SettingScout Lab

Is the default Donchian Channels (Donchian Channels) good enough? TradingView loads Donchian Channels with 20 out of the box, so we checked how those exact inputs held up in the latest market. We ran all 480 setting combinations on 10 coins (BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, BNB, DOGE, ADA, LINK, SUI and HYPE) across 15m, 30m, 1h and 4h, with a 0.11% fee taken out of every trade. The figures in this post are as of 2026-11-06, and every result is recomputed nightly with fresh data. What is Donchian Channels? What does each Donchian Channels setting change? TradingView default: 20. How did the default 20 do? On 4h, the default 20 did best on BTC at —%, and finished positive after fees on 0 of 10 coins. On 4h, the default averaged —% while the strongest setting combination under the same conditions hit +35.50%: a 35.5-point difference. How much does the timeframe matter? Timeframe Default avg. return Positive settings Avg. trades 15m —% 22% 233 30m —% 39% 114 1h —% 71% 57 4h —% 90% 15 The positi...

Donchian Breakout (Donchian Breakout) behaved very differently by timeframe. Over the past 90 days, 100% of setting combinations finished positive after fees on 1h, but only 74% did on 15m. We ran all 280 setting combinations on 10 coins (BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, BNB, DOGE, ADA, LINK, SUI and HYPE) across 15m, 30m, 1h and 4h, with a 0.11% fee taken out of every trade. The figures in this post are as of 2026-11-04, and every result is recomputed nightly with fresh data. What does Donchian Breakout actually measure? How should you read the Donchian Breakout parameters? TradingView default: 20 · 1. How does the TradingView default perform? Applied as-is on 1h, the default 20 · 1 was positive on 0 of 10 coins; BTC led at —%. Put the default average (—%) next to the top setting combination (+37.86%) and 1h alone shows a 37.9-point spread. Which timeframe fit best? Timeframe Default avg. return Positive settings Avg. trades 15m —% 74% 98 30m —% 87% 45 1h —% 100% 23 4h —% 87% 6 1h came in a...

Is the default DEMA 8-20-63 (DEMA 8-20-63 Strategy) good enough? TradingView loads DEMA 8-20-63 with 8 · 20 · 63 out of the box, so we checked how those exact inputs held up in the latest market. We ran all 1,000 setting combinations on 10 coins (BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, BNB, DOGE, ADA, LINK, SUI and HYPE) across 15m, 30m, 1h and 4h, with a 0.11% fee taken out of every trade. The figures in this post are as of 2026-11-03, and every result is recomputed nightly with fresh data. What is DEMA 8-20-63? What does each DEMA 8-20-63 setting change? TradingView default: 8 · 20 · 63. How did the default 8 · 20 · 63 do? On 4h, the default 8 · 20 · 63 did best on SUI at +60.85%, and finished positive after fees on 7 of 10 coins. On 4h, the default averaged +11.36% while the strongest setting combination under the same conditions hit +87.93%: a 76.6-point difference. How much does the timeframe matter? Timeframe Default avg. return Positive settings Avg. trades 15m -58.10% 3% 303 30m -11.50% 32%...

We recomputed 184,480 setting combinations on BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, BNB, DOGE, ADA, LINK, SUI and HYPE across 15m to 4h over the past 90 days, with the 0.11% fee per trade included, and compared them with 2026-10-26 (7 days earlier). Strategies that improved Donchian Channels (TradingView built-in): 54% → 57% of settings positive (+3 points) MACD + SMA 200 Strategy (by ChartArt): 41% → 44% of settings positive (+3 points) Stochastic + RSI, Double Strategy: 34% → 36% of settings positive (+2 points) Bollinger + RSI, Double Strategy (by ChartArt) v1.1: 42% → 44% of settings positive (+2 points) Bollinger Bands (TradingView built-in): 44% → 46% of settings positive (+2 points) Williams %R (TradingView built-in): 46% → 47% of settings positive (+2 points) Nadaraya-Watson Envelope Strategy: 38% → 39% of settings positive (+2 points) Common thread: 30m Across the scripts that improved, the share of positive settings changed like this by timeframe. 15m: 41% → 43%. 30m: 43% → 46%. 1h: 43% → 4...

Connors RSI (Connors RSI) behaved very differently by timeframe. Over the past 90 days, 87% of setting combinations finished positive after fees on 4h, but only 49% did on 15m. We ran all 1,400 setting combinations on 10 coins (BTC, ETH, SOL, XRP, BNB, DOGE, ADA, LINK, SUI and HYPE) across 15m, 30m, 1h and 4h, with a 0.11% fee taken out of every trade. The figures in this post are as of 2026-11-01, and every result is recomputed nightly with fresh data. What does Connors RSI actually measure? How should you read the Connors RSI parameters? TradingView default: 3 · 2 · 100 · 20 · 80. How does the TradingView default perform? Applied as-is on 4h, the default 3 · 2 · 100 · 20 · 80 was positive on 9 of 10 coins; HYPE led at +55.69%. Put the default average (+13.78%) next to the top setting combination (+64.99%) and 4h alone shows a 51.2-point spread. Which timeframe fit best? Timeframe Default avg. return Positive settings Avg. trades 15m -15.08% 49% 141 30m -5.39% 54% 70 1h -6.07% ...