A comparative study of the MACD-base trading strategies: evidence from the US stock market
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Growing trend among investors to incorporate technical analysis methods into trading strategies
- Advancements in computing power and availability of extensive public data make it easier for individual investors to analyze stocks and backtest their own strategies
- Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) indicator is widely used
- Extensive analysis conducted using traditional MACD parameters (12, 26, 9) to develop various trading strategies
- Strategies applied to stocks listed on Dow-Jones, Nasdaq, and S&P 500 indices
- Performance evaluated based on win rate, profitability, Sharpe ratio, number of trades, and maximum drawdown
- MACD strategy as a standalone indicator had a win rate of less than 50%
- Win rate improved significantly when combined with other momentum indicators such as Money Flow Index (MFI) and Relative Strength Index (RSI)
- Proposed redesign of MACD formula by incorporating additional factors such as trading volume and daily price volatility led to the development of VPVMA indicator
- VPVMA strategy showed enhanced win rates and improved risk-adjusted performance compared to all previous MACD-based strategies
- All MACD-based strategies generated positive returns but were suboptimal without incorporating other momentum indicators
- VPVMA indicator outperforms traditional MACD indicator in terms of generating consistent profits and managing risk effectively
- Research provides valuable insights for investors seeking to enhance trading strategies using technical analysis methods in the US stock market.
Authors: Pat Tong Chio
Abstract: In recent years, more and more investors use technical analysis methods in their own trading. Evaluating the effectiveness of technical analysis has become more feasible due to increasing computing capability and blooming public data, which indie investors can perform stock analysis and backtest their own trading strategy conveniently. The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) indicator is one of the popular technical indicators that are widely used in different strategies. In order to verify the MACD effectiveness, in this thesis, I use the MACD indicator with traditional parameters (12, 26, 9) to build various trading strategies. Then, I apply these strategies to stocks listed on three indices in the US stock market (i.e., Dow-Jones, Nasdaq, and S&P 500) and evaluate its performance in terms of win rate, profitability, Sharpe ratio, number of trades and maximum drawdown. The backtesting is programmed using Python, covering the period between 01/01/2015 and 28-08-2021. The result shows that the win-rate of the strategy with only the MACD indicator is less than 50%. However, the win-rate is improved for the trading strategies that combine the MACD indicator with other momentum indicators like the Money Flow Index (MFI) and the Relative Strength Index (RSI). Based on this result, I redesign the MACD mathematical formula by taking the trading volume and daily price volatility into consideration to derive a new indicator called VPVMA. The results show that the win-rate and risk-adjust performance of this new trading strategy have been improved significantly. In general, the findings suggest that while all the MACD trading strategies mentioned above can generate positive returns, the performance is not good without using other momentum indicators. Hence, the VPVMA indicator performs better.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.