Why X>Y>Z isn't the same as X>Y and X>Z and Y>Z?

Manage
1

Pretty basic question. Just trying to understand what’s going on here.

X > Y > Z … why it’s not giving the same results than X > Y and X > Z and Y > Z ?

Please see the attached file for an example.

1.JPG
1.JPG2358×181 40.6 KB

2

Not sure “sma(50) > sma(100) > sma(150)” is a valid line of code and therefore does what you want it to do

JMH

3

The third rule isn’t valid syntax.

I’m not sure what it’s doing but my guess is that it looks like this:

(SMA(50) > SMA(100))>SMA(150)

That implied parenthesis is based on the order of evaluation and is a guess on my part. But if my assumption is correct, because we know that this relationship is true for all results, the actually evaluated statement is:

1 > SMA(150)

And…you have 10 penny stocks. :slight_smile: