Almost every technical indicator is a lagging indicator.
Moving averages, MACD, the RSI, Stochastics, you name it, we're
talking lagging indicators. First there's a move in price, then
sometime later in the game, the indicator signals buy or sell.
That's why lagging indicators are called lagging indicators. They
lag behind market action. They give signals after the fact.
Leading indicators, on the other hand, tell us ahead of time where
the market is likely to find support or where the market is likely
to find resistance.
Most traders who have attempted to use leading
indicators have looked toward some form of overbought or oversold
oscillator. Most oscillators, however, are in the camp of
coincident or lagging indicators. They may tell us when a market
is at a resistant point or when a market is at a support level,
however typically they do not give us useful information ahead of
time. Traders rightfully view the use of leading indicators as a
dangerous enterprise because few traders understand how to place a
true leading indicator in the proper context to achieve the
desired results.
The trick is to achieve the proper balance by
mixing leading and lagging indicators across time frames. If we
can accomplish this objective, we can come up with a trading
approach which is far superior to using either of the two
exclusively.
Let's look at the problem more closely. Traders, being
rational human beings, prefer lagging indicators because they want
the comfort level of seeing a market already in a move prior to
their entry. Unfortunately, this kind of comfort comes at a price.
Once the lagging indicator is firmly established in a given
direction, everyone else sees the move and everyone else is
getting in at about the same time.
Those who provide the necessary
liquidity to fill the orders of the lagging indicator traders need
to make their profit, so now we're ready for a retracement. This
retracement is typically to the area where the lagging indicator
players put their stop. The net result is the lagging indicator
trader may be right on market direction, however is all too often
stopped out before the market goes the way he knew it would all
along.
So how do we overcome this situation? Buy pre-calculated
dips in an overall uptrend. Sell precalculated rallies in an
overall downtrend. We determine the location of such dips and
rallies with high quality leading indicators.
In my trading career I have found only two leading
indicators that have the reliability necessary to justify
employing them.
The first is the Oscillator Predictor, a study
I created in the early Eighties. It is a derivative of a detrended
oscillator. It tells me a day ahead of time where the market will
find support or resistance. It does not tell me that the market
will get to those points, it only tells me that if the market gets
to those points, there will be substantial support or resistance.
Here is Chart of it by a very powerful software
Trade Navigator:

The second leading indicator that I use, and have developed
considerably, is derived from an advanced form of Fibonacci
analysis that I refer to as DiNapoli Levels. By combining
varieties of expansions and retracements in unique ways, a trader
is able to determine ahead of time, very accurately, where the
market is likely to find tradable support or tradable resistance
in an ongoing move.
It doesn't matter whether they're on a one
minute chart or a monthly chart; these levels are consistent
throughout. The problem, however, with this very accurate leading
indicator, as with all leading indicators, is that it is of little
value in buying support in a strong down move or in selling
resistance in a strong up move unless you're just looking to scalp
the market for a very brief trade. That's why you need a strong
context for the trade. Here's how it works.
First, determine the context for the trade using lagging
indicators. Then establish the entry level using a high
quality leading indicator. Continue to use the leading indicator
to find a stop placement point. In the case of an uptrend, this
would be below a substantial support level. In the case of a
downtrend, the stop would be above a substantial resistance level.
Notice I don't use money stops. If the stop is too large for money
management criteria, simply don't take the trade. Since the stop
placement point is known ahead of time, it's easy to make that
calculation. Once the stop and entry are in place, it is now
possible to calculate an expansion level (leading indicator) to
take profits. The closing order is placed in the market
immediately upon making this calculation. Do not wait for the
market to get there and see what happens.
If you are using high quality leading indicators, the
advantages of this type of trading are substantial. You can
achieve an extremely high percentage of winning trades. In
addition, your orders will be filled with a minimum of slippage,
because you are buying a dip when the market is coming at you and
you're selling a rally when the market is advancing. If you're
trading size, this can be a huge advantage as compared with
initiating a trade with buy stops or sell stops.
If you're trading
a two lot, this approach can be significantly beneficial on your
execution as well, however more on that later. Is there a downside?
Obviously! It takes some experience to learn just how to employ
the techniques.
Let's say the market approach you're using to
determine the direction has indicated a strong upmove. You're
buying a dip within that upmove however you placed your entry order
too conservatively, on a support point that is not reached. The
market takes off without you. If you do this repeatedly and you're
right eight out of 10 times about the overall market direction,
you're going to be filled only on the two times you're wrong!
This
can be frustrating to say the least and underlines the need for
the accurate use and thorough knowledge of high quality leading
indicators to make the methodology work. Another problem arises
when you're taking profit objectives. You come to a clear point of
resistance, you clear your trade, and the market keeps going.
If
you're not a disciplined trader, you may end up getting right back
in "at the market", just as the market is about to have a serious
correction. If you're managing money, you may have some explaining
to do. This problem can be mitigated if you trade multiple
contracts. You can always hold some. I have tried this approach
over the years, and I've found that exiting all positions at
predetermined logical profit objectives is always better for my
bottom line.
Another method you can use to accommodate runaway bull moves
is to reenter the market on pullbacks against support points
on lower time frames. Let's say you may have exited a daily
position on Tuesday and you reenter it on a half-hour chart on
Thursday. What's interesting about this approach is that even if
you reenter the market at a higher price, you may be at a safer
level. That means that statistically you would be less vulnerable
to adverse volatility that could hit your stops and force you to
take a loss. This approach allows you to control risk without
raising your stops to areas likely to be hit!
Typically, I look for my lagging indicator or coincident
indicators on a higher time frame. Then I combine that
indicator with my leading indicators on a lower time frame. For
example, let's say a daily pattern that I use as a setup to go
long has just occurred. I'll look at an hourly (or less) chart to
calculate the precise entry and stop placement points. Depending
upon the nature of the lagging indicator that provided the context
for the trade, I determine the strength of the market. I will then
use pre-calculated profit objectives on either the hourly or the
daily chart as my exit point. The approach works equally well
using a half-hour chart as a setup and dropping to a five minute
chart for your leading indicator analysis. If you're a
monthly-based mutual fund trader you can consult daily analysis to
determine your entry, exit, and profit objectives.
The lagging and coincident indicators I use to establish
market trend or direction are displaced moving averages, a
combination of the MACD and Stochastic, as well as a series of 9
price patterns. The only leading indicators I use are, as I
said, a price-predicting oscillator as well as a specialized,
advanced form of Fibonacci analysis. The more accurate your
lagging indicators are the better your results. The more accurate
your leading indicators are the better your results.
Now let's examine different types of traders to see who
would be best suited to this approach and who might not be
well served by this type of trading methodology. Let's take a fund
manager with over five million under management. Such an
individual can afford to diversify over a wide variety of markets
and hedge his trading over a variety of different systems. He has
the equity to take the market drawdowns that a much smaller trader
couldn't afford and he can hire help to be there when he wants a
day off. Maybe he doesn't need this approach. On the other hand,
let's take a trader with a $25,000 to $50,000 dollar account.
This
trader is often an individual who is attempting to make a living
out of the market. He is often a one-man shop and needs income
from which he can pay his bills. He may also need the support of
his friends and family to continue this enterprise. It is very
difficult for your wife to understand your explanation of a 30%
win ratio and substantial losses for two months, even if the gain
on the third month outweighs the losses. A high accuracy trading
plan that shows consistent winnings avoids this issue and entices
this type of an individual back to the computer. It fosters his
ability to interact with the market in a very positive way.
Another consideration is the type of brokerage operation
that may be available to him. The influential connections that
a larger trader is able to cultivate may not be feasible for the
smaller trader. We all know a one lot in the S&P is treated
differently from a 10 or a 50 lot. It may be particularly
attractive to a one or a two lot trader to have price orders in
the market at predetermined levels prior to the market getting
there. He avoids the necessity for handpicked filling brokers
doing his "bidding." In between the 50,000 and five million dollar
million account there's a lot of elbow room.
Where you fit in can
be dictated by many factors. For hedging purposes this approach
can be a godsend. You eliminate all need for context since you
know already that you have to own a couple of million dollars of,
say, Swiss francs or Deutschemarks . What you do at that point is
simple. Look at where you are in relation to your leading
indicators. Act or wait as the numbers dictate.
Typically, mixing leading and lagging indicators is not
suited to strict non-judgmental trading systems. It is
perfectly suited, however, to traders who allow for some level of
judgment in their trading operations. System traders have to be
there day in and day out taking their signals so that when the big
move comes, it will bail out their losses.
This is very difficult
on a one-man shop. However, an approach that yields a high
percentage of winning trades and that is judgmental in nature can
be picked up and traded at will, at almost any time of the year.
This allows for a lot of down time for other activities. After
all, isn't that why most of us got into trading in the first
place?
Those using this information for trading purposes are
responsible for their own actions. No guarantee is made that
trading signals or methods of analysis will be profitable or will
not result in losses. It should not be assumed that future
performance will equal or exceed past results.
Joe DiNapoli ©
2004 Joe DiNapoli
Discover How Joe DiNapoli Combines Leading and Lagging Indicators
with his DiNapoli Levels in his book and Australian Seminars. Meet
the man live in Sydney in March 2006!