RVI settings: the period does not change how often it trades
Ten RVI periods backtested on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024: why a fourteen-fold change in the period barely moves the trade count, and why the spread then decides it.
RVI (the Relative Vigor Index) divides how far the close finished from the open by the bar's high-to-low range. The idea behind it: in a rising market, bars should close near their highs.
So what does changing its period do? I backtested ten periods, from 4 to 55, across the whole of 2025 on USD/JPY, on three timeframes, then ran all of it again on 2024.
The finding that shaped this article: widening the period fourteen-fold barely changed how often it traded. On hourly bars, period 4 produced 668 trades a year and period 55 produced 539. Turning the knob does not change the frequency.
And at more than five hundred trades a year, frequency is not a detail. It decides the result.
What RVI measures
For each bar, two quantities:
- Numerator — close minus open, weighted 1:2:2:1 across the last four bars
- Denominator — high minus low, weighted the same way
Divide one by the other and you have RVI, moving roughly between −1 and +1. Bars that keep closing near their highs push it positive.
That value is then summed over N bars to make the plotted line, and N is the only place the period appears.
There is a second line: the signal. It is RVI itself, weighted 1:2:2:1 over the last four bars. The period does not enter this calculation at all.
Trades come from the two lines crossing. So one line can be smoothed by the period while the other always chases it within four bars. The two can never drift apart for long, which means how often they cross is set by the signal line's construction, not by the period.
That is the theory. The measurements agree with it.
Adding RVI to a chart
| Platform | How to add it |
|---|---|
| MT4 / MT5 | Built in — Navigator, Oscillators, Relative Vigor Index |
| TradingView | In the indicator list as "Relative Vigor Index" |
| Browser (Formiq) | In the indicator list, with an adjustable period |
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 | RVI crosses above its signal line, filled at that bar's close |
| Sell | RVI crosses below it |
| Exit | The opposite crossover only — no stop, no target, no time exit |
| Costs | 0.3 pip spread, zero slippage, 0.1 lot |
| Periods tested | 4 / 6 / 8 / 10 / 14 / 18 / 24 / 30 / 40 / 55, per timeframe and per year |
| Method | Executed in Formiq's backtester; pips recomputed from each trade's fill prices |
The period changes the result but not the frequency
The figure at the top of this article draws the table below.
| Period | 2025 trades | 2025 net | 2024 trades | 2024 net |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 668 | +217.2 pips | 663 | −310.6 pips |
| 6 | 555 | −22.7 pips | 578 | −1,417.4 pips |
| 8 | 524 | +84.3 pips | 577 | −1,565.2 pips |
| 10 | 547 | +1,078.7 pips | 572 | +896.5 pips |
| 14 | 538 | +964.7 pips | 563 | +150.9 pips |
| 18 | 522 | −67.6 pips | 557 | −1,198.8 pips |
| 24 | 541 | +1,422.6 pips | 550 | +318.9 pips |
| 30 | 541 | +762.2 pips | 543 | −1,017.8 pips |
| 40 | 547 | +1,344.2 pips | 545 | −647.9 pips |
| 55 | 539 | +1,484.0 pips | 555 | −458.3 pips |
Read the trade columns downward: everything sits between 522 and 668. Fourteen times the period, twenty per cent of the frequency.
The P&L columns span more than 3,000 pips, from −1,565 to +1,484, and the two years disagree about which end is which. Period 18 lost in both. Period 8 made +84 pips in 2025 and lost 1,565 in 2024.
So the period is a knob that leaves the trading frequency alone and moves the result around at random. As a thing to optimise on past data, that is a poor foundation.
Three of the ten were profitable in both years: 10, 14 and 24. Period 10 was the best of all ten in 2024 (+896.5 pips) and fourth in 2025 (+1,078.7). It is the default.
By timeframe
| Timeframe | Profitable 2025 | 2025 median | Profitable 2024 | 2024 median | Trades a year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15-minute | 2 / 10 | −372 pips | 3 / 10 | −1,460 pips | ~2,200 |
| 1-hour | 8 / 10 | +863 pips | 3 / 10 | −553 pips | ~540 |
| 4-hour | 5 / 10 | +37 pips | 9 / 10 | +1,117 pips | ~137 |
Hourly and four-hour swap places between the years. Fifteen-minute is bad in both, and the trade count is why.
The spread decides it
Same year, same settings, changing only the spread:
| Spread | 1-hour, period 10 (547 trades) | 15-minute, period 10 (2,188 trades) |
|---|---|---|
| 0.0 pips | +1,242.8 | +159.2 |
| 0.3 pips | +1,078.7 | −497.2 |
| 0.6 pips | +914.6 | −1,153.6 |
| 1.0 pips | +695.8 | −2,028.8 |
| 1.5 pips | +422.3 | −3,122.8 |
| 2.0 pips | +148.8 | −4,216.8 |
The 15-minute version makes +159.2 pips with the spread set to zero. Charging even 0.3 turns it negative; at 2.0 it loses 4,216.8.
The hourly version is not safe either: across the same range it gives up 1,094 pips, taking +1,242.8 down to +148.8.
Those numbers follow a rule.
Same pair, same year, same timeframe — only the indicator differs.
| Indicator | Trades a year | Pips lost, 0 → 2.0 spread |
|---|---|---|
| Supertrend 10/3 | 76 | 152 pips |
| Aroon 25 crossover | 115 | 230 pips |
| QQE 17/3/4.236 | 233 | 466 pips |
| RVI 10 | 547 | 1,094 pips |
Every one is exactly trades × 2.0 pips. Trivial arithmetic — which is precisely why it never fails to apply. Choosing an indicator is choosing how much spread you will pay in a year.
RVI trades more often than any of the others here, so it is the most exposed of them.
Win rate and filters
Across the ten hourly periods in 2025, win rates ran 40.11% to 45.61% and the rank correlation between win rate and net pips was 0.176 — close to nothing.
Filters, added to period 10:
| Condition | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| RVI alone | 547 trades, 42.23% win, +1,078.7 pips | 572 trades, 45.80% win, +896.5 pips |
| ADX ≥ 25 | 267 trades, 46.07% win, +1,149.0 pips | 275 trades, 42.18% win, −813.2 pips |
| ADX ≥ 30 | 182 trades, 47.80% win, +834.1 pips | 183 trades, 43.72% win, −113.2 pips |
| Tokyo hours only | 253 trades, 39.92% win, −33.6 pips | 264 trades, 40.15% win, +653.1 pips |
| London/NY hours only | 379 trades, 42.74% win, +416.6 pips | 379 trades, 42.74% win, +257.6 pips |
ADX lifts the 2025 win rate by four points and turns 2024 from +896.5 into −813.2. The session filters reverse between years, as they did in the earlier tests.
One thing behaved differently. The London/NY filter roughly halves the trade count and stays positive in both years (+416.6 and +257.6). It gives up profit but not its sign. When frequency is the weakness, a filter that cuts frequency and survives is worth more than one that lifts the win rate.
Stops and targets
| Exit rule | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Opposite crossover only | 547 trades, +1,078.7 pips | 572 trades, +896.5 pips |
| Stop 30 / target 60 | 676 trades, +2,047.4 pips | 697 trades, −294.4 pips |
| Stop 50 / target 100 | 588 trades, +1,375.4 pips | 613 trades, −1,349.7 pips |
| Stop 100 / target 200 | 551 trades, +1,793.1 pips | 579 trades, −650.2 pips |
| Time exit after 24 bars | 548 trades, −40.8 pips | 572 trades, +896.5 pips |
All four stop-and-target variants lost money in 2024. The best of them in 2025 — stop 30, target 60 — returned −294.4 the year before.
RVI trades are short, averaging 7.9 bars to the exit. Layering a fixed pip distance on top means the price band decides the trade before the indicator does. Holding to the opposite crossover was steadier across both years.
What this test supports
- The period does not control frequency. Fourteen times the setting, twenty per cent of the trade count, because the signal line is built without reference to it
- The period moves the result at random between years. Three of ten were positive in both; the default 10 is one of them
- High frequency is this indicator's character. 540 trades a year on hourly bars, 2,200 on 15-minute — and spread cost scales exactly with that
- The 15-minute version makes +159 pips at zero spread. There is nothing to pay costs out of
- If you filter it, filter for fewer trades. London/NY hours was the only condition that stayed positive in both years
For the same test applied to other indicators, see QQE across 200 combinations, Aroon across 84 and Supertrend across 36. The conclusions differ by indicator, which is the point of running the same method on each.
Limits of this test
- One pair, two years
- RVI varies little between implementations, but signal-line conventions differ. These figures come from Formiq's
- Entries and exits both fill at bar closes
- The spread is modelled as flat for the whole period; real spreads move with the session, and high-frequency settings feel that most
- Four-hour configurations trade about 137 times a year — thin for reading win-rate differences
- USD/JPY opened 2025 at 157.227 and closed at 156.670 (−56 pips) inside a 1,900-pip range; 2024 rose 1,632 pips inside a 2,237-pip range
- Volatility varies by hour of the day, which the session-filter rows are exposed to
Questions people ask
- What is the best RVI period?
- On USD/JPY hourly bars in 2025 the best result came from period 55 (539 trades, +1,484.0 pips), but the same setting lost 458.3 pips in 2024. Only 3 of the 10 periods were profitable in both years, and the steadiest was the default period 10: +1,078.7 pips in 2025 and +896.5 pips in 2024, where it ranked first of ten.
- Does a longer RVI period mean fewer trades?
- Barely. On hourly bars, period 4 produced 668 trades a year and period 55 produced 539 — a fourteen-fold change in the setting for a 20% change in frequency. The RVI line is smoothed by the period, but the signal line is a fixed four-bar weighted average that tracks it regardless, so how often the two cross is not governed by the period.
- Does RVI work on 15-minute charts?
- Not in this test. Period 10 on 15-minute bars traded 2,188 times a year, returning −497.2 pips at a 0.3 pip spread, −2,028.8 at 1.0 and −4,216.8 at 2.0. Even with the spread set to zero it made only +159.2 pips, so there is almost nothing there before costs are taken out.
- What win rate does RVI produce on its own?
- Across the ten hourly periods in 2025, win rates ran from 40.11% to 45.61%. Positions are held to the opposite crossover with no stop, so wins are less frequent than losses but larger. The rank correlation between win rate and net pips was 0.176 — effectively unrelated.
- Is RVI built into MetaTrader?
- Yes, both MT4 and MT5 ship it as Relative Vigor Index under Oscillators. TradingView has it in the indicator list under the same name. Formiq's charts include it with an adjustable period.
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.