From b387c315da2548b07c510533ffaf75698786394a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Stefano Ariestasia Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2023 14:59:19 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] fix pre-commit --- docs/recursive-analysis.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/recursive-analysis.md b/docs/recursive-analysis.md index dd939a30a..c197a3e67 100644 --- a/docs/recursive-analysis.md +++ b/docs/recursive-analysis.md @@ -90,4 +90,4 @@ As such, aiming for absolute zero variance (shown by `-` value) might not be the - `recursive-analysis` will only calculate and compare the indicator values at the last row. The output table reports the percentage differences between the different startup candle count calculations and the original benchmark calculation. Whether it has any actual impact on your entries and exits is not included. - The ideal scenario is that indicators will have no variance (or at least very close to 0%) despite the startup candle being varied. In reality, indicators such as EMA are using a recursive formula to calculate indicator values, so the goal is not necessarily to have zero percentage variance, but to have the variance low enough (and the `startup_candle_count` high enough) that the recursion inherent in the indicator will not have any real impact on trading decisions. -- `recursive-analysis` will only run calculations on `populate_indicators` and `@informative` decorator(s). If you put any indicator calculation on `populate_entry_trend` or `populate_exit_trend`, it won't be calculated \ No newline at end of file +- `recursive-analysis` will only run calculations on `populate_indicators` and `@informative` decorator(s). If you put any indicator calculation on `populate_entry_trend` or `populate_exit_trend`, it won't be calculated