Output differences at low levels

• 01/30/2024 at 10:40 PM #227132
  ashehzi

  Hi,

  When I run e.g. close[0]/close[1] on PRT as indicator and use the same in PRT ProOrder Trading, the results are different e.g. in the attached picture, middle panel is for the indicator (value is 1.00.1644) while when same is run in proOrder, value is 1.001640. Why is there a different even in the last decimal digit?

   

  Sample Code

  timeframe(daily, updateonclose) myReturn = Close[0]/Close[1] timeframe(default) // for proder add below graph(myReturn)

  1 2 3 4 5 6

  timeframe(daily, updateonclose) myReturn = Close[0]/Close[1] timeframe(default)   // for proder add below graph(myReturn)

  This is resulting in inconsistency of my manual and auto trading. I would like to know why there is such a difference in internal implementation. It must be fixed imho.

  Regards,

  Ash

  

  ashehzi

  Participant

  Topics: 29

  Replies: 87

  Been thanked: 9 times
  01/31/2024 at 9:49 AM #227145
  Nicolas

  What is the code of your indicator please?

  A reminder, if you use “updateonclose”, the data used are from the last closed candle, in this case, the one from yesterday.

  

  Nicolas

  Keymaster

  Topics: 81

  Replies: 20854

  Been thanked: 4760 times
  01/31/2024 at 11:30 AM #227163
  ashehzi

  Code is same as shown above.

  In case of indicator, you can use

  “return myreturn”

  while in case of proOrder, you can use graph. This way you can compare the result.

  I understand what you mean by updateOnClose. The above issue persists whether you use updateonclose or not. This is irrelevant in this case imho.

   

  

  ashehzi

  Participant

  Topics: 29

  Replies: 87

  Been thanked: 9 times
  01/31/2024 at 11:32 AM #227164
  ashehzi

  Attaching the picture which I thought was there when I posted the issue initially. Sorry it seems I forgot 1st time.

  

  ashehzi

  Participant

  Topics: 29

  Replies: 87

  Been thanked: 9 times
  02/02/2024 at 9:52 AM #227291
  ashehzi

  Has the prt team got an idea why there is difference of implementation?

  

  ashehzi

  Participant

  Topics: 29

  Replies: 87

  Been thanked: 9 times
  02/05/2024 at 3:24 PM #227423
  Nicolas

  Yes, it’s just that the number of significant digits isn’t the same. In backtesting, it’s fixed at 10^-5, in indicators it’s variable depending on the floating point of the value.

  There may be very rare cases where a resistance/support will not be touched/crossed, for example, but it’s very rare. If you encounter recurring differences, the problem must come from somewhere else, I think.

  

  Nicolas

  Keymaster

  Topics: 81

  Replies: 20854

  Been thanked: 4760 times
  02/05/2024 at 7:58 PM #227439
  ashehzi

  The issue is there in auto tradng (not just backtest). It results in difference of 5-10 points on nas and completely disturbs the trading levels.

  

  ashehzi

  Participant

  Topics: 29

  Replies: 87

  Been thanked: 9 times
  02/05/2024 at 8:02 PM #227440
  ashehzi

  The code for indicator and auto trading is same, it is just that when run in auto trading or back testing, it results in different levels and is apparent when using graph() against the indicator levels I see on the chart. Eg today my breakout level on my indicator on nas was 17627 but auto trading had 17633 for the same code.

  I have been thinking if there is a workaround I need to apply to make it work but why workarounds.

  

  ashehzi

  Participant

  Topics: 29

  Replies: 87

  Been thanked: 9 times
  02/06/2024 at 9:31 AM #227455
  PeterSt

  Hi Ash – can you share the .itf (both strategy and indicator) of his ? Only the essential parts are necessary.
  At this moment I can not imagine the error you perceive, so I’d like to investigate it.

  Peter

  

  PeterSt

  Participant

  Topics: 73

  Replies: 2449

  Been thanked: 774 times
• Author
  Posts