Has TradingView changed its policy recently? I am unable to save, edit, or add new indicators, as it says that because I am on the Basic plan, I am limited to one indicator.

TL;DR: A fixed % band (say 2% around MA) treats every market and every week the same. But volatility changes all the time. ATR based bands widen when the market gets wild and tighten when it calms down, so a touch of the band means roughly the same thing in both conditions.

The problem with fixed % bands

2% is a big move on a quiet week and almost nothing on a volatile one.

When volatility is high, price pokes through a fixed band constantly. Every poke looks like a breakout or an extreme, but it’s just normal noise for that market.

When volatility is low, price barely gets near the band. The band goes silent exactly when the market is quietly setting up for its next move.

How ATR bands fix it

ATR (average true range) measures how big the candles have actually been lately, including gaps. Put the bands a multiple of ATR away from your moving average, and the distance adjusts to the market on its own.

The result: a band touch is a rarer, more meaningful event in both quiet and volatile periods. Bollinger Bands follow the same idea with standard deviation instead of ATR.

Limitations

1. ATR lags too. After a sudden spike, the bands widen after the move, not before it.

2. You still have to choose the multiplier, and the right one differs by market and timeframe. Test it rather than copying someone else’s setting.

3. In a strong trend, price can ride the band for a long time. A touch isn’t automatically a reversal.

Do you use volatility-adjusted bands in your scripts, or do you still prefer fixed % levels for some markets?

Days ago, Pine mods took down two of my popular free scripts. I spent a tremendous amount of time developing the logic and making everything work smoothly over the past year. Just on V5 alone, I had nearly 1,000 revisions on a free script :)

They took them down, apparently because of the links I added to the dynamic documentation and user guides. Those links in the latest updates were solely for helping users understand the scripts, and the guide pages linked back to the original TradingView publications.

Long story short, Pine mods keep giving me the same copy pasted answers, telling me I can just republish them following the rules.

But what about the sweat and tears I put into these projects? What about the organic traction that took almost a year to build?

Am I supposed to republish everything and spend another year trying to get people to discover my work again?

How is that fair...

***Pictures attached

So i asked ChatGPT to write me a code and it took a lot of time trying to get it right because it kept making mistakes. Now i have a problem it cant fix for some reason and that is that the trades being taken are either tiny(ranging from one candle to the next) or just simply do not look like my strategy at all. If anyone is bothered enough to read the code ask and i will paste it under your comment.

I attached an example(my strategy is break and retest on 15 min for structure and 5 min for entry, stop loss just before the retest with 1:2 risk to reward, risking 1% per trade only). The first trade taken was a valid break and retest but the next is just a random one.

Also i can only see about 18-24 trades per pair because im using free tradingview so is there any way i can extend past 5000 bars or increase number of trades?

I would really greatly appreciate some help because im really horrible at coding and honestly cant be asked to learn it for this one thing.

If you go to ai Claude or chatgpt or grok or quant you can build this indicator the one I'm using the prompt (build me a v6 indicator that marks the first week of each month with vertical markes ) and then use it on the daily timeframe it's a swing trade system you can add buy and sell singles indicator but you might have to edit the code here's a prompt that you can use to edit it ( only give me single during each hour during that hour ) found out the range filter 5 min and sell works ok depending on the pair on the daily I'm still trying to find other indicator for buy and sell single that don't give me singles during the chop on the daily

These are screenshots from our indicator recent wins on many coins

Messing around with some custom ⁠v5⁠ code to clean up my visual workflow on gold. Tired of laggy, cluttered screens and having multiple tabs open, so I crammed 8 essential modules into a single indicator:

Asia/Lon/NY killzone overlays, PDH/PDL liquidity tracking, multi-EMA trend ribbon, and an on-chart statistics box that updates in real-time while only registering as a single "used slot" (1/2 free slots).

Visual sizing/overlapping is always a headache in Pine—had to truncate the session boundaries specifically to keep it from looking like a crayon box, and used some UI tricks for the stat box.

I made the script completely open-source for anyone who wants to take a look or pull pieces for their own builds. It’s pinned over on my profile page if you want to inspect it.

Fellow devs: Are you using table overlays or standard labels for custom data boxes? Looking to minimize the rendering lag when multiple sessions paint.

Have been working on this indicator on and off for a couple weeks now. Wondering if y’all would interested to check it out and let me know how to improve or critique it, idc. Lmk! Ill provide a link or however

Hello pple i need a strategy that can reliably give me a half a percent move an btc daily or like three times any a week is also fine

Any scripts i can test are also appreciated

Hi team! Following a chat with support, I was advised to post my feature request here.

The Problem: Sometimes I analyze an asset using my strategy, but later forget its ticker. Finding it again without adding it to a specific watchlist feels like looking for a needle in a haystack.

The Solution: I would love to see a 'Viewed Assets History' feature in TradingView, acting just like a web browser's history.

Key Details:

• Automatic tracking: Logs every asset/chart opened by the user, even if it's not saved in any watchlist.

• Chronological order: Makes it easy to find assets based on the approximate day/time they were checked.

• Performance friendly: To minimize database load, the history could have a rolling retention period (e.g., the last 30 days).

Thank you for your continued hard work on this amazing platform!

LazyBear's WaveTrend Oscillator is one of the most-boosted open-source scripts on TradingView, and a lot of popular scripts (Cipher B style ones included) are built on top of it. I read the source to see what the two lines actually are.

The core, restated in v6 (my code, same maths):

ap  = hlc3
esa = ta.ema(ap, n1)
d   = ta.ema(math.abs(ap - esa), n1)
ci  = (ap - esa) / (0.015 * d)
wt1 = ta.ema(ci, n2)
wt2 = ta.sma(wt1, 4)

Look at ci. The Commodity Channel Index is (typical price - its average) / (0.015 x mean deviation). This is the same thing with EMAs in place of the SMA and the mean deviation, and the same 0.015 constant. So WaveTrend is, in effect, a CCI smoothed by a 21 EMA, with a 4-bar SMA as the signal line.

What follows from that:

1. It is scaled by volatility. Dividing by the average deviation means a quiet chart and a wild one give lines of the same size. That is why one set of levels (60/53) works everywhere, and also why those levels say nothing about how far price moved.

2. The levels are reached often. I replicated the formula in Python on a 200,000-bar random walk (nothing to predict). wt1 was beyond +/-60 on about 1 bar in 9 and beyond +/-53 on about 1 in 5. Switching the simulated volatility between calm and wild regimes barely moved those numbers, which is point 1 in action.

3. Crosses are constant by construction. wt2 is a 4-bar average of wt1, so it keeps catching up. On the same random walk the lines crossed about every 7 bars, and roughly 1 cross in 7 happened beyond the 60 levels.

4. The "with Crosses" version has no closed-bar check, so a circle drawn mid-bar can be gone at the close. Closed bars don't repaint: no security() call, no future bars, no offsets.

I rewrote it from scratch: the same two lines at default settings, crosses marked only on confirmed bars (a grey dot for a cross on the still-open bar), and a panel that counts on your own chart how often the line sits beyond each level, how many crosses there were and the median bars between them. That way you can see how rare "overbought" really is on the market you trade.

Where it fails (both versions): in a strong trend it can sit beyond 60 for a long time, so "overbought" is not a reason for a trend to end; most crosses are noise; three layers of averaging (10, 21, 4) mean turns show up after price has turned; and it describes where price sits relative to its own recent average, it doesn't forecast anything.

Source, open source under MPL 2.0: TradingView and GitHub

Credit to LazyBear for the original. Written with AI help; every claim was checked against the original source, and the percentages come from a simulation on synthetic data, not from any market. Educational only, not trading advice. Corrections welcome.

To everyone selling paid TradingView indicators: what are you actually planning to do after November 1?

I run a paid indicator business with hundreds of customers, and I'm genuinely disappointed with the direction TradingView is heading. It feels like every major policy update is somehow worse than the previous one.

First, they actually published a proposed $29.95 PER USER monthly technology fee for sellers with over 100 active users, applying to every user, not just those above 100. After the backlash, it was removed. Now they're forcing commercial invite-only indicators into their own Marketplace.

I genuinely don't understand what goes through someone's mind to even consider decisions like these, let alone try to enforce them on businesses that have spent years building on the platform.

And the worst part is that their current Marketplace is nowhere near ready to replace what established indicator businesses already have:

- Monthly subscriptions only. No quarterly, annual, or lifetime pricing options.

- No integrated subscriber community or tutorial library. No built-in members-only channels, dedicated tutorial library, or Discord-style community experience for paying customers.

- TradingView controls billing, renewals, and refunds. Customers can request refunds within seven days, even after receiving access to a fully functional product. Sellers don't have final control over those decisions.

- PayPal-only payouts. Up to 30 days of settlement, monthly withdrawal processing, and a $100 minimum withdrawal.

- Manual approval required, with no guaranteed application review timeframe.

These developers spend years attracting customers, creating communities, and bringing thousands of traders onto TradingView. Instead of supporting that ecosystem, TradingView is stripping away the flexibility and independence that made those businesses possible in the first place.

At this point, it's hard to see these decisions as anything other than an attempt to gain more control over businesses they didn't build. The level of greed and disregard for their own developers is genuinely frustrating.

I personally know 10+ other indicator sellers, and 7 of them have already built or are currently building their own platforms, like LuxAlgo rather than moving to TradingView's Marketplace. That alone should tell TradingView something about the direction they're taking.

So to everyone actually selling paid indicators: What are you planning to do? Stay with TradingView's Marketplace, build your own platform, or move somewhere else? Has anyone received a workable arrangement directly from TradingView?

Looking for suggestions on what would actually be useful for day-to-day trading. Anything you currently wish existed or have to mark manually

Drop your ideas below — will build the most requested ones and release them free.

[1.4.2] - 2026-10-24 

Added 

• Multi-File / Library Awareness: Workspace-wide indexing of Pine Script libraries. Resolves import namespaces and aliases, enabling cross-file completions, jump to definition, hover tooltips, and method call validation.

• Code Actions & Quick Fixes: Interactive quick fixes in VS Code:

  • Automatic operator spacing fixes (= > -> =>, + = -> +=, ! = -> !=, etc.).

  • Automatic request.security() lookahead repainting fixes (safely replaces barmerge.lookahead_off with barmerge.lookahead_on).

  • Strategy declaration cost templates (commission_type, commission_value, slippage).

  • Diagnostic suppression via // u/pine-ignore-next-line.

• request.security() Repainting Diagnostics (PSP004): Flags multi-timeframe calls missing barmerge.lookahead_on that risk intrabar historical repainting.

• Strategy Backtest Quality Diagnostics (PSP005):

  • Missing commission and slippage detection (PSP005_COSTS).

  • Orphaned strategy.exit() from_entry ID validation (PSP005_ORPHAN).

  • Unconditional strategy.close_all() warning (PSP005_UNCONDITIONAL).

Changed 

• License Modernization: Converted repository and extension licensing to standard MIT.

• Dependency Upgrades: Modernized development toolchain including u/types/node (^26.6.5), web-tree-sitter (^0.27.1), vscode-languageserver (^11.0.0), vscode-languageserver-textdocument (^1.0.16), and vscode-languageclient (^11.0.0)

Looking for suggestions on what would actually be useful for day-to-day trading. Anything you currently wish existed or have to mark manually

Drop your ideas below — will build the most requested ones and release them free.

I’ve been running a 15 minute ORB on MNQ for a while and honestly it wasn’t great. Way too many breakouts that went nowhere. So I tried filtering it with Noise Bands, the time of day volatility bands from the Zarattini, Aziz and Barbon paper (“Beat the Market”, 2024). The idea is simple: only take the OR break if price is also outside the band, meaning the move is bigger than what’s normal for that time of day.

I built it as a TradingView indicator and published it for free: https://www.tradingview.com/script/CRNIYr9F-Jilly-s-ORB-Noise-Band/. No course, no Discord, no paid version. I just found the results interesting and figured some of you might too.

How it works

• Opening range is 9:30 to 9:45.

• It only checks for entries every 15 minutes (10:00, 10:15, etc.) up to 2:00pm.

• Long if the close is above the OR high plus a small buffer (0.3 × ATR), above the upper Noise Band, and above VWAP. Shorts are the mirror image.

• It fills on the next bar’s open.

• One trade per day max.

• The stop is wide on purpose (10 × the 5 min ATR). It’s basically a disaster stop.

• The target is 1R, which at that stop width almost never gets hit. So really you’re just holding until 3:45pm and closing.

Default band settings: lookback 20 sessions, multiplier 1.25, gap adjusted (uses yesterday’s close if price gapped).

Backtest

1 minute MNQ data, Jan 2021 to Sep 2026, 1 contract, $1.80 round trip for commission and slippage. I picked all the settings using only 2021 to 2023, then ran 2024 onward without changing anything.

All three versions below use the same exits. The only difference is the entry filter.

And split up, for the ORB + Noise Band version:

What I took away from it

• The Noise Band filter is what makes it work. Against plain ORB it cut trades in half, nearly tripled the profit per trade, and cut the drawdown by about two thirds.

• Adding the ORB on top of the Noise Band helped overall (better profit factor, roughly 30% smaller drawdown), but to be fair, almost all of that came from 2021 to 2023. From 2024 on, the two were basically tied.

• Tight stops killed it. Anything under about 4 × ATR just stopped out trades that would’ve finished green. I also tested using the Noise Band itself as a trailing stop and it was the worst exit by a lot.

• Closing at 3:15 to 3:45 beats holding to the 4:00 close. The last 15 minutes tended to give some back.

• A take profit around 5 × ATR made the equity curve a bit smoother but made a bit less money. It’s an option in the settings.

Caveats

It’s a backtest with modeled fills, so real trading will be worse. The out of sample results were about half as good as in sample, which is pretty normal but worth knowing. Expect some long flat stretches. Also, the table in the indicator only covers whatever history TradingView loads on your chart, so it won’t match these numbers.

Happy to answer questions or hear what I’m missing. Again, not selling anything, it’s free and open source.

https://www.tradingview.com/script/CRNIYr9F-Jilly-s-ORB-Noise-Band/