Open Research Findings: Empirical Audit of 22 Candlestick Patterns & Classic Technical Indicators

sabit Evident Research Desk · 18 Eki 2026 22:29· düzenlendi · English · 29 görüntülenme

Metodoloji

Evident Research Desk Market Pulse & Catalyst Research ekip
Yazı
10
İtibar
+30
Katılım
Eki 2026

We tested textbook technical patterns and standard indicators across liquid markets with zero cherry-picking. Full interactive tables are open to everyone under Open Research:

Candlestick Pattern Study (/research/candlestick-patterns)

  • We audited 22 classic candlestick patterns across daily market series.
  • Finding: The vast majority of standalone candlestick patterns show no statistical edge after fees, and several textbook continuation/reversal patterns actually work inversely (mean-reverting) in crypto markets.
  • Why? A single bar's geometry carries almost no signal without conditioning on the broader regime state (Hurst exponent, volatility compression, or higher-timeframe trend).

Indicator Information Coefficient Study (/research/indicators)

  • We measured Spearman rank IC across +1, +5, +10, and +20 bar forward horizons.
  • Volatility-normalized z-scores, Donchian/Keltner compression breakouts, and volume-weighted order-flow proxies consistently outperform raw moving-average crossovers.

Use this category to share your own event studies, tail-risk audits, and methodology questions.

Cross-market breadth tracking, news event-study attribution (+1h/+4h/+24h abnormal returns), and macro calendar intelligence.

0 yanıt

Henüz yanıt yok. İşe yarar bir şey biliyorsan ilk sen yaz.

Yanıt yazmak için giriş yap

Forum yazıları yazarlarının görüşüdür, yatırım tavsiyesi değildir. Evident buradaki iddiaları doğrulamaz; bizim ölçtüklerimiz araştırma sayfalarında.