STOCK TRADING STRATEGIES to get started today...💸

Here are 6⃣ simple strategies which you can use if you are still struggling to trade cash stocks!

They are very simple yet very effective if you can stick to them🤓

Ready to learn?

Let's go🧵...

1⃣ CCI & Pivot based strategy to ride massive trends in stocks

Don't forget to checkout the fundamental parameters!

https://t.co/dNI79bNiQe
2⃣ Multi-time frame positional strategy based on CCI with examples

https://t.co/iOr7sP1yrW
3⃣ Only CCI based investment strategy - You can catch massive trends in stocks with good Sales/PAT growth using this one

https://t.co/5JQcrBjkZv
4⃣ Tradingview code for strategy shared by @heartwon based on the long term and short term EMA

https://t.co/ENbKkgiNwx
5⃣ Tradingview code for strategy shared by
@MaverickAmit01 & @ydstartupreneur
based on RSI, Awesome oscillator and MACD

https://t.co/RrpeJKDJ3K
6⃣ Tradingview code for 13 & 34 ema crossover explained by @Singh7575

https://t.co/QUxG2ZwNmu
7⃣ If there are many requests then I'll publish these strategies in @tradingview @in_tradingview as well!

Let me know in the comments if you need!
Learnt something? If yes, please👇

1. Retweet the first tweet https://t.co/8LerkSYzcw
2. Follow @dmdsplyinvestor
3. Subscribe to my YouTube channel for more content! https://t.co/yNCTzHWpi6

More from Trendline Investor

More from Trading strategies

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?