[kaalilaatikko]

Gentlemen,

I've been doing my homework with ADX, trying to program its calculations and then debug the reason why my results do not match with Delta's.

I also browsed through this thread (to see that I won't repost anything after initially skipping some portions with lighter reading when I didn't yet have the book), and found vivid discussion 2 months ago about why different brokers provide rather different values for ADX. The most proposed explanation was in the time zone differences.

I finally found an explanation that may have some importance here. Our holy book says on page 37 that an accumulation technique shall be used for determining +DM14 and -DM14. The 2nd argumentation is notable:

"It incorporates a smoothing effect on the DM."

The same technique is in use in calculating all x14 values.

Then I looked at the formula used by Delta. It appeared that they do not use Wilder's accumulation technique at all. Rather they just calculate the sums directly from 14 raw values, i.e. no smoothing there.

It's too late now for me to modify my program to see how much impact this has on the ADX values, but I'll do that in the coming days.

I'm a bit afraid that there are more brokers out there that are not using Wilder's accumulation technique. The reason I suspect is that it is much more compact to express the formula this way in an indicator language like Delta is using, and nobody has really bothered to evaluate the difference in the calculations. But on the other hand it might be quite well that the non-smoothing formula yields a "better ADX" than the lazy man's calculation technique Wilder is advocating.

Any comments?

J.