OsMA: all 54 settings made money on hourly bars
54 OsMA parameter sets backtested on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024. On hourly bars every one was profitable in both years; on 15-minute bars, one of 54.
OsMA — Moving Average of Oscillator — plots the gap between the MACD line and its signal line as a histogram. Above zero means the MACD line is above its signal; below means the reverse.
I tested three parameters across 54 combinations on USD/JPY through the whole of 2025, on three timeframes, then ran the same 54 on 2024.
On hourly bars, all 54 were profitable in both years.
Across the six indicators tested this way, no other produced a clean sweep in even one year. But that is not the end of it: the same 54 settings on 15-minute bars managed one profitable in both years.
The timeframe decided it
| Timeframe | Profitable 2025 | 2025 median | Profitable 2024 | 2024 median | Both years | Trades a year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15-minute | 38 / 54 | +171 pips | 1 / 54 | −1,303 pips | 1 / 54 | ~970 |
| 1-hour | 54 / 54 | +952 pips | 54 / 54 | +1,855 pips | 54 / 54 | ~230 |
| 4-hour | 41 / 54 | +266 pips | 44 / 54 | +812 pips | 31 / 54 | ~55 |
One of 54 in 2024 on 15-minute bars. At around 970 trades a year, the spread alone is a large bill — the same relationship held for every indicator in this series.
Four-hour bars cut that to about 55 trades and run into the opposite problem: too thin a sample. 31 of 54 survived both years, below hourly.
What the parameters did
| Setting | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Default 12/26/9 | 226 trades, 38.50% win, PF 1.232, +1,129.4 pips (13th of 54) | +2,363.7 pips (1st) |
| Best of 2025, 6/18/9 | 316 trades, 36.08% win, PF 1.286, +1,597.4 pips | +2,029.4 pips (14th) |
| Worst of 2025, 18/26/15 | +288.2 pips | +1,946.0 pips |
The third row is the one that matters. The worst hourly setting still made +288.2 pips in 2025 and +1,946.0 in 2024. There was never a question of picking a profitable setting versus an unprofitable one.
The rank correlation between years is +0.082 — the ordering does not carry over, but with everything positive there is nothing to lose by that.
Trade counts across the 54 ran from 130 to 416 a year. The parameters move the frequency; profit survives at every frequency here.
The win rate is low, and that is fine
Across the 54 hourly settings in 2025, win rates ran 32.29% to 41.50% with a median of 35.8%. Win rate and net pips correlate at −0.331 — settings with higher win rates did slightly worse.
Holding in the direction of a zero-line break means losing often and small while the winners run. It is the exact inverse of what Williams %R showed. Ranking indicators by win rate puts them in the wrong order.
Adding OsMA to a chart
| Platform | How to add it |
|---|---|
| MT4 / MT5 | Built in — Navigator, Oscillators, Moving Average of Oscillator |
| TradingView | Add MACD and read its histogram (the same calculation) |
| Browser (Formiq) | In the indicator list, with fast, slow and signal all adjustable |
How this was measured
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Pair | USD/JPY |
| Period | 2025-01-01 to 2025-12-31 (2024 run identically for comparison) |
| Timeframes | 15-minute / 1-hour / 4-hour |
| Bars tested | 6,226 hourly bars in 2025; 24,903 on 15-minute, 1,610 on 4-hour |
| Buy | OsMA crosses above zero, filled at that bar's close |
| Sell | It crosses below zero |
| Exit | The opposite zero crossing only — no stop, no target, no time exit |
| Costs | 0.3 pip spread, zero slippage, 0.1 lot |
| Combinations | 5 fast (6–24) × 4 slow (18–60) × 3 signal (5–15), keeping fast < slow: 54 |
| Method | Executed in Formiq's backtester; pips recomputed from each trade's fill prices |
Four-hour bars invert
| 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|
| Best of 2025, 9/18/9 | +1,040.3 pips | −1,153.4 pips (53rd of 54) |
| Best of 2024, 24/60/15 | −835.0 pips (54th) | +1,718.4 pips |
The best setting of 2024 was the worst of 2025, and the best of 2025 was 53rd in 2024. Rank correlation −0.277. At 55 trades a year, a reversal of that size is ordinary.
The same indicator changes character with the timeframe — including whether choosing settings means anything at all.
What this test supports
- On hourly bars there was nothing to optimise. All 54 positive in both years; the worst still made +288.2 and +1,946.0 pips
- It does not work on 15-minute bars. One of 54 in 2024 — 970 trades a year cannot carry the spread
- Four-hour bars invert. 2024's best was 2025's worst, on a 55-trade sample
- A low win rate is the correct shape here. Median 35.8%, correlating −0.331 with profit
- The default 12/26/9 is enough. First in 2024, 13th in 2025; searching adds little
The same method applied to QQE, Aroon, RVI, Supertrend, Williams %R and MFI.
Limits of this test
- One pair, two years
- Both years may simply have suited hourly OsMA. A 54-of-54 sweep says as much about USD/JPY in this window as about the indicator
- OsMA inherits whatever the MACD implementation does, including how its EMAs are seeded. These figures come from Formiq's
- Entries and exits both fill at bar closes
- The spread is modelled as a flat 0.3 pips; the 15-minute result depends heavily on that
- Four-hour settings trade 35 to 110 times a year — wide numbers at that count
- Volatility varies by hour of the day
Questions people ask
- What are the best OsMA settings?
- On hourly bars there was barely anything to choose. All 54 combinations were profitable in both 2025 and 2024. The best of 2025 was 6/18/9 (316 trades, +1,597.4 pips) and the best of 2024 was the default 12/26/9 (+2,363.7 pips), which ranked 1st that year and 13th the next.
- How is OsMA different from MACD?
- OsMA is the MACD histogram. It plots the gap between the MACD line and its signal line, so OsMA crossing above zero is the same event as the MACD line crossing above its signal. They are two views of one calculation rather than two indicators.
- Which timeframe suits OsMA?
- Hourly, decisively, in this test: 54 of 54 settings profitable in both years. Four-hour managed 31 of 54 and 15-minute just 1 of 54 — the 15-minute version trades about 970 times a year, and the spread on that many trades outweighs what it earns.
- What win rate does OsMA produce?
- A low one. Across the 54 hourly settings in 2025 win rates ran 32.29% to 41.50%, median 35.8%. Holding through a zero-line crossover is trend following, so losses are frequent and small while wins run. Win rate and net pips correlate at −0.331 — the higher-win-rate settings did slightly worse.
- Is OsMA built into MetaTrader?
- Yes. Both MT4 and MT5 ship it as Moving Average of Oscillator under Oscillators. On TradingView the MACD histogram is the same thing. Formiq's charts include it with all three parameters adjustable.
Formiq is a free browser-based FX terminal with replay practice and no-code backtesting. Open the chart or see what the free plan includes.