a cumulative momentum value.
Signal Generation:
Bullish signals trigger when the score crosses above the Upper Threshold
Bearish signals trigger when the score crosses below the Lower Threshold
Divergence Alerts: Automatically detects when price makes new highs/lows that aren't confirmed by the oscillator.
Practical Use:
Trend Identification: The color-coded oscillator and signal table help confirm trend direction.
Reversal Warning: Divergence labels highlight potential trend exhaustion points for careful watch.
Customization:
Adjust MA type and length for sensitivity tuning
Modify loop parameters (From/To) to change analysis depth
Fine-tune threshold levels for signal frequency
Enable/disable divergence detection as needed
⚠️ Disclaimer
This tool is for technical analysis education only. It does not guarantee results or constitute financial advice. Always use proper risk management and combine with other analysis methods. Past performance doesn't predict future results.
Bollinger Band Spread (Dunk)Bollinger Band Width measures the distance between the upper and lower Bollinger Bands. It reflects market volatility—wider bands mean higher volatility, narrower bands mean lower volatility.
When the width contracts to low levels, it can signal price consolidation and potential breakouts. When the width expands, it indicates active markets or strong trends.
Traders use it to spot volatility squeezes, confirm breakouts, and compare relative volatility across assets or timeframes.
Custom MA & VWAP Crossover SignalsCrossover logic:
Buy = MA1 crosses above MA2.
Sell = MA1 crosses below MA2.
Labels show at the bar where crossover happens:
Green “Buy” label at bar high.
Red “Sell” label at bar low.
Bitcoin Fair Price Calculator [bitcoinfairprice.com]1. Purpose of the scriptLong-term Bitcoin valuation based on historical time (days since Genesis block)
Fair Price = theoretically “fair” price according to power law.
Bottom Price = lower support (historically ~58% below Fair Price).
Daily display as on the website – without external access.
Buy/sell signals in case of strong overvaluation/undervaluation.
2. Mathematical model (original formula)pinescript
Bottom Price = Fair Price × 0.42
→ Corresponds historically to ~58% below Fair Price.
Days since Genesis block are calculated automatically per bar.
3. What is displayed in the chart?
Fair Price Average power law line (“fair price”) Blue
Bottom Price Lower support (“floor”) Green
Power Law Corridor Filled area between 0.1× and 2.5× Fair Price Light blue (transparent)
Table (top right) Daily values as on the website Black with white text
Label (for >20% deviation) Shows current prices + percentage Red (overvalued) / Green (undervalued)
4. Recommended use Timeframe
Recommendation Weekly / Monthly Best long-term signals
Daily Good balance
Log scale Be sure to activate! (Right-click on Y-axis → “Logarithmic scale”)
9. Strategy tips (based on the model)
Price near bottom --> Buy / accumulate
Price > 2.5× fair price --> Sell part of position / caution
Price between fair & bottom --> Strong buy zone
Deviation < -20% --> HODL signal
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
COT IndexTHE HIDDEN INTELLIGENCE IN FUTURES MARKETS
What if you could see what the smartest players in the futures markets are doing before the crowd catches on? While retail traders chase momentum indicators and moving averages, obsess over Japanese candlestick patterns, and debate whether the RSI should be set to fourteen or twenty-one periods, institutional players leave footprints in the sand through their mandatory reporting to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. These footprints, published weekly in the Commitment of Traders reports, have been hiding in plain sight for decades, available to anyone with an internet connection, yet remarkably few traders understand how to interpret them correctly. The COT Index indicator transforms this raw institutional positioning data into actionable trading signals, bringing Wall Street intelligence to your trading screen without requiring expensive Bloomberg terminals or insider connections.
The uncomfortable truth is this: Most retail traders operate in a binary world. Long or short. Buy or sell. They apply technical analysis to individual positions, constrained by limited capital that forces them to concentrate risk in single directional bets. Meanwhile, institutional traders operate in an entirely different dimension. They manage portfolios dynamically weighted across multiple markets, adjusting exposure based on evolving market conditions, correlation shifts, and risk assessments that retail traders never see. A hedge fund might be simultaneously long gold, short oil, neutral on copper, and overweight agricultural commodities, with position sizes calibrated to volatility and portfolio Greeks. When they increase gold exposure from five percent to eight percent of portfolio allocation, this rebalancing decision reflects sophisticated analysis of opportunity cost, risk parity, and cross-market dynamics that no individual chart pattern can capture.
This portfolio reweighting activity, multiplied across hundreds of institutional participants, manifests in the aggregate positioning data published weekly by the CFTC. The Commitment of Traders report does not show individual trades or strategies. It shows the collective footprint of how actual commercial hedgers and large speculators have allocated their capital across different markets. When mining companies collectively increase forward gold sales to hedge thirty percent more production than last quarter, they are not reacting to a moving average crossover. They are making strategic allocation decisions based on production forecasts, cost structures, and price expectations derived from operational realities invisible to outside observers. This is portfolio management in action, revealed through positioning data rather than price charts.
If you want to understand how institutional capital actually flows, how sophisticated traders genuinely position themselves across market cycles, the COT report provides a rare window into that hidden world. But understand what you are getting into. This is not a tool for scalpers seeking confirmation of the next five-minute move. This is not an oscillator that flashes oversold at market bottoms with convenient precision. COT analysis operates on a timescale measured in weeks and months, revealing positioning shifts that precede major market turns but offer no precision timing. The data arrives three days stale, published only once per week, capturing strategic positioning rather than tactical entries.
If you need instant gratification, if you trade intraday moves, if you demand mechanical signals with ninety percent accuracy, close this document now. COT analysis rewards patience, position sizing discipline, and tolerance for being early. It punishes impatience, overleveraging, and the expectation that any single indicator can substitute for market understanding.
The premise is deceptively simple. Every Tuesday, large traders in futures markets must report their positions to the CFTC. By Friday afternoon, this data becomes public. Academic research spanning three decades has consistently shown that not all market participants are created equal. Some traders consistently profit while others consistently lose. Some anticipate major turning points while others chase trends into exhaustion. Bessembinder and Chan (1992) demonstrated in their seminal study that commercial hedgers, those with actual exposure to the underlying commodity or financial instrument, possess superior forecasting ability compared to speculators. Their research, published in the Journal of Finance, found statistically significant predictive power in commercial positioning, particularly at extreme levels. This finding challenged the efficient market hypothesis and opened the door to a new approach to market analysis based on positioning rather than price alone.
Think about what this means. Every week, the government publishes a report showing you exactly how the most informed market participants are positioned. Not their opinions. Not their predictions. Their actual money at risk. When agricultural producers collectively hold their largest short hedge in five years, they are not making idle speculation. They are locking in prices for crops they will harvest, informed by private knowledge of weather conditions, soil quality, inventory levels, and demand expectations invisible to outside observers. When energy companies aggressively hedge forward production at current prices, they reveal information about expected supply that no analyst report can capture. This is not technical analysis based on past prices. This is not fundamental analysis based on publicly available data. This is behavioral analysis based on how the smartest money is actually positioned, how institutions allocate capital across portfolios, and how those allocation decisions shift as market conditions evolve.
WHY SOME TRADERS KNOW MORE THAN OTHERS
Building on this foundation, Sanders, Boris and Manfredo (2004) conducted extensive research examining the behaviour patterns of different trader categories. Their work, which analyzed over a decade of COT data across multiple commodity markets, revealed a fascinating dynamic that challenges much of what retail traders are taught. Commercial hedgers consistently positioned themselves against market extremes, buying when speculators were most bearish and selling when speculators reached peak bullishness. The contrarian positioning of commercials was not random noise but rather reflected their superior information about supply and demand fundamentals. Meanwhile, large speculators, primarily hedge funds and commodity trading advisors, exhibited strong trend-following behaviour that often amplified market moves beyond fundamental values. Small traders, the retail participants, consistently entered positions late in trends, frequently near turning points, making them reliable contrary indicators.
Wang (2003) extended this research by demonstrating that the predictive power of commercial positioning varies significantly across different commodity sectors. His analysis of agricultural commodities showed particularly strong forecasting ability, with commercial net positions explaining up to fifteen percent of return variance in subsequent weeks. This finding suggests that the informational advantages of hedgers are most pronounced in markets where physical supply and demand fundamentals dominate, as opposed to purely financial markets where information asymmetries are smaller. When a corn farmer hedges six months of expected harvest, that decision incorporates private observations about rainfall patterns, crop health, pest pressure, and local storage capacity that no distant analyst can match. When an oil refinery hedges crude oil purchases and gasoline sales simultaneously, the spread relationships reveal expectations about refining margins that reflect operational realities invisible in public data.
The theoretical mechanism underlying these empirical patterns relates to information asymmetry and different participant motivations. Commercial hedgers engage in futures markets not for speculative profit but to manage business risks. An agricultural producer selling forward six months of expected harvest is not making a bet on price direction but rather locking in revenue to facilitate financial planning and ensure business viability. However, this hedging activity necessarily incorporates private information about expected supply, inventory levels, weather conditions, and demand trends that the hedger observes through their commercial operations (Irwin and Sanders, 2012). When aggregated across many participants, this private information manifests in collective positioning.
Consider a gold mining company deciding how much forward production to hedge. Management must estimate ore grades, recovery rates, production costs, equipment reliability, labor availability, and dozens of other operational variables that determine whether locking in prices at current levels makes business sense. If the industry collectively hedges more aggressively than usual, it suggests either exceptional production expectations or concern about sustaining current price levels or combination of both. Either way, this positioning reveals information unavailable to speculators analyzing price charts and economic data. The hedger sees the physical reality behind the financial abstraction.
Large speculators operate under entirely different incentives and constraints. Commodity Trading Advisors managing billions in assets typically employ systematic, trend-following strategies that respond to price momentum rather than fundamental supply and demand. When crude oil rallies from sixty dollars to seventy dollars per barrel, these systems generate buy signals. As the rally continues to eighty dollars, position sizes increase. The strategy works brilliantly during sustained trends but becomes a liability at reversals. By the time oil reaches ninety dollars, trend-following funds are maximally long, having accumulated positions progressively throughout the rally. At this point, they represent not smart money anticipating further gains but rather crowded money vulnerable to reversal. Sanders, Boris and Manfredo (2004) documented this pattern across multiple energy markets, showing that extreme speculator positioning typically marked late-stage trend exhaustion rather than early-stage trend development.
Small traders, the retail participants who fall below reporting thresholds, display the weakest forecasting ability. Wang (2003) found that small trader positioning exhibited negative correlation with subsequent returns, meaning their aggregate positioning served as a reliable contrary indicator. The explanation combines several factors. Retail traders often lack the capital reserves to weather normal market volatility, leading to premature exits from positions that would eventually prove profitable. They tend to receive information through slower channels, entering trends after mainstream media coverage when institutional participants are preparing to exit. Perhaps most importantly, they trade with emotion, buying into euphoria and selling into panic at precisely the wrong times.
At major turning points, the three groups often position opposite each other with commercials extremely bearish, large speculators extremely bullish, and small traders piling into longs at the last moment. These high-divergence environments frequently precede increased volatility and trend reversals. The insiders with business exposure quietly exit as the momentum traders hit maximum capacity and retail enthusiasm peaks. Within weeks, the reversal begins, and positions unwind in the opposite sequence.
FROM RAW DATA TO ACTIONABLE SIGNALS
The COT Index indicator operationalizes these academic findings into a practical trading tool accessible through TradingView. At its core, the indicator normalizes net positioning data onto a zero to one hundred scale, creating what we call the COT Index. This normalization is critical because absolute position sizes vary dramatically across different futures contracts and over time. A commercial trader holding fifty thousand contracts net long in crude oil might be extremely bullish by historical standards, or it might be quite neutral depending on the context of total market size and historical ranges. Raw position numbers mean nothing without context. The COT Index solves this problem by calculating where current positioning stands relative to its range over a specified lookback period, typically two hundred fifty-two weeks or approximately five years of weekly data.
The mathematical transformation follows the methodology originally popularized by legendary trader Larry Williams, though the underlying concept appears in statistical normalization techniques across many fields. For any given trader category, we calculate the highest and lowest net position values over the lookback period, establishing the historical range for that specific market and trader group. Current positioning is then expressed as a percentage of this range, where zero represents the most bearish positioning ever seen in the lookback window and one hundred represents the most bullish extreme. A reading of fifty indicates positioning exactly in the middle of the historical range, suggesting neither extreme optimism nor pessimism relative to recent history (Williams and Noseworthy, 2009).
This index-based approach allows for meaningful comparison across different markets and time periods, overcoming the scaling problems inherent in analyzing raw position data. A commercial index reading of eighty-five in gold carries the same interpretive meaning as an eighty-five reading in wheat or crude oil, even though the absolute position sizes differ by orders of magnitude. This standardization enables systematic analysis across entire futures portfolios rather than requiring market-specific expertise for each contract.
The lookback period selection involves a fundamental tradeoff between responsiveness and stability. Shorter lookback periods, perhaps one hundred twenty-six weeks or approximately two and a half years, make the index more sensitive to recent positioning changes. However, it also increases noise and produces more false signals. Longer lookback periods, perhaps five hundred weeks or approximately ten years, create smoother readings that filter short-term noise but become slower to recognize regime changes. The indicator settings allow users to adjust this parameter based on their trading timeframe, risk tolerance, and market characteristics.
UNDERSTANDING CFTC DATA STRUCTURES
The indicator supports both Legacy and Disaggregated COT report formats, reflecting the evolution of CFTC reporting standards over decades of market development. Legacy reports categorize market participants into three broad groups: commercial traders (hedgers with underlying business exposure), non-commercial traders (large speculators seeking profit without commercial interest), and non-reportable traders (small speculators below reporting thresholds). Each category brings distinct motivations and information advantages to the market (CFTC, 2020).
The Disaggregated reports, introduced in September 2009 for physical commodity markets, provide finer granularity by splitting participants into five categories (CFTC, 2009). Producer and merchant positions capture those actually producing, processing, or merchandising the physical commodity. Swap dealers represent financial intermediaries facilitating derivative transactions for clients. Managed money includes commodity trading advisors and hedge funds executing systematic or discretionary strategies. Other reportables encompasses diverse participants not fitting the main categories. Small traders remain as the fifth group, representing retail participation.
This enhanced categorization reveals nuances invisible in Legacy reports, particularly distinguishing between different types of institutional capital and their distinct behavioural patterns. The indicator automatically detects which report type is appropriate for each futures contract and adjusts the display accordingly.
Importantly, Disaggregated reports exist only for physical commodity futures. Agricultural commodities like corn, wheat, and soybeans have Disaggregated reports because clear producer, merchant, and swap dealer categories exist. Energy commodities like crude oil and natural gas similarly have well-defined commercial hedger categories. Metals including gold, silver, and copper also receive Disaggregated treatment (CFTC, 2009). However, financial futures such as equity index futures, Treasury bond futures, and currency futures remain available only in Legacy format. The CFTC has indicated no plans to extend Disaggregated reporting to financial futures due to different market structures and participant categories in these instruments (CFTC, 2020).
THE BEHAVIORAL FOUNDATION
Understanding which trader perspective to follow requires appreciation of their distinct trading styles, success rates, and psychological profiles. Commercial hedgers exhibit anticyclical behaviour rooted in their fundamental knowledge and business imperatives. When agricultural producers hedge forward sales during harvest season, they are not speculating on price direction but rather locking in revenue for crops they will harvest. Their business requires converting volatile commodity exposure into predictable cash flows to facilitate planning and ensure survival through difficult periods. Yet their aggregate positioning reveals valuable information because these hedging decisions incorporate private information about supply conditions, inventory levels, weather observations, and demand expectations that hedgers observe through their commercial operations (Bessembinder and Chan, 1992).
Consider a practical example from energy markets. Major oil companies continuously hedge portions of forward production based on price levels, operational costs, and financial planning needs. When crude oil trades at ninety dollars per barrel, they might aggressively hedge the next twelve months of production, locking in prices that provide comfortable profit margins above their extraction costs. This hedging appears as short positioning in COT reports. If oil rallies further to one hundred dollars, they hedge even more aggressively, viewing these prices as exceptional opportunities to secure revenue. Their short positioning grows increasingly extreme. To an outside observer watching only price charts, the rally suggests bullishness. But the commercial positioning reveals that the actual producers of oil find these prices attractive enough to lock in years of sales, suggesting skepticism about sustaining even higher levels. When the eventual reversal occurs and oil declines back to eighty dollars, the commercials who hedged at ninety and one hundred dollars profit while speculators who chased the rally suffer losses.
Large speculators or managed money traders operate under entirely different incentives and constraints. Their systematic, momentum-driven strategies mean they amplify existing trends rather than anticipate reversals. Trend-following systems, the most common approach among large speculators, by definition require confirmation of trend through price momentum before entering positions (Sanders, Boris and Manfredo, 2004). When crude oil rallies from sixty dollars to eighty dollars per barrel over several months, trend-following algorithms generate buy signals based on moving average crossovers, breakouts, and other momentum indicators. As the rally continues, position sizes increase according to the systematic rules.
However, this approach becomes a liability at turning points. By the time oil reaches ninety dollars after a sustained rally, trend-following funds are maximally long, having accumulated positions progressively throughout the move. At this point, their positioning does not predict continued strength. Rather, it often marks late-stage trend exhaustion. The psychological and mechanical explanation is straightforward. Trend followers by definition chase price momentum, entering positions after trends establish rather than anticipating them. Eventually, they become fully invested just as the trend nears completion, leaving no incremental buying power to sustain the rally. When the first signs of reversal appear, systematic stops trigger, creating a cascade of selling that accelerates the downturn.
Small traders consistently display the weakest track record across academic studies. Wang (2003) found that small trader positioning exhibited negative correlation with subsequent returns in his analysis across multiple commodity markets. This result means that whatever small traders collectively do, the opposite typically proves profitable. The explanation for small trader underperformance combines several factors documented in behavioral finance literature. Retail traders often lack the capital reserves to weather normal market volatility, leading to premature exits from positions that would eventually prove profitable. They tend to receive information through slower channels, learning about commodity trends through mainstream media coverage that arrives after institutional participants have already positioned. Perhaps most importantly, retail traders are more susceptible to emotional decision-making, buying into euphoria and selling into panic at precisely the wrong times (Tharp, 2008).
SETTINGS, THRESHOLDS, AND SIGNAL GENERATION
The practical implementation of the COT Index requires understanding several key features and settings that users can adjust to match their trading style, timeframe, and risk tolerance. The lookback period determines the time window for calculating historical ranges. The default setting of two hundred fifty-two bars represents approximately one year on daily charts or five years on weekly charts, balancing responsiveness with stability. Conservative traders seeking only the most extreme, highest-probability signals might extend the lookback to five hundred bars or more. Aggressive traders seeking earlier entry and willing to accept more false positives might reduce it to one hundred twenty-six bars or even less for shorter-term applications.
The bullish and bearish thresholds define signal generation levels. Default settings of eighty and twenty respectively reflect academic research suggesting meaningful information content at these extremes. Readings above eighty indicate positioning in the top quintile of the historical range, representing genuine extremes rather than temporary fluctuations. Conversely, readings below twenty occupy the bottom quintile, indicating unusually bearish positioning (Briese, 2008).
However, traders must recognize that appropriate thresholds vary by market, trader category, and personal risk tolerance. Some futures markets exhibit wider positioning swings than others due to seasonal patterns, volatility characteristics, or participant behavior. Conservative traders seeking high-probability setups with fewer signals might raise thresholds to eighty-five and fifteen. Aggressive traders willing to accept more false positives for earlier entry could lower them to seventy-five and twenty-five.
The key is maintaining meaningful differentiation between bullish, neutral, and bearish zones. The default settings of eighty and twenty create a clear three-zone structure. Readings from zero to twenty represent bearish territory where the selected trader group holds unusually bearish positions. Readings from twenty to eighty represent neutral territory where positioning falls within normal historical ranges. Readings from eighty to one hundred represent bullish territory where the selected trader group holds unusually bullish positions.
The trading perspective selection determines which participant group the indicator follows, fundamentally shaping interpretation and signal meaning. For counter-trend traders seeking reversal opportunities, monitoring commercial positioning makes intuitive sense based on the academic research discussed earlier. When commercials reach extreme bearish readings below twenty, indicating unprecedented short positioning relative to recent history, they are effectively betting against the crowd. Given their informational advantages demonstrated by Bessembinder and Chan (1992), this contrarian stance often precedes major bottoms.
Trend followers might instead monitor large speculator positioning, but with inverted logic compared to commercials. When managed money reaches extreme bullish readings above eighty, the trend may be exhausting rather than accelerating. This seeming paradox reflects their late-cycle participation documented by Sanders, Boris and Manfredo (2004). Sophisticated traders thus use speculator extremes as fade signals, entering positions opposite to speculator consensus.
Small trader monitoring serves primarily as a contrary indicator for all trading styles. Extreme small trader bullishness above seventy-five or eighty typically warns of retail FOMO at market tops. Extreme small trader bearishness below twenty or twenty-five often marks capitulation bottoms where the last weak hands have sold.
VISUALIZATION AND USER INTERFACE
The visual design incorporates multiple elements working together to facilitate decision-making and maintain situational awareness during active trading. The primary COT Index line plots in bold with adjustable line width, defaulting to two pixels for clear visibility against busy price charts. An optional glow effect, controlled by a simple toggle, adds additional visual prominence through multiple plot layers with progressively increasing transparency and width.
A twenty-one period exponential moving average overlays the index line, providing trend context for positioning changes. When the index crosses above its moving average, it signals accelerating bullish sentiment among the selected trader group regardless of whether absolute positioning is extreme. Conversely, when the index crosses below its moving average, it signals deteriorating sentiment and potentially the beginning of a reversal in positioning trends.
The EMA provides a dynamic reference line for assessing positioning momentum. When the index trades far above its EMA, positioning is not only extreme in absolute terms but also building with momentum. When the index trades far below its EMA, positioning is contracting or reversing, which may indicate weakening conviction even if absolute levels remain elevated.
The data table positioned at the top right of the chart displays eleven metrics for each trader category, transforming the indicator from a simple index calculation into an analytical dashboard providing multidimensional market intelligence. Beyond the COT Index itself, users can monitor positioning extremity, which measures how unusual current levels are compared to historical norms using statistical techniques. The extremity metric clarifies whether a reading represents the ninety-fifth or ninety-ninth percentile, with values above two standard deviations indicating genuinely exceptional positioning.
Market power quantifies each group's influence on total open interest. This metric expresses each trader category's net position as a percentage of total market open interest. A commercial entity holding forty percent of total open interest commands significantly more influence than one holding five percent, making their positioning signals more meaningful.
Momentum and rate of change metrics reveal whether positions are building or contracting, providing early warning of potential regime shifts. Position velocity measures the rate of change in positioning changes, effectively a second derivative providing even earlier insight into inflection points.
Sentiment divergence highlights disagreements between commercial and speculative positioning. This metric calculates the absolute difference between normalized commercial and large speculator index values. Wang (2003) found that these high-divergence environments frequently preceded increased volatility and reversals.
The table also displays concentration metrics when available, showing how positioning is distributed among the largest handful of traders in each category. High concentration indicates a few dominant players controlling most of the positioning, while low concentration suggests broad-based participation across many traders.
THE ALERT SYSTEM AND MONITORING
The alert system, comprising five distinct alert conditions, enables systematic monitoring of dozens of futures markets without constant screen watching. The bullish and bearish COT signal alerts trigger when the index crosses user-defined thresholds, indicating the selected trader group has reached extreme positioning worthy of attention. These alerts fire in real-time as new weekly COT data publishes, typically Friday afternoon following the Tuesday measurement date.
Extreme positioning alerts fire at ninety and ten index levels, representing the top and bottom ten percent of the historical range, warning of particularly stretched readings that historically precede reversals with high probability. When commercials reach a COT Index reading below ten, they are expressing their most bearish stance in the entire lookback period.
The data staleness alert notifies users when COT reports have not updated for more than ten days, preventing reliance on outdated information for trading decisions. Government shutdowns or federal holidays can interrupt the normal Friday publication schedule. Using stale signals while believing them current creates dangerous false confidence.
The indicator's watermark information display positioned in the bottom right corner provides essential context at a glance. This persistent display shows the symbol and timeframe, the COT report date timestamp, days since last update, and the current signal state. A trader analyzing a potential short entry in crude oil can glance at the watermark to instantly confirm positioning context without interrupting analysis flow.
LIMITATIONS AND REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS
Practical application requires understanding both the indicator's considerable strengths and inherent limitations. COT data inherently lags price action by three days, as Tuesday positions are not published until Friday afternoon. This delay means the indicator cannot catch rapid intraday reversals or respond to surprise news events. Traders using the COT Index for timing entries must accept this latency and focus on swing trading and position trading timeframes where three-day lags matter less than in day trading or scalping.
The weekly publication schedule similarly makes the indicator unsuitable for short-term trading strategies requiring immediate feedback. The COT Index works best for traders operating on weekly or longer timeframes, where positioning shifts measured in weeks and months align with trading horizon.
Extreme COT readings can persist far longer than typical technical indicators suggest, testing the patience and capital reserves of traders attempting to fade them. When crude oil enters a sustained bull market driven by genuine supply disruptions, commercial hedgers may maintain bearish positioning for many months as prices grind higher. A commercial COT Index reading of fifteen indicating extreme bearishness might persist for three months while prices continue rallying before finally reversing. Traders without sufficient capital and risk tolerance to weather such drawdowns will exit prematurely, precisely when the signal is about to work (Irwin and Sanders, 2012).
Position sizing discipline becomes paramount when implementing COT-based strategies. Rather than risking large percentages of capital on individual signals, successful COT traders typically allocate modest position sizes across multiple signals, allowing some to take time to mature while others work more quickly.
The indicator also cannot overcome fundamental regime changes that alter the structural drivers of markets. If gold enters a true secular bull market driven by monetary debasement, commercial hedgers may remain persistently bearish as mining companies sell forward years of production at what they perceive as favorable prices. Their positioning indicates valuation concerns from a production cost perspective, but cannot stop prices from rising if investment demand overwhelms physical supply-demand balance.
Similarly, structural changes in market participation can alter the meaning of positioning extremes. The growth of commodity index investing in the two thousands brought massive passive long-only capital into futures markets, fundamentally changing typical positioning ranges. Traders relying on COT signals without recognizing this regime change would have generated numerous false bearish signals during the commodity supercycle from 2003 to 2008.
The research foundation supporting COT analysis derives primarily from commodity markets where the commercial hedger information advantage is most pronounced. Studies specifically examining financial futures like equity indices and bonds show weaker but still present effects. Traders should calibrate expectations accordingly, recognizing that COT analysis likely works better for crude oil, natural gas, corn, and wheat than for the S&P 500, Treasury bonds, or currency futures.
Another important limitation involves the reporting threshold structure. Not all market participants appear in COT data, only those holding positions above specified minimums. In markets dominated by a few large players, concentration metrics become critical for proper interpretation. A single large trader accounting for thirty percent of commercial positioning might skew the entire category if their individual circumstances are idiosyncratic rather than representative.
GOLD FUTURES DURING A HYPOTHETICAL MARKET CYCLE
Consider a practical example using gold futures during a hypothetical but realistic market scenario that illustrates how the COT Index indicator guides trading decisions through a complete market cycle. Suppose gold has rallied from fifteen hundred to nineteen hundred dollars per ounce over six months, driven by inflation concerns following aggressive monetary expansion, geopolitical uncertainty, and sustained buying by Asian central banks for reserve diversification.
Large speculators, operating primarily trend-following strategies, have accumulated increasingly bullish positions throughout this rally. Their COT Index has climbed progressively from forty-five to eighty-five. The table display shows that large speculators now hold net long positions representing thirty-two percent of total open interest, their highest in four years. Momentum indicators show positive readings, indicating positions are still building though at a decelerating rate. Position velocity has turned negative, suggesting the pace of position building is slowing.
Meanwhile, commercial hedgers have responded to the rally by aggressively selling forward production and inventory. Their COT Index has moved inversely to price, declining from fifty-five to twenty. This bearish commercial positioning represents mining companies locking in forward sales at prices they view as attractive relative to production costs. The table shows commercials now hold net short positions representing twenty-nine percent of total open interest, their most bearish stance in five years. Concentration metrics indicate this positioning is broadly distributed across many commercial entities, suggesting the bearish stance reflects collective industry view rather than idiosyncratic positioning by a single firm.
Small traders, attracted by mainstream financial media coverage of gold's impressive rally, have recently piled into long positions. Their COT Index has jumped from forty-five to seventy-eight as retail investors chase the trend. Television financial networks feature frequent segments on gold with bullish guests. Internet forums and social media show surging retail interest. This retail enthusiasm historically marks late-stage trend development rather than early opportunity.
The COT Index indicator, configured to monitor commercial positioning from a contrarian perspective, displays a clear bearish signal given the extreme commercial short positioning. The table displays multiple confirming metrics: positioning extremity shows commercials at the ninety-sixth percentile of bearishness, market power indicates they control twenty-nine percent of open interest, and sentiment divergence registers sixty-five, indicating massive disagreement between commercial hedgers and large speculators. This divergence, the highest in three years, places the market in the historically high-risk category for reversals.
The interpretation requires nuance and consideration of context beyond just COT data. Commercials are not necessarily predicting an imminent crash. Rather, they are hedging business operations at what they collectively view as favorable price levels. However, the data reveals they have sold unusually large quantities of forward production, suggesting either exceptional production expectations for the year ahead or concern about sustaining current price levels or combination of both. Combined with extreme speculator positioning indicating a crowded long trade, and small trader enthusiasm confirming retail FOMO, the confluence suggests elevated reversal risk even if the precise timing remains uncertain.
A prudent trader analyzing this situation might take several actions based on COT Index signals. Existing long positions could be tightened with closer stop losses. Profit-taking on a portion of long exposure could lock in gains while maintaining some participation. Some traders might initiate modest short positions as portfolio hedges, sizing them appropriately for the inherent uncertainty in timing reversals. Others might simply move to the sidelines, avoiding new long entries until positioning normalizes.
The key lesson from case study analysis is that COT signals provide probabilistic edges rather than deterministic predictions. They work over many observations by identifying higher-probability configurations, not by generating perfect calls on individual trades. A fifty-five percent win rate with proper risk management produces substantial profits over time, yet still means forty-five percent of signals will be premature or wrong. Traders must embrace this probabilistic reality rather than seeking the impossible goal of perfect accuracy.
INTEGRATION WITH TRADING SYSTEMS
Integration with existing trading systems represents a natural and powerful use case for COT analysis, adding a positioning dimension to price-based technical approaches or fundamental analytical frameworks. Few traders rely exclusively on a single indicator or methodology. Rather, they build systems that synthesize multiple information sources, with each component addressing different aspects of market behavior.
Trend followers might use COT extremes as regime filters, modifying position sizing or avoiding new trend entries when positioning reaches levels historically associated with reversals. Consider a classic trend-following system based on moving average crossovers and momentum breakouts. Integration of COT analysis adds nuance. When large speculator positioning exceeds ninety or commercial positioning falls below ten, the regime filter recognizes elevated reversal risk. The system might reduce position sizing by fifty percent for new signals during these high-risk periods (Kaufman, 2013).
Mean reversion traders might require COT signal confluence before fading extended moves. When crude oil becomes technically overbought and large speculators show extreme long positioning above eighty-five, both signals confirm. If only technical indicators show extremes while positioning remains neutral, the potential short signal is rejected, avoiding fades of trends with underlying institutional support (Kaufman, 2013).
Discretionary traders can monitor the indicator as a continuous awareness tool, informing bias and position sizing without dictating mechanical entries and exits. A discretionary trader might notice commercial positioning shifting from neutral to progressively more bullish over several months. This trend informs growing positive bias even without triggering mechanical signals.
Multi-timeframe analysis represents another powerful integration approach. A trader might use daily charts for trade execution and timing while monitoring weekly COT positioning for strategic context. When both timeframes align, highest-probability opportunities emerge.
Portfolio construction for futures traders can incorporate COT signals as an additional selection criterion. Markets showing strong technical setups AND favorable COT positioning receive highest allocations. Markets with strong technicals but neutral or unfavorable positioning receive reduced allocations.
ADVANCED METRICS AND INTERPRETATION
The metrics table transforms simple positioning data into multidimensional market intelligence. Position extremity, calculated as the absolute deviation from the historical mean normalized by standard deviation, helps identify truly unusual readings versus routine fluctuations. A reading above two standard deviations indicates ninety-fifth percentile or higher extremity. Above three standard deviations indicates ninety-ninth percentile or higher, genuinely rare positioning that historically precedes major events with high probability.
Market power, expressed as a percentage of total open interest, reveals whose positioning matters most from a mechanical market impact perspective. Consider two scenarios in gold futures. In scenario one, commercials show a COT Index reading of fifteen while their market power metric shows they hold net shorts representing thirty-five percent of open interest. This is a high-confidence bearish signal. In scenario two, commercials also show a reading of fifteen, but market power shows only eight percent. While positioning is extreme relative to this category's normal range, their limited market share means less mechanical influence on price.
The rate of change and momentum metrics highlight whether positions are accelerating or decelerating, often providing earlier warnings than absolute levels alone. A COT Index reading of seventy-five with rapidly building momentum suggests continued movement toward extremes. Conversely, a reading of eighty-five with decelerating or negative momentum indicates the positioning trend is exhausting.
Position velocity measures the rate of change in positioning changes, effectively a second derivative. When velocity shifts from positive to negative, it indicates that while positioning may still be growing, the pace of growth is slowing. This deceleration often precedes actual reversal in positioning direction by several weeks.
Sentiment divergence calculates the absolute difference between normalized commercial and large speculator index values. When commercials show extreme bearish positioning at twenty while large speculators show extreme bullish positioning at eighty, the divergence reaches sixty, representing near-maximum disagreement. Wang (2003) found that these high-divergence environments frequently preceded increased volatility and reversals. The mechanism is intuitive. Extreme divergence indicates the informed hedgers and momentum-following speculators have positioned opposite each other with conviction. One group will prove correct and profit while the other proves incorrect and suffers losses. The resolution of this disagreement through price movement often involves volatility.
The table also displays concentration metrics when available. High concentration indicates a few dominant players controlling most of the positioning within a category, while low concentration suggests broad-based participation. Broad-based positioning more reliably reflects collective market intelligence and industry consensus. If mining companies globally all independently decide to hedge aggressively at similar price levels, it suggests genuine industry-wide view about price valuations rather than circumstances specific to one firm.
DATA QUALITY AND RELIABILITY
The CFTC has maintained COT reporting in various forms since the nineteen twenties, providing nearly a century of positioning data across multiple market cycles. However, data quality and reporting standards have evolved substantially over this long period. Modern electronic reporting implemented in the late nineteen nineties and early two thousands significantly improved accuracy and timeliness compared to earlier paper-based systems.
Traders should understand that COT reports capture positions as of Tuesday's close each week. Markets remain open three additional days before publication on Friday afternoon, meaning the reported data is three days stale when received. During periods of rapid market movement or major news events, this lag can be significant. The indicator addresses this limitation by including timestamp information and staleness warnings.
The three-day lag creates particular challenges during extreme volatility episodes. Flash crashes, surprise central bank interventions, geopolitical shocks, and other high-impact events can completely transform market positioning within hours. Traders must exercise judgment about whether reported positioning remains relevant given intervening events.
Reporting thresholds also mean that not all market participants appear in disaggregated COT data. Traders holding positions below specified minimums aggregate into the non-reportable or small trader category. This aggregation affects different markets differently. In highly liquid contracts like crude oil with thousands of participants, reportable traders might represent seventy to eighty percent of open interest. In thinly traded contracts with only dozens of active participants, a few large reportable positions might represent ninety-five percent of open interest.
Another data quality consideration involves trader classification into categories. The CFTC assigns traders to commercial or non-commercial categories based on reported business purpose and activities. However, this process is not perfect. Some entities engage in both commercial and speculative activities, creating ambiguity about proper classification. The transition to Disaggregated reports attempted to address some of these ambiguities by creating more granular categories.
COMPARISON WITH ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES
Several alternative approaches to COT analysis exist in the trading community beyond the normalization methodology employed by this indicator. Some analysts focus on absolute position changes week-over-week rather than index-based normalization. This approach calculates the change in net positioning from one week to the next. The emphasis falls on momentum in positioning changes rather than absolute levels relative to history. This method potentially identifies regime shifts earlier but sacrifices cross-market comparability (Briese, 2008).
Other practitioners employ more complex statistical transformations including percentile rankings, z-score standardization, and machine learning classification algorithms. Ruan and Zhang (2018) demonstrated that machine learning models applied to COT data could achieve modest improvements in forecasting accuracy compared to simple threshold-based approaches. However, these gains came at the cost of interpretability and implementation complexity.
The COT Index indicator intentionally employs a relatively straightforward normalization methodology for several important reasons. First, transparency enhances user understanding and trust. Traders can verify calculations manually and develop intuitive feel for what different readings mean. Second, academic research suggests that most of the predictive power in COT data comes from extreme positioning levels rather than subtle patterns requiring complex statistical methods to detect. Third, robust methods that work consistently across many markets and time periods tend to be simpler rather than more complex, reducing the risk of overfitting to historical data. Fourth, the complexity costs of implementation matter for retail traders without programming teams or computational infrastructure.
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF COT TRADING
Trading based on COT data requires psychological fortitude that differs from momentum-based approaches. Contrarian positioning signals inherently mean betting against prevailing market sentiment and recent price action. When commercials reach extreme bearish positioning, prices have typically been rising, sometimes for extended periods. The price chart looks bullish, momentum indicators confirm strength, moving averages align positively. The COT signal says bet against all of this. This psychological difficulty explains why COT analysis remains underutilized relative to trend-following methods.
Human psychology strongly predisposes us toward extrapolation and recency bias. When prices rally for months, our pattern-matching brains naturally expect continued rally. The recent price action dominates our perception, overwhelming rational analysis about positioning extremes and historical probabilities. The COT signal asking us to sell requires overriding these powerful psychological impulses.
The indicator design attempts to support the required psychological discipline through several features. Clear threshold markers and signal states reduce ambiguity about when signals trigger. When the commercial index crosses below twenty, the signal is explicit and unambiguous. The background shifts to red, the signal label displays bearish, and alerts fire. This explicitness helps traders act on signals rather than waiting for additional confirmation that may never arrive.
The metrics table provides analytical justification for contrarian positions, helping traders maintain conviction during inevitable periods of adverse price movement. When a trader enters short positions based on extreme commercial bearish positioning but prices continue rallying for several weeks, doubt naturally emerges. The table display provides reassurance. Commercial positioning remains extremely bearish. Divergence remains high. The positioning thesis remains intact even though price action has not yet confirmed.
Alert functionality ensures traders do not miss signals due to inattention while also not requiring constant monitoring that can lead to emotional decision-making. Setting alerts for COT extremes enables a healthier relationship with markets. When meaningful signals occur, alerts notify them. They can then calmly assess the situation and execute planned responses.
However, no indicator design can completely overcome the psychological difficulty of contrarian trading. Some traders simply cannot maintain short positions while prices rally. For these traders, COT analysis might be better employed as an exit signal for long positions rather than an entry signal for shorts.
Ultimately, successful COT trading requires developing comfort with probabilistic thinking rather than certainty-seeking. The signals work over many observations by identifying higher-probability configurations, not by generating perfect calls on individual trades. A fifty-five or sixty percent win rate with proper risk management produces substantial profits over years, yet still means forty to forty-five percent of signals will be premature or wrong. COT analysis provides genuine edge, but edge means probability advantage, not elimination of losing trades.
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES AND CONTINUOUS LEARNING
The indicator provides extensive built-in educational resources through its documentation, detailed tooltips, and transparent calculations. However, mastering COT analysis requires study beyond any single tool or resource. Several excellent resources provide valuable extensions of the concepts covered in this guide.
Books and practitioner-focused monographs offer accessible entry points. Stephen Briese published The Commitments of Traders Bible in two thousand eight, offering detailed breakdowns of how different markets and trader categories behave (Briese, 2008). Briese's work stands out for its empirical focus and market-specific insights. Jack Schwager includes discussion of COT analysis within the broader context of market behavior in his book Market Sense and Nonsense (Schwager, 2012). Perry Kaufman's Trading Systems and Methods represents perhaps the most rigorous practitioner-focused text on systematic trading approaches including COT analysis (Kaufman, 2013).
Academic journal articles provide the rigorous statistical foundation underlying COT analysis. The Journal of Futures Markets regularly publishes research on positioning data and its predictive properties. Bessembinder and Chan's earlier work on systematic risk, hedging pressure, and risk premiums in futures markets provides theoretical foundation (Bessembinder, 1992). Chang's examination of speculator returns provides historical context (Chang, 1985). Irwin and Sanders provide essential skeptical perspective in their two thousand twelve article (Irwin and Sanders, 2012). Wang's two thousand three article provides one of the most empirical analyses of COT data across multiple commodity markets (Wang, 2003).
Online resources extend beyond academic and book-length treatments. The CFTC website provides free access to current and historical COT reports in multiple formats. The explanatory materials section offers detailed documentation of report construction, category definitions, and historical methodology changes. Traders serious about COT analysis should read these official CFTC documents to understand exactly what they are analyzing.
Commercial COT data services such as Barchart provide enhanced visualization and analysis tools beyond raw CFTC data. TradingView's educational materials, published scripts library, and user community provide additional resources for exploring different approaches to COT analysis.
The key to mastering COT analysis lies not in finding a single definitive source but rather in building understanding through multiple perspectives and information sources. Academic research provides rigorous empirical foundation. Practitioner-focused books offer practical implementation insights. Direct engagement with data through systematic backtesting develops intuition about how positioning dynamics manifest across different market conditions.
SYNTHESIZING KNOWLEDGE INTO PRACTICE
The COT Index indicator represents the synthesis of academic research, trading experience, and software engineering into a practical tool accessible to retail traders equipped with nothing more than a TradingView account and willingness to learn. What once required expensive data subscriptions, custom programming capabilities, statistical software, and institutional resources now appears as a straightforward indicator requiring only basic parameter selection and modest study to understand. This democratization of institutional-grade analysis tools represents a broader trend in financial markets over recent decades.
Yet technology and data access alone provide no edge without understanding and discipline. Markets remain relentlessly efficient at eliminating edges that become too widely known and mechanically exploited. The COT Index indicator succeeds only when users invest time learning the underlying concepts, understand the limitations and probability distributions involved, and integrate signals thoughtfully into trading plans rather than applying them mechanically.
The academic research demonstrates conclusively that institutional positioning contains genuine information about future price movements, particularly at extremes where commercial hedgers are maximally bearish or bullish relative to historical norms. This informational content is neither perfect nor deterministic but rather probabilistic, providing edge over many observations through identification of higher-probability configurations. Bessembinder and Chan's finding that commercial positioning explained modest but significant variance in future returns illustrates this probabilistic nature perfectly (Bessembinder and Chan, 1992). The effect is real and statistically significant, yet it explains perhaps ten to fifteen percent of return variance rather than most variance. Much of price movement remains unpredictable even with positioning intelligence.
The practical implication is that COT analysis works best as one component of a trading system rather than a standalone oracle. It provides the positioning dimension, revealing where the smart money has positioned and where the crowd has followed, but price action analysis provides the timing dimension. Fundamental analysis provides the catalyst dimension. Risk management provides the survival dimension. These components work together synergistically.
The indicator's design philosophy prioritizes transparency and education over black-box complexity, empowering traders to understand exactly what they are analyzing and why. Every calculation is documented and user-adjustable. The threshold markers, background coloring, tables, and clear signal states provide multiple reinforcing channels for conveying the same information.
This educational approach reflects a conviction that sustainable trading success comes from genuine understanding rather than mechanical system-following. Traders who understand why commercial positioning matters, how different trader categories behave, what positioning extremes signify, and where signals fit within probability distributions can adapt when market conditions change. Traders mechanically following black-box signals without comprehension abandon systems after normal losing streaks.
The research foundation supporting COT analysis comes primarily from commodity markets where commercial hedger informational advantages are most pronounced. Agricultural producers hedging crops know more about supply conditions than distant speculators. Energy companies hedging production know more about operating costs than financial traders. Metals miners hedging output know more about ore grades than index funds. Financial futures markets show weaker but still present effects.
The journey from reading this documentation to profitable trading based on COT analysis involves several stages that cannot be rushed. Initial reading and basic understanding represents the first stage. Historical study represents the second stage, reviewing past market cycles to observe how positioning extremes preceded major turning points. Paper trading or small-size real trading represents the third stage to experience the psychological challenges. Refinement based on results and personal psychology represents the fourth stage.
Markets will continue evolving. New participant categories will emerge. Regulatory structures will change. Technology will advance. Yet the fundamental dynamics driving COT analysis, that different market participants have different information, different motivations, and different forecasting abilities that manifest in their positioning, will persist as long as futures markets exist. While specific thresholds or optimal parameters may shift over time, the core logic remains sound and adaptable.
The trader equipped with this indicator, understanding of the theory and evidence behind COT analysis, realistic expectations about probability rather than certainty, discipline to maintain positions through adverse volatility, and patience to allow signals time to develop possesses genuine edge in markets. The edge is not enormous, markets cannot allow large persistent inefficiencies without arbitraging them away, but it is real, measurable, and exploitable by those willing to invest in learning and disciplined application.
REFERENCES
Bessembinder, H. (1992) Systematic risk, hedging pressure, and risk premiums in futures markets, Review of Financial Studies, 5(4), pp. 637-667.
Bessembinder, H. and Chan, K. (1992) The profitability of technical trading rules in the Asian stock markets, Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 3(2-3), pp. 257-284.
Briese, S. (2008) The Commitments of Traders Bible: How to Profit from Insider Market Intelligence. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Chang, E.C. (1985) Returns to speculators and the theory of normal backwardation, Journal of Finance, 40(1), pp. 193-208.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) (2009) Explanatory Notes: Disaggregated Commitments of Traders Report. Available at: www.cftc.gov (Accessed: 15 January 2025).
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) (2020) Commitments of Traders: About the Report. Available at: www.cftc.gov (Accessed: 15 January 2025).
Irwin, S.H. and Sanders, D.R. (2012) Testing the Masters Hypothesis in commodity futures markets, Energy Economics, 34(1), pp. 256-269.
Kaufman, P.J. (2013) Trading Systems and Methods. 5th edn. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Ruan, Y. and Zhang, Y. (2018) Forecasting commodity futures prices using machine learning: Evidence from the Chinese commodity futures market, Applied Economics Letters, 25(12), pp. 845-849.
Sanders, D.R., Boris, K. and Manfredo, M. (2004) Hedgers, funds, and small speculators in the energy futures markets: an analysis of the CFTC's Commitments of Traders reports, Energy Economics, 26(3), pp. 425-445.
Schwager, J.D. (2012) Market Sense and Nonsense: How the Markets Really Work and How They Don't. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Tharp, V.K. (2008) Super Trader: Make Consistent Profits in Good and Bad Markets. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wang, C. (2003) The behavior and performance of major types of futures traders, Journal of Futures Markets, 23(1), pp. 1-31.
Williams, L.R. and Noseworthy, M. (2009) The Right Stock at the Right Time: Prospering in the Coming Good Years. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
FURTHER READING
For traders seeking to deepen their understanding of COT analysis and futures market positioning beyond this documentation, the following resources provide valuable extensions:
Academic Journal Articles:
Fishe, R.P.H. and Smith, A. (2012) Do speculators drive commodity prices away from supply and demand fundamentals?, Journal of Commodity Markets, 1(1), pp. 1-16.
Haigh, M.S., Hranaiova, J. and Overdahl, J.A. (2007) Hedge funds, volatility, and liquidity provision in energy futures markets, Journal of Alternative Investments, 9(4), pp. 10-38.
Kocagil, A.E. (1997) Does futures speculation stabilize spot prices? Evidence from metals markets, Applied Financial Economics, 7(1), pp. 115-125.
Sanders, D.R. and Irwin, S.H. (2011) The impact of index funds in commodity futures markets: A systems approach, Journal of Alternative Investments, 14(1), pp. 40-49.
Books and Practitioner Resources:
Murphy, J.J. (1999) Technical Analysis of the Financial Markets: A Guide to Trading Methods and Applications. New York: New York Institute of Finance.
Pring, M.J. (2002) Technical Analysis Explained: The Investor's Guide to Spotting Investment Trends and Turning Points. 4th edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Federal Reserve and Research Institution Publications:
Federal Reserve Banks regularly publish working papers examining commodity markets, futures positioning, and price discovery mechanisms. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City maintain active research programs in this area.
Online Resources:
The CFTC website provides free access to current and historical COT reports, explanatory materials, and regulatory documentation.
Barchart offers enhanced COT data visualization and screening tools.
TradingView's community library contains numerous published scripts and educational materials exploring different approaches to positioning analysis.
Trading Toolkit - Comprehensive AnalysisTrading Toolkit – Comprehensive Analysis
A unified trading analysis toolkit with four sections:
📊 Company Info
Fundamentals, market cap, sector, and earnings countdown.
📅 Performance
Date‑range analysis with key metrics.
🎯 Market Sentiment
CNN‑style Fear & Greed Index (7 components) + 150‑SMA positioning.
🛡️ Risk Levels
ATR/MAD‑based stop‑loss and take‑profit calculations.
Key Features
CNN‑style Fear & Greed approximation using:
Momentum: S&P 500 vs 125‑DMA
Price Strength: NYSE 52‑week highs vs lows
Market Breadth: McClellan Volume Summation (Up/Down volume)
Put/Call Ratio: 5‑day average (inverted)
Volatility: VIX vs 50‑DMA (inverted)
Safe‑Haven Demand: 20‑day SPY–IEF return spread
Junk‑Bond Demand: HY vs IG credit spread (inverted)
Normalization: z‑score → percentile (0–100) with ±3 clipping.
CNN‑aligned thresholds:
Extreme Fear: 0–24 | Fear: 25–44 | Neutral: 45–54 | Greed: 55–74 | Extreme Greed: 75+.
Risk tools: ATR & MAD volatility measures with configurable multipliers.
Flexible layout: vertical or side‑by‑side columns.
Data Sources
S&P 500: CBOE:SPX or AMEX:SPY
NYSE: INDEX:HIGN, INDEX:LOWN, USI:UVOL, USI:DVOL
Options: USI:PCC (Total PCR), fallback INDEX:CPCS (Equity PCR)
Volatility: CBOE:VIX
Treasuries: NASDAQ:IEF
Credit Spreads: FRED:BAMLH0A0HYM2, FRED:BAMLC0A0CM
Risk Management
ATR risk bands: 🟢 ≤3%, 🟡 3–6%, ⚪ 6–10%, 🟠 10–15%, 🔴 >15%
MAD‑based stop‑loss and take‑profit calculations.
Author: Daniel Dahan
(AI Generated, Merged & enhanced version with CNN‑style Fear & Greed)
st 47Усредненный Ишимоку (Custom: 9/48/96) [V6]st47 — Volume in Clouds
This indicator is a custom Ichimoku Cloud modification that dynamically reacts to market volume.
The color intensity of the Kumo (cloud) changes depending on the current trading volume — brighter clouds indicate stronger activity, while dimmer ones reflect low participation.
Key Features:
• Based on the Ichimoku Cloud system (8/48/96 settings)
• Volume-sensitive cloud visualization
• Works on any timeframe and pair
• Supports multi-ticker averaging (BTCUSDT, BTCUSDT.P, etc.)
• Displays additional volume histogram below the chart
Purpose:
Helps visualize both trend structure and the strength behind it by combining Ichimoku logic with real-time volume dynamics.
