Why Use A|B Indicators? The Case for Reliable Signals

You've connected your trading account to Algo Bread. You've set up your webhook. You're ready to automate.

Now comes the big question: which indicator or strategy should generate your signals?

The honest answer: you can use anything. Algo Bread works with any TradingView script that can fire an alert. Any Pine Script indicator. Any strategy. Any custom code you've written or downloaded.

But just because you *can* use anything doesn't mean you *should*.

The Wild West of TradingView Scripts

TradingView's public library has tens of thousands of indicators. The community is massive. The creativity is impressive. And the quality? That's where things get interesting.

Some scripts are excellent. Carefully coded, well-tested, clearly documented. The creators understand both trading and programming, and it shows.

Many scripts are... not that. They're thrown together, poorly tested, and uploaded without much thought about whether they'll work in real trading. Some are genuinely buggy. Some are overfitted to historical data. Some look great on a chart but fall apart when you actually use them.

And some have a specific problem that can destroy your automated trading: repainting.

The Repainting Problem

Repainting is when an indicator changes its historical values after the fact. A buy signal that appeared on yesterday's chart simply vanishes today, replaced by something different.

On a static chart, you might never notice. The indicator looks profitable because it only shows the signals that "worked." The losers have been quietly erased or moved.

But in live trading, you saw that original signal. You took the trade. And now the indicator pretends it never happened.

Here's how bad signals happen with repainting indicators:

Look-Ahead Bias

Some indicators use future data in their calculations without the creator realizing it. They reference tomorrow's close in today's signal calculation. On a historical chart, this works—the data exists. In real time, it doesn't, so the indicator either breaks or gives completely different signals.

Recalculating on Every Tick

An indicator might calculate a signal based on the current bar's data. But the current bar isn't finished yet. Every tick updates the bar, so the signal keeps changing. By the time the bar closes, the signal might be completely different from what you saw mid-bar.

Redrawing Pivot Points

Some indicators identify "significant highs and lows" that shift around as new data comes in. That perfect support level you traded? It moved 10 points after you entered.

Late Signal Confirmation

An indicator shows a signal, but the logic requires the next bar to "confirm" it. If the next bar doesn't confirm, the signal disappears from history. You only see the wins.

When you automate a repainting indicator, you're not trading the backtest. You're trading whatever random signals appear in real time—which might have no relationship to the historical performance that attracted you to the script in the first place.

The Problem With "Popular" Scripts

Popularity isn't a quality signal. The most downloaded indicators are often the ones with the best marketing, the prettiest visuals, or the most eye-catching backtests (which may be the result of repainting or overfitting).

Common issues with popular free scripts:

No testing for live trading. The creator ran it on historical data, saw it looked good, and uploaded it. They never used it in real time with real money.

No updates. TradingView and Pine Script evolve. Indicators that worked two years ago might have subtle bugs with current versions. If the creator has moved on, nobody's maintaining the code.

No support. Something breaks, you leave a comment, it goes unanswered. You're on your own.

Hidden complexity. The indicator has 47 settings with no documentation. What does "smoothing factor" do? What's the right value for "threshold sensitivity"? Trial and error with real money is expensive.

Overfitting. The script has been optimized to perfection on one specific instrument over one specific time period. It looks incredible on that chart. It fails everywhere else.

What Makes A|B Indicators Different

A|B indicators are built specifically for automated trading. That sounds obvious, but it changes everything about how they're designed.

No Repainting, Ever

This is non-negotiable. A|B indicators calculate signals on confirmed, closed bars only. The signal you see is the signal you get. Period.

When a buy signal appears on your chart, you can trust that:

• It won't disappear tomorrow
• It's calculated from actual historical data, not future-looking calculations
• It will fire the same way in a backtest and in real time

This sounds basic because it should be basic. But you'd be surprised how many indicators fail this simple test.

Built for Webhook Alerts

Most indicators are built for visual analysis. They're designed to look good on a chart and help a human make decisions. Automation is an afterthought, if it's considered at all.

A|B indicators are built with automation as the primary use case. The alert conditions are clean and unambiguous. The output is optimized for webhook payloads. There's no guesswork about how to set up your alerts.

Tested in Live Conditions

Before an A|B indicator ships, it's tested in actual trading conditions. Not just backtests—real-time forward testing where we monitor how signals behave as bars form and close.

We catch the edge cases that don't show up in backtests:

• How the indicator behaves during high volatility
• What happens during low-liquidity periods
• How signals fire during overnight sessions
• Performance across different instruments and timeframes

Clear Documentation

Every A|B indicator comes with straightforward documentation explaining:

• What the indicator does and how it calculates signals
• How to set up alerts for automation
• What each setting controls
• Example webhook payloads
• Recommended configurations for different use cases

No mystery settings. No trial and error.

Ongoing Support

If something doesn't work as expected, you can reach out and get help. The indicators are actively maintained. When TradingView makes changes, we update the code. When users report issues, we investigate and fix them.

When Third-Party Scripts Make Sense

Let's be real: A|B indicators aren't the only option, and they're not always the right choice.

Third-party scripts make sense when:

You're an experienced Pine Script developer. You can read the code, understand what it does, and verify it doesn't repaint. You can maintain and update it yourself.

You've thoroughly forward-tested it. Not just backtested—actually ran it in real time (paper trading at minimum) for an extended period and verified the signals behave as expected.

You understand the methodology. You know why the indicator works (or doesn't), not just that it produced a nice equity curve on historical data.

The creator has a track record. Some community developers are excellent. They document their code, respond to issues, and maintain their work. If you find one, their indicators can be valuable.

If you've done this due diligence, use whatever works. Algo Bread doesn't care where your signals come from.

When A|B Indicators Make Sense

A|B indicators make sense when:

You want reliability without research. You don't want to spend hours vetting indicators. You want to know it works and get trading.

You're new to automation. You have enough to learn already. Adding "become a Pine Script expert" to the list isn't realistic right now.

You've been burned before. You used a popular indicator, it seemed to work great, then you discovered it was repainting after some expensive losses.

You want support. When something goes wrong, you want someone who can actually help.

You're trading real money. The stakes are too high for mystery code from anonymous creators.

The Bottom Line

Algo Bread gives you flexibility. Use whatever signals you want. That freedom is intentional.

But flexibility means you're responsible for signal quality. A broken indicator will generate broken trades, and Algo Bread will execute them faithfully. Garbage in, garbage out.

A|B indicators exist to remove that variable. When you use them, you know the signals are clean. You know they won't repaint. You know they'll behave the same in live trading as they did in testing.

Is that worth something? That's for you to decide.

If you're confident in your own scripts or have vetted third-party indicators thoroughly, go for it. Algo Bread will work with anything.

If you want that confidence out of the box, without the research project, A|B indicators are built for exactly that purpose.

Either way, now you know what to look for—and what to avoid.