Your red in price and red on MACD is regular bullish divergence.
The green in price and green on the others two are hidden bearish

Thanks. You are right. And I even checked the 'cheat sheet' that was posted earlier in here.

I guess it's just so damn unintuitive to me... lower highs in price, higher highs in indicator seems to indicate a bullish div to me, intuitively at least.

But yeah, no point in arguing, I made the same mistake as last time :P

I am also not used to work with divergencies, but I would love pros to give their take. In Oda's example, there were two bullish divergencies and two hidden bearish. What is the interpretation? And generally, is there a simple answer to Oda's question of relative importance of regular vs hidden divergences?

Great answer. Screencapped and saved.

Thanks.

Maybe it will help engrave it if I explain it my way too: During a trend, you want the indicator (an indicator is nothing but a filtered/"interpreted" way to look at price history) to align with the price action to signal that the way the price moves doesn't change. And if you are looking at a bullish trend, you want to look at the highs because that's where the momentum is. If there's a divergence in the highs during the bullish trend, then something has probably changed, two views no longer align with each other.

A regular bearish divergence happens for instance when the price makes new highs, but then reverses sharply and retraces untypically little of the drop before candle close, or when the price takes longer to make new highs than before. For the hidden bearish divergence, it could happen when the price simply stops making new highs without a drastic drop while the indicator (MACD is a good example) still goes higher just based on a past moving average. Both is a loss of momentum, it's just that one of the two views is more receptive to some signals while the other filters them out.

This will all depend in detail how the indicator works; there are many variations. I only use the MACD and the RSI myself.

I wouldn't attribute divergences much importance if they happen on a low volume or relatively sideways market because there is just no trend to look at.

tl;dr:

Price goes up, you look at highs. Divergence = bad
Price goes down, you look at lows. Divergence = good

Boy would I love to hear from masterluc. I remember in July 2013 his "special indicators" giving a strong buy signal ~ $65.... hmmmm....

That is not very likely, considering that we did not break the 200SMA until ~ 73 price level. Of course the best traders do not share their secretes.

We're still in a short/medium term bear market, although it's showing some signs of reversal now. I would probably call this a bull market when the weekly MACD crosses again.

I am not as certain. We broke through short-term support pretty heavily, and are currently below hourly SMA50. I suppose the hidden bullish divergence could signal a final local spike up (possibly to the support-line (assumingly) gone resistance), but I have a feeling we'll break through hourly SMA200 and test long-term support (currently at $462) before we can break daily SMA200 and take off. Certainly doesn't help that it's weekend = whale dump time, and market looks fragile enough atm to be significantly moved by a whale.



But then again I'm a noobish sheep, so for all I know you could be right Just throwing out possibilities.