Trading bands, which are
lines plotted in and around the price structure to form an
envelope, are the action of prices near the edges of the
envelope that we are interested in. They are one of the
most powerful concepts available to the technically based
investor, but they do not, as is commonly believed, give
absolute buy and sell signals based on price touching the
bands. What they do is answer the perennial question of
whether prices are high or low on a relative basis. Armed with
this information, an intelligent investor can make buy and
sell decisions by using indicators to confirm price action.
But before we begin, we need
a definition of what we are dealing with. Trading bands are
lines plotted in and around the price structure to form an
"envelope." It is the action of prices near the
edges of the envelope that we are particularly interested in.
The earliest reference to trading bands I have come across in
technical literature is in The Profit Magic of Stock
Transaction Timing; author J.M. Hurst's approach involved
the drawing of smoothed envelopes around price to aid in cycle
identification.
Figure 1 shows an example of this technique: Note in particular
the use of different envelopes for cycles of differing
lengths.
The next major development in
the idea of trading bands came in the mid to late 1970s, as
the concept of shifting a moving average up and down by a
certain number of points or a fixed percentage to obtain an
envelope around price gained popularity, an approach that is
still employed by many. A good example appears in Figure
2, where an envelope has been constructed around the Dow
Jones Industrial Average (DJIA). The average used is a 21-day
simple moving average. The bands are shifted up and down by
4%.
FIGURE 2:
The procedure to create such
a chart is straightforward. First, calculate and plot the
desired average. Then calculate the upper band by multiplying
the average by 1 plus the chosen percent (1 + 0.04 = 1.04).
Next, calculate the lower band by multiplying the average by
the difference between 1 and the chosen percent (1 - 0.04 =
0.96). Finally, plot the two bands. For the DJIA, the two most
popular averages are the 20- and 21-day averages and the most
popular percentages are in the 3.5 to 4.0 range.
The next major innovation
came from Marc Chaikin of Bomar Securities who, in attempting
to find some way to have the market set the band widths rather
than the intuitive or random-choice approach used before,
suggested that the bands be constructed to contain a fixed
percentage of the data over the past year. Figure 3
depicts this powerful and still very useful approach. He stuck
with the 21-day average and suggested that the bands ought to
contain 85% of the data. Thus, the bands are shifted up
3% and down by 2%. Bomar bands were the result. The
width of the bands is different for the upper and lower bands.
In a sustained bull move, the upper band width will expand and
the lower band width will contract. The opposite holds true in
a bear market. Not only does the total band width change
across time, the displacement around the average changes as
well.
FIGURE 3:

Asking the market what is
happening is always a better approach than telling the market
what to do. In the late 1970s, while trading warrants and
options and in the early 1980s, when index option trading
started, I focused on volatility as the key variable. To
volatility, then, I turned again to create my own approach to
trading bands. I tested any number of volatility measures
before selecting standard deviation as the method by which to
set band width. I became especially interested in standard
deviation because of its sensitivity to extreme deviations. As
a result, Bollinger Bands are extremely quick to react to
large moves in the market.
In Figure 5, Bollinger Bands
are plotted two standard deviations above and below a 20-day
simple moving average. The data used to calculate the standard
deviation are the same data as those used for the simple
moving average. In essence, you are using moving standard
deviations to plot bands around a moving average. The time
frame for the calculations is such that it is descriptive of
the intermediate-term trend.
Note that many reversals
occur near the bands and that the average provides support and
resistance in many cases.
There is great value in
considering different measures of price. The typical price,
(high + low + close)/3, is one such measure that I have found
to be useful. The weighted close, (high + low + close +
close)/4, is another. To maintain clarity, I will confine my
discussion of trading bands to the use of closing prices for
the construction of bands. My primary focus is on the
intermediate term, but short- and long-term applications work
just as well. Focusing on the intermediate trend gives one
recourse to the short- and long-term arenas for reference, an
invaluable concept.
For the stock market and
individual stocks. a 20-day period is optimal for calculating
Bollinger Bands. It is descriptive of the intermediate-term
trend and has achieved wide acceptance. The short-term trend
seems well served by the 10-day calculations and the long-term
trend by 50-day calculations.
The average that is selected
should be descriptive of the chosen time frame. This is almost
always a different average length than the one that proves
most useful for crossover buys and sells. The easiest way to
identify the proper average is to choose one that provides
support to the correction of the first move up off a bottom.
If the average is penetrated by the correction, then the
average is too short. If, in turn, the correction falls short
of the average, then the average is too long. An average that
is correctly chosen will provide support far more often than
it is broken. (See Figure 6.)
Bollinger Bands can be
applied to virtually any market or security. For all markets
and issues, I would use a 20-day calculation period as a
starting point and only stray from it when the circumstances
compel me to do so. As you lengthen the number of periods
involved, you need to increase the number of standard
deviations employed. At 50 periods, two and a tenth standard
deviations are a good selection, while at 10 periods one and a
nine tenths do the job quite well.
| 50 periods with 2.1 standard deviation |
10 periods with 1.9 standard deviation |
Upper Band
= 50-day SMA + 2.1(s)
Middle Band = 50-day SMA
Lower Band = 50-day SMA - 2.1(s)
|
Upper Band
= 10-day SMA + 1.9(s)
Middle Band = 10-day SMA
Lower Band = 10-day SMA - 1.9(s)
|
In most cases, the nature of
the periods is immaterial; all seem to respond to correctly
specified Bollinger Bands. I have used them on monthly and
quarterly data, and I know many traders apply them on an
intraday basis.
Tags of the Upper and Lower Bands
Trading bands answer the
question whether prices are high or low on a relative basis.
The matter actually centers on the phrase "a relative
basis." Trading bands do not give absolute buy and sell
signals simply by having been touched; rather, they provide a
framework within which price may be related to indicators.
Some older work stated that
deviation from a trend as measured by standard deviation from
a moving average was used to determine extreme overbought and
oversold states. But I recommend the use of trading bands as
the generation of buy, sell and continuation signals through
the comparison of an additional indicator to the action of
price within the bands.
If price tags the upper band
and indicator action confirms it, no sell signal is generated.
On the other hand, if price tags the upper band and indicator
action does not confirm (that is, it diverges). we have a sell
signal. The first situation is not a sell signal; instead, it
is a continuation signal if a buy signal was in effect.
It is also possible to
generate signals from price action within the bands alone. A
top (chart formation) formed outside the bands followed by a
second top inside the bands constitutes a sell signal. There
is no requirement for the second top's position relative to
the first top, only relative to the bands. This often helps in
spotting tops where the second push goes to a nominal new
high. Of course, the converse is true for lows.
Percent b (%b) and Bandwidth
An indicator derived from
Bollinger Bands that I call %b can be of great help, using the
same formula that George Lane used for stochastics. The
indicator %b tells us where we are within the bands. Unlike
stochastics, which are bounded by 0 and 100, %b can assume
negative values and values above 100 when prices are outside
of the bands. At 100 we are at the upper band, at 0 we are at
the lower band. Above 100 we are above the upper bands and
below 0 we are below the lower band.
%b =
close - lower band
upper band - lower band
Indicator %b lets us compare
price action to indicator action. On a big push down, suppose
we get to -20 for %b and 35 for relative strength index (RSI).
On the next push down to slightly lower price levels (after a
rally), %b only falls to 10, while RSI stops at 40. We get a
buy signal caused by price action within the bands. (The first
low came outside of the bands, while the second low was made
inside the bands.) The buy signal is confirmed by RSI, as it
did not make a new low, thus giving us a confirmed buy signal.
Bandwidth =
upper band - lower band
middle band
Trading bands and indicators
are both good tools, but when they are combined, the resultant
approach to the markets becomes powerful. Bandwidth, another
indicator derived from Bollinger Bands, may also interest
traders. It is the width of the bands expressed as a percent
of the moving average. When the bands narrow drastically, a
sharp expansion in volatility usually occurs in the very near
future. For example, a drop in band width below 2% for the
Standard & Poor's 500 has led to spectacular moves. The
market most often starts off in the wrong direction after the
bands tighten prior to really getting under way, of which
January 1991 is a good example.
Avoiding Multicolinearity
A cardinal rule for the
successful use of technical analysis requires avoiding
multicolinearity amid indicators. Multicolinearity is simply
the multiple counting of the same information. The use of four
different indicators all derived from the same series of
closing prices to confirm each other is a perfect example.
So one indicator derived from
closing prices, another from volume and the last from price
range would provide a useful group of indicators. But
combining RSI, moving average convergence/divergence (MACD)
and rate of change (assuming all were derived from closing
prices and used similar time spans) would not. Here are,
however, three indicators to use with bands to generate buys
and sells without running into problems. Amid indicators
derived from price alone, RSI is a good choice. Closing prices
and volume combine to produce on-balance volume, another good
choice. Finally, price range and volume combine to produce
money flow, again a good choice. None is too highly colinear
and thus together combine for a good grouping of technical
tools. Many others could have been chosen as well: MACD could
be substituted for RSI, for example.
The Commodity Channel Index (CCI)
was an early choice to use with the bands, but as it turned
out, it was a poor one, as it tends to be colinear with the
bands themselves in certain time frames. The bottom line is to
compare price action within the bands to the action of an
indicator you know well. For confirmation of signals, you can
then compare the action of another indicator, as long as it is
not colinear with the first.
One of the great joys of having invented an analytical technique
such as Bollinger Bands is seeing what other people do with
it. While there are many ways to use Bollinger Bands,
following are a few rules that serve as a good beginning
point.
gl_0
|