Justin's Playground

TBM the loser never says he lost $41,500 in a day.... Only winning days posted. It's obvious he is a consistently losing trader.

Another loser Tanja is now so scared of trading that she seldom pulls the trigger.... Another ICT loser.

Why Mr Justin why why do you persist and keep day trading?

Hull Moving Average Ribbon

Looks better and faster than EMA ribbons or Guppy... Just help intuitive trading. Try to view from multiple time frames.




https://www.tradingview.com/script/m...verage-Ribbon/

Safety Net of Prop Firms

Prop firms set up many ridiculously arbitrary rules and safety net is one of them. So, if you have purchased $50K plan, you have to make $3000 for eval, and then another $2500 before you finally can request any payout. If you can make $5500 from day trading, why don't you just trade your own money. I thought I could have $2500 of safety net refunded when I close my account later.

Apex set safety net of $2500 before you can request payouts. That means I can request payout when my account equity reaches $52500 for $50K plan. If I close my account, can I request this $2500?

Great clarification — yes, you're referring specifically to Apex Trader Funding and their $2,500 trailing threshold requirement before you can start requesting withdrawals.
Here’s how it works in Apex's case:
Apex $2,500 Safety Net — What It Really Is

1. This $2,500 is not real, withdrawable money.
2. It's a buffer or cushion that you must build in profit before you can request your first withdrawal.
3. For a $50K account, you can’t request any payout until your balance hits $52,500.

If You Close the Account, Can You Get the $2,500?
No, you cannot withdraw the $2,500.
Here’s why:

1. It is not actual profit – it is the minimum trailing drawdown requirement set by Apex before you qualify to withdraw any money.
2. Apex retains that as a risk control, even when you are funded. They do not pay you this amount upon account closure, even if you never drew down below it.
3. Only profit above the $2,500 safety net is considered eligible for withdrawal.

Example
ScenarioCan You Withdraw?
Account reaches $52,000 No – below $52,500
Account reaches $52,500 Yes – you can start withdrawing profit above $50,000 (but must leave safety net)
You close the account at $52,500 No payout – you haven’t earned beyond the safety net
You close the account at $54,000 Yes – you can withdraw $2,000 (the amount above the safety net)
Summary

1. The $2,500 is not a payout, but a profit cushion.
2. You must exceed it to withdraw any profit.
3. If you close your account without exceeding it, you get nothing.

Let me know if you want help calculating your withdrawable amount based on your current balance — happy to help.


Alpine Trader also talked about it:

ZEFIR (ZERO EDGE FIR)

=================================
What is FIR?
FIR (Finite Impulse Response) is an institutional-grade digital filter derived from aerospace and audio engineering. Unlike simple moving averages that weight all prices equally, FIR uses mathematically optimized weights to surgically remove noise while preserving the true market structure. Think of it as the difference between a butter knife and a scalpel.

What's New in ZEFIR?
This indicator solves the age-old problem of FIR filters: amazing noise reduction but terrible lag. By adding real-time extension algorithms, you get the best of both worlds - institutional-grade filtering with minimal delay.

Key Features
1. Advanced Window Functions
-Choose from 6 window types (Rectangular to Blackman-Harris)
-ALMA integration - Adaptive smoothing that lets you control where the filter "looks" (past vs recent data)

2. Zero-Lag Extension Modes
-ADAPTIVE: Smart projection using linear regression with decay - great for trending markets
-AGGRESSIVE: Ehlers Error-Correcting filter - ultra-responsive for scalping
See both the "true" FIR (solid line) and real-time extension (filling the gap)

3. Full Multi-Timeframe
-All MT5 timeframes (M1-MN1)
-Auto-select 1st/2nd higher timeframes
-Smooth interpolation option
-MTF Extensions not implemented in this version

Quick Settings Guide
Scalpers (M1-M15)
Taps: 7-11, Window: Rectangular/Hanning, Extension: AGGRESSIVE
ALMA: Sigma 3-4, Sample 0.75

Day Traders (M15-H1)
Taps: 15-19, Window: Hamming/ALMA, Extension: ADAPTIVE
ALMA: Sigma 5-6, Sample 0.6

Swing Traders (H1+)
Taps: 21-31, Window: Blackman/ALMA, Extension: ADAPTIVE or OFF
ALMA: Sigma 6-8, Sample 0.5

Why It Works
FIR filters are the gold standard in signal processing - they preserve the true shape of price movements while removing noise. The problem? They lag by (Taps-1)/2 bars.

Our extension system fills this gap intelligently:
-You see the mathematically pure FIR signal (no distortion)
-Plus a smart projection to current price (no lag)
-Extensions repaint? Yes - they adapt in real-time (that's the whole point!)

ALMA Parameters Explained
-Sigma: Lower = more responsive (2-4 for fast markets, 6-8 for smooth trends)
-Sample: 0 = weight past prices, 1 = weight recent prices (0.5 = balanced)
Think of ALMA as a "smart moving average" that you can tune to focus where you want.

Based on John Ehlers' DSP research and Arnaud Legoux's adaptive filtering. Extension algorithms use regression analysis and error-correcting techniques for real-time response.
=================================



https://forex-station.com/post129556...ml#p1295568360

Interesting tool and the repaint issue doesn't look a significant drawback.... A fun toy for killing time.

Short streaming of 25 mins today. He lost $30,300 again.

Best? She's shameless.....

Is Tanja Trader really a profitable trader?

====================================
Here’s what real traders are saying:
Peer Insights from Reddit
“Okay, honestly… based on her livestreams, she seems to lose most of her trades. Her RRs aren’t huge enough to compensate for the losses… I really don’t think she is profitable at all.” (Reddit)
That comment, which was highly upvoted, reflects a consensus:

1. Many note she frequently loses individual trades.
2. Her risk-reward ratio often isn’t strong enough to offset those losses.

“She’s only profitable from the simps that generate her social media revenue.” (Reddit)
“Tanja is so ass bro… Her entries are fucked up… Once in a blue moon she catches a really textbook trade… but she is still apparently profitable.” (Reddit)
These voices say her income stems more from streaming, prop-firm affiliations, and giveaways—not consistent trading performance.
However:
“When you add up affiliations to prop firms + streaming income… yes, she is profitable!!!!” (Reddit)
Most agree she makes decent money—just not primarily from profitable trades.
Channel & Streaming Metrics

1. She’s built ~79K YouTube subscribers and gets around 16K views per month, with ~24K views per video (Reddit, HypeAuditor.com).
2. She streams daily NQ/ES futures at 9:15 a.m. EST and keeps her streams transparent, but transparency ≠ profitability. (HypeAuditor.com)

Bottom Line
*Is she someone who generates overall income?
Yes. Through affiliate deals, prop‑firm payouts, and streaming.
Is she a consistently profitable trader?
The evidence suggests no. Cameos of winning trades may shine, but losses appear frequent; most gains come from external revenue, not trading edge.
If you're evaluating her as a trading mentor or signal service, be cautious:

1. Most profit likely comes from her social influence, not from consistently beating the market.
2. As one Redditor put it: “You’d have to collect data … to really know,” but anecdotal views lean toward “mediocre at best.” (Reddit)

Want to Join the Conversation?

1. Study her live trading logs — consider tracking her performance over weeks.
2. Compare her entries and exits to your own rigorously tested strategy.
3. And always ask: Is her income coming from trading gains, or from being an influencer?

TL;DR: Tanja appears to be making good money, but it's more from affiliates and streaming than from being a reliably profitable trader. Her entries and risk-reward execution draw skepticism from experienced traders.

====================================

The only thing I can consistently make money is spread trading. I am asking myself why I spend a huge amount of time and effort and money to day trading. Why? why? What I want to prove? $2700 loss I made recently from day trading will be quickly recouped by profit from the spread trading as usual.
As I promised to myself, this year is the last time before I give up day trading for good. I'd be happy when I go back to spread only trader. Day trading is by nature evil. The motivation of people who move and drive the market behind is evil. That's all I can say.

Jurik Moving Average (JMA) beats HMA. JMA is the best.
MT4/MT5 download: https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...5#post15308965

What is the best moving average? Is there anything can beat Jurik Moving Average (JMA)?

The "best" moving average depends on your trading style, market conditions, and what you prioritize — speed, smoothness, accuracy, or non-repainting behavior. That said, the Jurik Moving Average (JMA) is widely regarded as one of the best due to its ability to:

1. React quickly to price changes (low lag),
2. Remain smooth (minimal whipsaws),
3. And avoid repainting, which is critical for reliable signals.

Can Anything Beat JMA?
Yes, in some contexts, but with trade-offs. Let’s compare JMA with a few top contenders:
1. Kalman Filter-Based Averages

1. Pros: Highly adaptive, excellent for noisy markets.
2. Cons: Complex to implement, may overfit without care.
3. Beats JMA? Potentially, in algorithmic or statistical models with adaptive filtering.

2. Super Smoother (John Ehlers)

1. Pros: Good balance of smoothness and speed, very low lag.
2. Cons: Not as flexible or configurable as JMA.
3. Beats JMA? In simplicity and robustness, maybe. But JMA is often smoother.

3. FIR Filters (Finite Impulse Response)

1. Pros: Can be optimized for ultra-low lag with high customization.
2. Cons: Risk of repainting or delay if not designed properly.
3. Beats JMA? Possibly in ideal conditions, but JMA is more stable for real-time use.

4. Double/Triple Exponential Moving Averages (DEMA/TEMA)

1. Pros: Lower lag than EMA/SMA.
2. Cons: Still laggy compared to JMA; more prone to whipsaws.
3. Beats JMA? No — generally slower and noisier.

5. Zero-Lag Moving Averages (ZLEMA, HMA, ALMA)

1. Pros: Faster than EMAs; some (like HMA) are very smooth.
2. Cons: Still slightly noisier or laggier than JMA.
3. Beats JMA? Not in both smoothness + speed at once.

Final Verdict:
JMA remains top-tier for discretionary traders and many algo traders because of its performance in both speed and noise reduction, without repainting.
Advanced traders might experiment with Kalman filters, custom FIR filters, or machine-learned smoothing techniques, but those require more expertise and testing.
If you want the best all-around plug-and-play solution, JMA is very hard to beat.
Let me know your platform (e.g., MT4, MT5, TradingView, Quantower), and I can suggest the best alternative available to you specifically.

It looks like a trend starts whenever volume oscillator is at the bottom. Is this true?


The idea that "a trend starts whenever the Volume Oscillator is at the bottom" can sometimes appear true, but it's not a reliable or universally accurate rule. Let's break it down:
Why It Might Seem True:

1. Volume Oscillator bottoms often occur during consolidation or low-volume pullbacks, just before a breakout.
2. When volume starts to rise from a low point, it can signal renewed participation, potentially kicking off a trend.
3. Traders often use volume confirmation to anticipate trend direction—rising volume from a low base can be bullish or bearish depending on context.

Why It’s Not Always True:

1. Low volume does not always mean a trend is coming—it can just mean indecision or lack of interest.
2. A bottom in the Volume Oscillator could also occur during a range-bound market, with no real trend following.
3. Many trends begin with a spike in volume, not necessarily from a volume low.

Better Approach:
Use Volume Oscillator bottoms:

1. Along with price action (e.g., support/resistance breakouts).
2. In combination with other tools (like moving averages, trendlines, or momentum indicators).
3. During high-probability setups, such as after a pullback in an uptrend.

Summary:
Volume Oscillator bottoms can precede trend moves, but they do not guarantee one will follow. Always confirm with other signals before acting.
Would you like a chart example or a specific setup showing how to use it effectively?

Can I make money from volume cycle in day trading?

Yes, you can potentially make money from volume cycles in day trading, but it depends on how well you understand and apply the concept. Here’s a breakdown to clarify:
What is a Volume Cycle?
A volume cycle refers to the repeating phases of rising and falling trading volume that often align with:

1. Breakouts
2. Pullbacks
3. Trend reversals
4. Accumulation/distribution phases

These volume patterns can reveal when smart money is entering or exiting, even before price makes a big move.
How Can It Help You in Day Trading?

1. Anticipate Breakouts
   1. After low volume consolidation, a sudden surge in volume can confirm a breakout.
   2. Example: Volume oscillator at a low, then spikes → Enter long on breakout.

2. Spot Traps and Fakeouts
   1. A price move with no volume support may be a false breakout.
   2. Helps avoid chasing traps created by stop-hunting algorithms.

3. Confirm Trend Strength
   1. Rising volume with rising price → strong trend.
   2. Falling volume in pullback → likely continuation.

4. Cycle Timing
   1. Some traders use volume oscillators (e.g., Volume Oscillator, OBV, VWMA) to catch volume bottoms, which often lead price turns.

Example Strategy Concept
Volume Cycle Reversal Setup:

1. Use a volume oscillator (Short Length: 5, Long Length: 14).
2. Watch for oscillator to bottom out (volume drying up).
3. Wait for a price reversal candle or momentum trigger.
4. Confirm with ADX or CCI for trend resumption.
5. Enter with stop just below the low of the candle.

Things to Be Careful About

1. Volume is relative: Compare to recent history, not absolute values.
2. News events can distort volume cycles.
3. Choppy markets often generate misleading volume spikes.
4. Works best when combined with price action, trend filters, or momentum tools (like JMA or CCI).

Final Tip
Volume cycles are not magical by themselves. But if you combine volume timing with structure and momentum, yes—they can provide a real edge in day trading.
Would you like a sample setup with volume oscillator and a trigger signal?

Now he blocks live streaming videos immediately after closing the stream. What a disgusting and shameless loser! Patrick is a mad man but at least he doesn't lie.

Trade by Matt looks like he wants to hide losing days in his live Youtube streams. Is this true?

There’s significant community skepticism around Trades by Matt and whether he hides losing days in his live streams. Here's what seasoned traders on Reddit report:
Claims & Patterns
Losses on Cherry-Picked Streams
Many viewers believe that he deletes or privatizes videos showing large losing days, typically those significantly larger than any single winning day. For example:
“He used to be more forthcoming on his videos … then he started hiding his videos to hide his losses.” (Reddit)
 “He doesn’t hide all his losing days but he certainly does hide his blow up days where he loses >10× his wins.” (Reddit)
Simulation Concerns
There’s a strong belief he trades via simulation during streams, not live accounts. Reporters highlight:
“He trades paper money … The account balance is hidden … no real way to confirm…” (Reddit)
“He trades simulation futures … and crops out his account on stream.” (Reddit)
Focus on Affiliate Revenue
His income appears largely derived from Topstep (or similar) affiliate links, rather than trading gains:
“He makes so much money from TopStep affiliates … clearly doesn’t make any from day trading.” (Reddit)
“At peak he made serious money, then justified huge losses knowing he’d receive a check from TopStep.” (Reddit)
Summary Table
ClaimDescription
Hides large lossesDeletes or removes videos showing heavy drawdowns; presenting mostly small wins.
Likely paper trading on streamHides account details; uses unclear DOM, suspicious execution.
Affiliate-based income modelPromotes prop firms; referred traders provide his primary revenue.
So—is he hiding losing days?
Verdict: According to multiple reports, yes. While he may not remove every losing day, he appears to specifically hide his worst losses, and reliably shows only modest profits—and even that may be off-screen. His live stream trading is widely suspected to be simulation, with real performance withheld and likely supplemented through affiliate earnings.
Be Cautious
Many experienced traders warn:
“Most trading gurus don’t actually trade for a living … sell courses, chats, affiliate programs.” (Reddit, Reddit, Reddit)
“Any guru with a referral-heavy business is suspect—real traders demonstrate results, not just video wins.” (Reddit)
TL;DR
Based on Reddit research:

1. Yes, Trades by Matt reportedly hides his largest losing trading days.
2. His public streams often suggest paper trading rather than real risk.
3. The bulk of his income likely comes from affiliate deals, not trading profit.

If you're following him or similar creators, approach with skepticism, verify results independently, and avoid assuming profitability based purely on curated streams. Let me know if you’d like links to deeper breakdowns or documentation on his activity.

What is the formula of Jurik Moving Average?


The exact formula for the Jurik Moving Average (JMA) is proprietary and not publicly disclosed by Jurik Research. It is a commercial product, and the algorithm is protected under intellectual property rights. However, based on reverse engineering attempts, community insights, and performance observations, we can describe some of its known characteristics and approximated structure.
Key Characteristics of JMA

1. Adaptive smoothing: adjusts its responsiveness to market volatility.
2. Low lag: reacts quickly to price changes.
3. Smooth output: reduces noise more effectively than traditional moving averages.
4. Non-linear filter: believed to use a special form of a non-linear Kalman filter.

Important
There is no official public formula, but here’s an approximate pseudocode-based representation seen in some open-source JMA clones:
JMA = (1 - phase) * smooth_price + phase * JMA_prev
Where:

1. phase is a smoothing factor (can be adaptive)
2. smooth_price may be calculated using a modified EMA or FIR-style smoother
3. Adaptive elements adjust the smoothing factor based on price volatility or acceleration

In some reverse-engineered versions, JMA behaves similar to a de-noised FIR filter with dynamic coefficients or a super-smooth EMA with adaptive feedback.
Open-Source Alternatives Inspired by JMA
If you're looking to experiment or code something similar:

1. DEMA (Double EMA)
2. T3 moving average (uses volume factor smoothing)
3. ALMA (Arnaud Legoux MA)
4. HMA (Hull MA)
5. ZLEMA (Zero-lag EMA)

These don't match JMA exactly but can replicate some of its low-lag or smooth properties.
Summary

1. Exact formula: Not public
2. Core idea: Adaptive, low-lag, noise-filtered smoother
3. Best approach if coding: Use a high-performance smoother like T3, ALMA, or ZLEMA, or try a reverse-engineered approximation.

Would you like a Python or Pine Script version of a JMA-style approximation?

Yesterday TBM the retard 'proudly' delivered 10 ticks of profit and this streaming video is still open to the public. Does he really expect people would buy it? What a retard.....

It looks the code of Jurik Moving Average has been leaked. Is this the reason why Jurik Research Software discontinues their business?


There’s no evidence indicating that the leak of Jurik Moving Average (JMA) code was the reason Jurik Research Software ceased operations.
According to their official statement, Jurik Research Software, after 34 years of building and supporting technical‑analysis tools, is simply “winding down its operations” (jurikres.com). This phrasing suggests a planned business closure or retirement, rather than a reaction to code exposure.
As for the leak itself:

1. JMA’s actual proprietary algorithm has never been made public. What circulates—like community scripts on platforms such as TradingView or MT5—is reverse‑engineered approximations, not the genuine source code (stockgro.club).
2. So far, there’s no credible documentation or official comment linking the leak of these mimic scripts to Jurik Research’s decision to close.

In summary:

1. Closure reason: Likely a strategic winding down after decades of operation—not due to any leak.
2. Code leak: Consists of unauthorized mimic scripts, not the original algorithm, and has not been officially acknowledged as a cause for the business ending.

If you’d like to explore exactly what copycat versions are out there—or dig into community versions vs. the licensed JMA—I'd be happy to help further!

How close between original real Jurik Moving Average and reverse engineered JMA look-alike?


The reverse-engineered JMA look-alikes can get visually close to the original Jurik Moving Average (JMA) — especially in simple conditions like trending markets with low volatility — but they are not identical, and there are key differences in behavior and performance. Here's a breakdown of how close they really are:
Similarity Level (Visual & Functional)
FeatureReverse-Engineered JMAOriginal Jurik JMA
Visual Curve Shape~85–95% similarOriginal, smooth, adaptive
Lag ReductionModerate to goodExceptionally low
ResponsivenessTunable, but often less consistentDynamically adapts better
Smoothing QualityGood, but can "ring" or overshootExtremely smooth without overshoot
Noise FilteringSomewhat effectiveVery strong with minimal lag
Performance in Choppy MarketsDegrades more easilyMaintains stability better
CodebasePublicly available (e.g., Pine Script, MQL, etc.)Proprietary, closed-source
Where Differences Become Clear

1. In fast-changing or choppy markets, the original JMA retains smoothness and low lag much better.
2. Reverse-engineered versions sometimes introduce artifacts, like minor oscillations, lag on reversals, or less robust cycle adaptation.
3. Jurik’s internal implementation likely uses high-precision math, possibly proprietary smoothing functions (like nonlinear FIR filters and dynamic phase shifting) which are not fully replicable from the outside.

Conclusion

1. If you're using a well-coded reverse-engineered version (like Pine Script or open-source MQL4/5 ones), you can get close to 90% of the visual and functional behavior of JMA in most situations.
2. But for exact behavior, especially under stress, nothing perfectly replicates the original — it's still more stable, smoother, and lag-free due to its proprietary design.

If you want, I can compare a specific reverse-engineered code you have to the real JMA characteristics more directly.


========================================


Compare between Jurik Research Software's JMA and Tradingview or MT5 JMA


The Jurik Moving Average (JMA) is designed to be smoother and more responsive than traditional moving averages like those found in Tradingview or MT5. It achieves this through a proprietary algorithm that incorporates phase shifting and power adjustment, making it more adaptable to market changes. While Tradingview and MT5 offer various moving averages, including some that may be based on the JMA concept, they may not replicate the exact same behavior as the original JMA developed by Jurik Research.
Here's a more detailed comparison:
Jurik Research JMA:

1. Developed by Mark Jurik:
   The original JMA was created by Mark Jurik and is known for its advanced smoothing and noise reduction capabilities.
2. Superior Smoothing and Responsiveness:
   JMA is designed to be smoother than traditional moving averages while also reacting quickly to price changes, minimizing lag.
3. Adaptive to Market Conditions:
   JMA utilizes a dynamic volatility-based factor (alpha) that adapts to market volatility, making it superior to traditional moving averages in many situations.
4. Not Widely Available:
   The original JMA implementation is not always freely available and may require purchasing or accessing it through specific platforms or providers.
5. Potential for Superior Performance:
   Many traders find JMA to be more reliable and accurate, especially in fast-moving markets.

Tradingview/MT5 JMA (Implementations):

1. Potential for Varied Implementations:
   Tradingview and MT5 may offer different versions or implementations of the JMA, potentially with slight variations in behavior.
2. Free and Widely Available:
   Tradingview and MT5 offer a wider range of free indicators, including those inspired by JMA, making them accessible to more users.
3. Dependence on Implementation:
   The effectiveness of JMA implementations on Tradingview and MT5 can depend on the quality and accuracy of the specific code.
4. May Not Precisely Match Original:
   Some Tradingview/MT5 implementations might not perfectly replicate the original JMA algorithm, leading to minor differences in behavior.
5. User-Created Scripts:
   Many JMA scripts on Tradingview are created by users, and their reliability can vary.

In summary: While Tradingview and MT5 offer various moving averages, including those based on the JMA concept, the original JMA developed by Jurik Research is known for its superior smoothing and responsiveness due to its unique algorithm. If accuracy and performance are paramount, the original JMA might be preferable, but it's important to consider the availability and potential variations of JMA implementations on different platforms.

What is the cost to use original and real Jurik Moving Average?


The original, real Jurik Moving Average (JMA) from Jurik Research Software is not free and typically requires a paid license. The cost varies depending on:
1. Platform & Integration
Jurik offers JMA for specific platforms like:

1. TradeStation
2. NinjaTrader
3. MultiCharts
4. MotiveWave
5. MATLAB
6. (and previously) MetaTrader (limited access)

Each platform has separate licensing.
2. Estimated Cost Breakdown (as of last known pricing)
ProductApprox. Price (USD)Notes
JMA (single platform license)$500–$750One-time fee per platform
Full indicator suite$1,000–$1,500Includes JMA, VEL, RSX, QRS, and more
Institutional licenseCustom quoteFor hedge funds, banks, etc.
Subscription models were not typical — licenses were usually perpetual with optional upgrade costs.
Other Things to Know

1. License is hardware-locked or tied to your platform user ID.
2. Jurik Software was notoriously protective of their IP — no demo, no trial, and very little public documentation.
3. No source code is provided — only a compiled, locked indicator.

Important Update (2024–2025)
As of mid-2025, Jurik Research Software may have discontinued operations. Their website is offline, and no formal announcements were made. If this is confirmed, new licenses may no longer be purchasable, and only existing users would have access via previously licensed platforms.
Would you like help finding a close alternative JMA clone for a specific platform (like MT5, TradingView, or NinjaTrader)?