Fix warming up bug in Stochastic indicator #8422
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Martin-Molinero
requested review from
jhonabreul
and removed request for
jhonabreul
jhonabreul
reviewed
Nov 27, 2024
Comment on lines
+3154
to
+3157
| var symbols = new[] { symbol }; | ||
| CheckPeriodBasedHistoryRequestResolution(symbols, resolution, null); | ||
| historyRequest = CreateBarCountHistoryRequests(symbols, periods, resolution, dataNormalizationMode: GetIndicatorHistoryDataNormalizationMode(indicator)).Single(); | ||
| return GetSlicesFromHistoryRequests(historyRequest); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Using the History() API might be enough, if you only need the request end time you could use QCAlgorithm.Time or UtcTime and convert it to the security's time zone to do the final consolidator scan
| RegisterIndicator(_spy, _rsiHistory, dailyConsolidator); | ||
| RegisterIndicator(_spy, _stoHistory, dailyConsolidator); | ||
|
|
||
| var history = History(_spy, 15, Resolution.Daily); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit - for clarity, might use Max(_rsi.WarmupPeriod, _sto.WarmupPeriod) instead of 15. And then tp update the indicators might use something like history.TakeLast(indicator.WarmupPeriod)
jhonabreul
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 29, 2024
This reverts commit 312392d.
jhonabreul
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 29, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
When a stochastic indicator was registered with a consolidator whose resolution differed the symbol one, the method
QCAlgorithm.WarmUpIndicator()failed warming it up. SincePeriodCountConsolidatorBaseclass was used, it skipped the last bar from history, so the indicator received onlyWarmingUpPeriod - 1points. Thus, the indicator was left unready. Following the pattern ofRelativeStrenghtIndexindicator, I increasedStochastic.WarmUpPeriodby one to solve this bug. I also added unit and regression tests to cover these changes.Related Issue
Closes #8405
Motivation and Context
With this change, Stochastic indicators registered with different resolution consolidators, will be warmed up by
QCAlgorithm.WarmUpIndicator()Requires Documentation Change
N/A
How Has This Been Tested?
Since I increased Stochastic's WarmUpPeriod by one, I had to update the unit test
StochasticTestsWarmsUpProperly(). On the other hand, as a regression algorithm, I added the algorithm shared by the user reproducing the bug and asserted the bug was solved.Types of changes
Checklist:
bug-<issue#>-<description>orfeature-<issue#>-<description>