DEV Community: Emmanuel Dessallien

Best TradingView Alternative in 2026 — An Honest Comparison

Emmanuel Dessallien — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 12:00:08 +0000

TradingView is still one of the best charting platforms available. The issue isn’t the product — it’s that many traders end up paying for charting and then adding separate tools for screening, backtesting, or research workflows that TradingView doesn’t cover out of the box.
If you rely on Pine Script or TradingView’s social layer, staying there makes sense. If you want charting, screening, and backtesting that works without learning a scripting language — CompoundPulse is built for that workflow.
Bottom line up front: This is not a “TradingView is bad” article. It’s a workflow comparison. TradingView can do most of these jobs. The question is whether the extra friction — Pine Script for backtesting, additional data subscriptions for real-time feeds, separate tools for some research workflows — is worth the cost for the way you actually trade.

What TradingView Charges You For
Free: $0–2 indicators per chart, 3 active price alerts, data timing varies by feed
Essential: $12.95/mo billed annually — 5 indicators, 20 price alerts, 30-day trial
Plus: $29.95/mo billed annually — 10 indicators, 100 price alerts, 30-day trial
Premium: $59.95/mo billed annually — 25 indicators per chart, 400 price alerts, exchange data add-ons may apply separately

Feature-for-Feature: TradingView Plus vs CompoundPulse Pro
Indicators: TV Plus = 10 per chart | CompoundPulse = 75+, all enabled
Screener: TV Plus = separate from charts | CompoundPulse = opens directly into chart
Backtesting: TV Plus = Strategy Tester, Pine Script for custom logic | CompoundPulse = built-in, zero code
Insider activity: TV Plus = via News Flow | CompoundPulse = dedicated Form 4 tracker
Asset correlation: TV Plus = add indicator manually | CompoundPulse = standalone matrix page
Price alerts: TV Plus = 20 alerts | CompoundPulse = unlimited, email + push
Paper trading: TV Plus = Premium only | CompoundPulse = all plans
Free trial: TV Plus = 30 days | CompoundPulse = 7 days, no credit card

Where the Workflow Difference Actually Shows Up

Backtesting pushes you toward Pine Script TradingView’s Strategy Tester is capable — but the moment you want custom logic, you’re writing Pine Script. CompoundPulse: pick ticker, pick strategy, hit run. Full equity curve, win rate, max drawdown in 10 seconds. No code.
Insider activity lives in a different part of the platform TradingView surfaces some corporate activity through News Flow, but it’s not a dedicated Form 4 tracker. CompoundPulse keeps a dedicated insider tracker alongside every chart.
The screener lives in a separate workflow TradingView’s screener is capable but lives separately from charting. On CompoundPulse, a screener result opens directly into the chart with your indicator layout already applied.
Correlation requires a separate indicator setup TradingView has a correlation heatmap as an official indicator — requires adding and configuring manually. CompoundPulse has a standalone matrix page, immediate.

Where TradingView Still Wins
Pine Script ecosystem — massive, nothing equivalent elsewhere
Social features — published ideas, profiles, followers
Broker integration — direct one-click trading with some brokers
Mobile app — TradingView’s mobile app is excellent

Our honest take: If you’re a heavy Pine Script user with hundreds of saved scripts, switching costs are real. For everyone else paying $30/month for charts and a mediocre screener — at least try the free trial and compare side by side.

Who Should Switch
Paying Plus/Premium but never open Pine Script
Want backtesting without learning to code
Use Finviz separately and want to consolidate
Trade based on insider activity
Care about asset correlation
Want unlimited price alerts
Who Should Stay
Pine Script library you rely on
Publish ideas with a following on TradingView
Broker with direct TradingView integration
Need Level 2 order book data

Most traders don’t lose because they’re bad at this. They lose because they keep entering without seeing the full picture — the trend, the pressure, the confirmation — and by the time they feel it, they’re already trapped. The traders who actually compound aren’t smarter. They just see it first. That’s what CompoundPulse is built for.
Try CompoundPulse free — no credit card: compoundpulse.com

Stop Using Your Stock Screener Backwards

Emmanuel Dessallien — Tue, 31 Mar 2026 15:10:28 +0000

Most traders open a screener with no plan, pile on filters, end up with 12 tickers they don't trust, skip the trade, blame the tool. The screener's real job is to reduce decision noise — not find stocks. If you open it without a thesis, you're generating random homework.

Bad workflow: No goal → random filters → 0-3 results, loosen, get 200 → overwhelmed, close tab → repeat tomorrow.

Good workflow: Step 1: Define trade type first. Step 2: Max 3-4 filters. Step 3: Chart confirms entry. Step 4: Save the scan, run it every week.

Filters that waste your time: Beta as primary filter (backward-looking, tells you nothing about current momentum). 52-week high/low without volume confirmation (noise without chart review). Stacking overlapping technical filters (RSI <30 and price down 20% measure almost the same thing).

3 Scan Recipes:

Swing trader oversold quality: RSI <35 + above 200 SMA + market cap >$1B + avg vol >500K. Quality companies having a bad week. Pull chart, find prior support, that's your entry zone.
Momentum breakout: 52-week high within 2% + volume 2x avg past 10 days + positive EPS growth YoY. Don't chase day 1 — wait for 1-2 day pullback, buy the retest.
Income investor: dividend yield >3% + debt/equity <1.0 + market cap >$5B. Yellow flag: yield above 6% usually means market is pricing in a cut.
Comparison table — CompoundPulse vs Finviz vs TradingView:

Free tier filters: Dozens (all free) vs Dozens (some paywalled) vs Many (limited saves free)
Chart integration: Native same platform vs Basic inline charts vs Full charts, separate tab
Signal presets: Yes vs Elite tier only vs Limited free
Mobile: Responsive web vs Not mobile-optimized vs Dedicated app
Price: Free 7-day trial vs Free/$39.50 Elite vs Free/$14.95+
Finviz is the benchmark. TradingView has a capable screener with a large number of filter fields, but for many traders it sits in a separate part of the platform from the main charting workflow. CompoundPulse's advantage is workflow integration: screen for a setup, open the chart with your indicators already loaded, same tab. Whether that matters depends on how you trade.

Bottom line: Pick one of the three scan recipes. Run it this week exactly as written. After five sessions, adjust one variable. That's how you build a process that compounds.
compoundpulse.com

The Only Technical Indicators That Matter (And the Ones Traders Abuse)

Emmanuel Dessallien — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 11:07:10 +0000

Most trading setups fail not because indicators are wrong — but because traders use 4 indicators that all say the same thing. RSI, MACD, Stochastic, and CCI on the same chart aren't four signals. They're one signal with four redundant confirmations. The real problem is indicator soup.
Framework: 4 questions, 4 indicators. Trend (what direction?), Momentum (accelerating or stalling?), Volatility/Risk (how wide is my stop?), Volume (is real money confirming?). One per question. Everything else is noise.
TREND — Pick One: EMA Stack 20/50/200 (most versatile, every asset class, daily/weekly — price above 200 EMA = bullish regime). Supertrend ATR10/Factor3 (cleanest rule-based signals, best for crypto and momentum stocks). Ichimoku Cloud (most complete single indicator — trend, S/R, momentum, signals — but has 5 components and steep learning curve; half-knowing it is worse than not using it).
MOMENTUM — Pick One: RSI 14 (biggest mistake: fading uptrends because RSI hit 70 — in a bull trend RSI stays overbought. Right way: use as trend filter — above 50 = bullish regime, look for dips to 40-50 as re-entry not 30. Divergence = reliable exhaustion warning). MACD 12/26/9 (too slow for entries — by the time it crosses you've missed 20-30% of the move. Use as confirmation that a move has legs, not as a trigger. Zero-line crossovers stronger than signal line crossovers).
VOLATILITY/RISK — Always Have One: ATR 14 (criminally underrated — solves stop placement AND position sizing in one number; stop at 1.5-2x ATR is calibrated to actual volatility, not arbitrary percentages; rising ATR = expanding volatility, falling = consolidation before explosion). Bollinger Bands 20/±2σ (most misunderstood — upper band is NOT a sell signal; price walks the band for weeks in strong trends; BB Squeeze when bands tighten = the setup, direction of breakout = the trade).
VOLUME — Non-Negotiable: VWAP intraday (institutional benchmark, resets daily, essential for day traders, useless for swing). Volume MA 20-period (breakout needs 1.5-2x avg volume; volume dry-up during consolidation = bullish — sellers not showing up).
The one you probably shouldn't have: Stochastic — measures same thing as RSI with faster noisier signals. If you have RSI, Stochastic is redundant. Only valid for scalpers on 1m/5m. Everyone else: drop it.
The 4-indicator setup that actually works: 200 EMA (trend/regime) + RSI 14 (momentum) + ATR 14 (stop placement) + Volume MA 20 (confirmation).
Concrete NVDA daily example: Price above 200 EMA = long setups only. RSI pulls to 48 = momentum cooling, not broken, potential re-entry zone. ATR $4.20 = stop goes $6-8 below entry. Volume during consolidation below 20-period MA = sellers not participating (constructive). Volume expands on next up-day = confirmation. Four indicators. Four separate readings. One trade.
Bottom line: More indicators never equals more edge. Pick one trend indicator. Pick one momentum indicator. Always have ATR. Always check volume. Cut everything else.
compoundpulse.com

How to Backtest a Trading Strategy Without Lying to Yourself

Emmanuel Dessallien — Sun, 29 Mar 2026 17:47:16 +0000

Most backtests look great. That's the problem. They use overfit rules, ignore execution costs, and reward the person who built them instead of the strategy itself.

Why backtest: Validates statistical edge vs bull market luck. Shows behavior across regimes. Reveals worst drawdown. Gives reference point when real trades go against you. Honest caveat: goal isn't a strategy that looks good on paper — it's one that would have been hard to break.

Step 1 — Surgical precision: If you can't explain your entry in one sentence it's not testable. Entry: RSI crosses above 30 while price above 200 EMA. Exit: RSI above 70 OR price drops below 200 EMA. Stop: 2x ATR. Size: 2% risk. Any two people should make identical trades.

Step 2 — Data + regime testing: Min 3-5 years spanning bull and bear. Ideal 10+ years including 2008, 2020, 2022. Critically: segment by regime. A strategy that only works in bull markets is just market beta — you could've bought an index fund.

Step 3 — Run it: CompoundPulse Backtests page — select ticker, timeframe, strategy. No code. Don't adjust parameters based on early results — that's curve fitting.

Step 4 — Metrics + walk-forward: Total return, vs buy & hold (most strategies don't beat it), win rate (40% with 2:1 R/R is profitable), profit factor (>1.5 solid, >2.0 excellent), max drawdown (stress test), Sharpe ratio (>1.0 acceptable, >2.0 strong), number of trades. Then: split into in-sample (optimize) and out-of-sample (holdout). If it only works on data you tuned it for, it found patterns in noise, not signal.

Step 5 — Equity curve: Grows steadily with shallow drawdowns. Red flags: 30%+ drawdowns, long flat periods, only works in bull markets, suspiciously smooth curve (real strategies have rough patches — too smooth = overfitting, not skill).

Common Mistakes (the heart of the article):

Curve fitting: You can make any strategy look great on 5 years of AAPL if you tweak enough parameters. You haven't found an edge — you've memorized the data. Real test: does it work on TSLA? Financials 2018-2022? If it only works when conditions are precisely right, you have a coincidence.
Survivorship bias: Lehman Brothers, Enron, Bed Bath & Beyond aren't in your universe. Biases every result upward. Always in the same direction.
Parameter fragility: Strategy only works with RSI 14 but falls apart at RSI 12 or 16 = fragile. Real edges are robust across parameter ranges. Changing one input by 10% shouldn't destroy results.
Not enough trades: Under 20 is astrology. Need 30-50 minimum. A coin flipped 12 times can "win" 70% without meaning anything.
Slippage: High-frequency strategies on thin stocks look phenomenal and are completely unexecutable. Stock trades 50K shares/day, you need 10K at open — the historical fill price is fiction.
Honest filter: After realistic slippage and commissions, does the strategy still have an edge? If it only works in a frictionless world, it doesn't work.

3 Questions before trusting any backtest:

Does it work on out-of-sample data? (Performance collapses = overfitting found)
Does it work across different assets and sectors? (Robust edges generalize, coincidences don't)
Does it still work if I change parameters slightly? (RSI nudged by 2, MA shifted by 10 days — still consistent = maybe real; falls apart = fragile artifact)
After all 3 pass → paper trade in real time with simulated money before risking capital. CompoundPulse has both built-in — no switching platforms, no code.

If you want to run this workflow without stitching tools together, try CompoundPulse — backtesting, charting, and screening in one place. compoundpulse.com