Multi-Timeframe EMA Alignment for Trend Following

Summary

This trend-following method compares fast and slow exponential moving averages across daily, six-hour, and 15-minute price series. It takes a long stance when all three fast-minus-slow EMA differences are positive, and a short stance when all are negative. The settings specify EMA lengths of 21 and 34, along with date-window inputs. Although the narrative describes a daily, four-hour, and 15-minute combination, the supplied parameters set the middle interval to 180 minutes. The published test covers one week of BTC/USDT futures data and reports no performance measures.

The document argues that agreement across timeframes may filter some single-timeframe signals, while warning that moving averages can lag and whipsaw in ranging markets. The code checks whether each EMA difference is above or below zero, rather than whether a crossover occurred at that moment. It also does not appear to apply the date-window inputs to trading. These implementation details limit how literally the prose describes the strategy. Suggested additions, such as volatility filters, sizing rules, and rolling evaluation, are ideas for further investigation, not demonstrated improvements.

Key ideas

• The method aligns fast and slow EMAs across three timeframes to define direction.
• Long and short conditions depend on all EMA differences sharing the same sign.
• The settings use a 180-minute middle timeframe, while the narrative says four hours.
• The source checks EMA alignment rather than a newly occurring crossover.
• The example backtest reports no performance results, and date inputs appear unused in the code.

Tags

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.