Measured indicator guides
Forex indicator settings, tested
Each guide starts with how the indicator works, then tests its periods, levels or triggers on the same historical data. Profitable and losing settings stay in the tables so the result can be checked rather than trusted.
Moving averages and distance
Crosses, ribbon structure, averaging methods and distance from price.
- Best Moving Average Crossover Settings: 280 USD/JPY BacktestsA USD/JPY test of 280 moving-average crossover settings across 2024 and 2025, comparing periods, timeframes, win rates, SMA, EMA and three other methods.
- SMA vs EMA: 672 head-to-head backtests on USD/JPYThe simple and exponential moving average, head to head at identical periods on USD/JPY. The EMA finished ahead in 318 of 672 — weights, drop-off and cost measured.
- GMMA settings: does a 12-line ribbon beat two moving averages?We thinned each GMMA ribbon from six lines to one while holding its mean period fixed across 216 USD/JPY runs. One line beat six in 21 of 36 matched comparisons.
- Alligator settings: is the forward shift doing anything?1,584 Alligator settings swept on USD/JPY with the forward shift taken out. The shift is a delay, not a forecast, and the mouth is open 80% of the year.
- MA disparity settings: the 5% level that never arrived4,320 disparity index settings tested on USD/JPY. The 5% level textbooks quote was never reached on a 25-period line, and the zero line is a moving average crossover.
Bands and volatility
Period, deviation, width and squeeze rules measured separately.
- Best Bollinger Band Settings: 315 Backtests, Fade vs BreakoutThe same bands traded both ways on USD/JPY across 2024 and 2025: a 60% win rate that loses money, a 40% one that makes it, and where the textbook 20 and 2σ landed.
- Bollinger Bands Period Settings: Which Lookback Works Best?We tested Bollinger Bands periods from 5 to 200 across seven deviations and three USD/JPY timeframes. Period 20 led hourly bars, but the winner changed by timeframe.
- Bollinger Band Settings: Which Sigma Works Best?We tested Bollinger Bands from 0.5 to 4 standard deviations on USD/JPY. The hourly breakout favored 1σ; wider fade settings failed to repeat across two years.
- Bollinger BandWidth Settings: Does the Squeeze Hold Up?We tested 4,032 Bollinger BandWidth settings on USD/JPY. BBW levels changed by timeframe, and a 125-bar rolling low did not stay profitable across years.
- Squeeze Momentum settings: 45 tested, and the four-hour flip45 Squeeze Momentum settings backtested on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024. Four-hour bars fell from 26 profitable settings to 5, and 15-minute was its best.
Oscillators and levels
Overbought, oversold, zero-line and crossover rules, including losing settings.
- Best RSI Settings, Tested 330 Ways on USD/JPYRSI run as a 30/70 fade and as a 50-line cross: 330 settings on USD/JPY, 2024 and 2025. The fade won 65% of its trades and lost money; the cross won 24% and made it.
- RSI Length Test: How Long Overbought and Oversold LastRSI lengths 7 through 50 were tested above 70 and below 30 on USD/JPY. Longer settings removed most signals without steadily changing persistence or fade returns.
- Stoch RSI settings: only the four-hour chart survived 36 tests36 Stoch RSI settings backtested on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024. Only 3 of 36 came through both years on hourly bars and none on 15-minute; on four-hour bars, 30 did.
- QQE Settings: 183 of 200 Made Money in Both Years200 QQE parameter sets tested on USD/JPY in 2025 and 2024, comparing annual net pips, trade counts, win rates, timeframes, filters, and spread costs.
- RVI settings: the period does not change how often it tradesTen 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.
- Williams %R settings: a 68% win rate that still lost money240 Williams %R settings backtested on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024: win rates above 60% with negative results, and the win-to-loss size gap behind it.
- MFI barely fires on forex: 240 settings tested240 MFI settings on USD/JPY in 2024–2025: 137 four-hour settings took fewer than ten trades, while the textbook long reversed from +1,379.1 to −654.2 pips.
- CCI settings: does the ±100 fade or the breakout actually win?2,448 CCI settings swept on USD/JPY: the line sits outside ±100 for 40% of the year, the breakout beat the fade everywhere, and the best reading is a moving average.
- OsMA: all 54 settings made money on hourly bars54 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, 13 of 54 were.
- Accelerator Oscillator Settings: 24 of 27 Worked, Hourly Only27 Accelerator Oscillator settings backtested on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024. On hourly bars 24 of 27 were profitable in both years; on 15-minute bars, none were.
- STC settings: 49 of 72 held up on hourly bars72 Schaff Trend Cycle settings tested on USD/JPY in 2025 and 2024, comparing profitable counts, annual net pips, trade frequency, and the default.
- WaveTrend settings: the default stayed profitable in both years30 WaveTrend settings backtested on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024. All 30 were profitable on hourly bars in 2025, and the default placed second of them.
- Psychological Line Settings: 75 Does Not Mean 75%A psychological line level of 75 is not 75%: on a 12-bar line it means 10 of 12. 5,760 USD/JPY backtests on periods, levels and readings.
Trend and transformed price
Flip-based trend tools, ranked currencies and charts that rewrite price.
- Supertrend settings: only the multiplier does anythingAll 36 Supertrend period and multiplier combinations backtested on USD/JPY: the period changes almost nothing, and a profit factor of 5.04 came from fifteen trades.
- Aroon Settings: 33 of 84 Held Up on Hourly BarsWe tested 84 Aroon period, trigger and threshold combinations on USD/JPY across 2025 and 2024, including crossover versus level signals and timeframe differences.
- Parabolic SAR Settings: 23 of 36 Held Up on Hourly Bars36 Parabolic SAR settings tested on USD/JPY, comparing profitable counts, annual net pips, the 0.02/0.20 default, win rates, filters, and costs.
- Heikin Ashi Settings: The Same Trades, −523 or +34,120 PipsThe Heikin Ashi close is an average of four prices and not one of them. The same 6,107 trades came to −523 pips at the real close and +34,120 at the Heikin Ashi close.
- Renko Chart Settings: One Brick Size, +222 to +3,083 PipsA Renko chart has one setting, and it is not the one that decided the result. Ten grid positions at a fixed 20-pip brick swung USD/JPY 2025 from +222 to +3,083 pips.
- Currency Strength Settings: Does Strong Versus Weak Win?We ranked eight currencies across 28 FX pairs. Momentum failed, but a daily 20-bar, 12-bar-hold reversal survived tests of the top and bottom two ranks.
Levels and price structure
Popular chart levels tested against nearby or deliberately ordinary controls.
- Fibonacci Retracement Levels: No Ratio Beat the Depth Next DoorWhich Fibonacci retracement level actually holds? Every depth from 10% to 90%, measured across 6,266 USD/JPY swings: no canonical ratio beat the depth next door.
- Fair Value Gap Settings: 99% Fill, and So Does Every Other BarFair value gaps open on a fifth of USD/JPY bars and 96-99% get filled. Bars that opened no gap were revisited just as often, and the median wait was two bars. Measured.