Support Board
Date/Time: Tue, 03 Mar 2026 19:18:25 +0000
Better control of region's scale when multiple studies in region
View Count: 244
| [2026-01-09 18:48:08] |
| n8trading - Posts: 68 |
|
Let me start this question by telling you want I'm looking for: - Cumulative Delta Bars - Trades study in its own region separate from the main chart. - I want to always be able to see the last bar (and preferably several bars before the last) in the cumulative delta region without having to manually adjust the region's position as the main chart's price is moving. - A simple moving average line based on the cumulative delta study. So these are the steps I take to set this up: - Add the Cumulative Delta Bars - Trades study to the chart. Set the region to a new region (region 3 in my case). - Set the scale on this study to be Constant Range 500 and Re-Center To The Last Bar On Every Update. Press Ok on scale and study dialogs. - Add the Moving Average - Simple study. Set Based On to the Cumulative Delta study. Set the region to region 3. Leave the scale settings as-is (Automatic) What happens is that the moving average study seems to become the "owner" of the region's scale. So the region's scale is on Automatic (the moving average's scale setting) and the moving average line is not accurate. So my first question is: 1. Is this the best way to set up what I'm trying to do? If so, should/could there be a study setting for region scale "owner" or priority order, or something of the sort? To resolve this, it appears I can go into the moving average's scale settings (either from the study itself or by right-clicking the scale in the region since it is the "owner" of the region's scale) and set it also to Constant Range 500 and Re-Center To The Last Bar On Every Update. But: 2. Is this the correct/expected procedure, and will it in ensure the moving average is displayed accurately based on the cumulative delta? My concern is that this seems a bit cumbersome and could be even worse if you had more than 2 studies in the same region. Thank you, |
| [2026-01-09 19:36:46] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 44906 |
|
For the way you have this setup, the "Moving Average" should not become the "owner" of the scale, rather the scaling should be based on both the studies. In the end, if you want the scale to be controlled by the "Cumulative Delta Bars", then you need to set the scale for any other study in that region to be "Same as Region". Refer to the following: Chart Scale and Scale Adjusting: Same As Region (Scale Range) For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2026-01-14 17:10:16] |
| n8trading - Posts: 68 |
|
The order in which I add the studies appears to be what is determining what I am calling the scale "owner". If I add these studies to a new region in the intuitive order (cumulative delta and then moving average), the moving average study becomes the scale "owner", seemingly because it was added last. If I simply set the moving average study's scale at this point to Same as Region, while my cumulative delta study has Constant Range selected, the moving average is not displayed properly. So the solution I found was to simply remove the cumulative delta study, re-add it (so that it becomes the study that was last added), set the scale setting on it to Constant Range, and then go into the moving average study, set Based On to the cumulative delta study, and set the scale setting on it to Same as Region. I think I have noticed this seemingly inconsistent scale region behavior (technically it is consistent if it is always determined by the last added study) many times but didn't dig into it until now. It is a bit frustrating. So, could we be given better control of which study becomes the "owner" of the region's scale? Thank you, Date Time Of Last Edit: 2026-01-14 17:15:47
|
| [2026-01-14 17:53:55] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 44906 |
|
We went through a test of this when you first posted to ensure that something had not changed that we were not aware of, and it definitely worked as we stated. When you added the Moving Average, it did not take over the "ownership" of the scale. Both the Moving Average and the CVD should have contributed towards the actual scaling that was being used, but within the confines of the "Constant Range" that you had setup. Attached are two images in which we follow the process you went through. The one named "CVD.png" is the Cumulative Delta - Volume, setup with a Constant Range scale. The one named "CVDWithMA.png" is the CVD with the Moving Average - Simple added to it without changing the scaling for this study, so the scale for the Moving Average is "Automatic". As you can see, the scaling hasn't change at all and is set to "Constant Range". This should be what you are seeing. If not, then there must be something about the way you are adding these, or adjusting the scale to be creating something different. Are you using a Left Side Scale by any chance? For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
 CVDWithMA.png / V - Attached On 2026-01-14 17:53:52 UTC - Size: 145.04 KB - 25 views |
| [2026-01-14 18:08:20] |
| n8trading - Posts: 68 |
|
No, not using Left Side Scale. In your second screenshot, if you right-click the scale in the region, which scale settings open? CD or MA? For me, MA opens. The first pain-point here is that when setting up the studies/region, we have no control of which study will "own" the region's scale here. More importantly, I think you'll notice that the MA is not accurate and/or is not "attached" to the CD study, even though Based On is set on the MA study to the CD study. I think you can confirm this by moving the region's range around with your mouse - you'll see the MA move independently of the CD bars. From here to attempt to "fix" this, if you simply go into the MA study's settings and change the scale to Same As Region, you'll see that now the region's scale is blank and the MA is still not accurate or attached to the CD, and for me, I can no longer move the region's range around with my mouse. This seems to be because the region's scale "owner" is the MA study. So, the only way I can correct this and get it working as intended (where the MA is based on and attached to the CD bars) is to remove the CD study and re-add it, and then go into the MA study and put its settings back to Based on CD and scale as Same as region. |
| [2026-01-14 18:52:53] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 44906 |
|
Please setup the chart in the way where it is not correct for you and then get us that chart. Something is simply not making sense to us. Follow these instructions to get us the chart: Support Board Posting Information: Providing Chartbook with Only a Single Chart For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2026-01-14 19:09:44] |
| n8trading - Posts: 68 |
|
Attached as requested.
|
Private File |
| [2026-01-14 20:00:18] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 44906 |
|
We see some of what is occurring. The first thing to understand is that the first study in the "Studies to Graph" list (the one nearest the top of the list) for a given region will be the study that drives the scaling for that region. And any changes made to the scale directly, will update back to that study. Therefore, with the way that chart was setup, you had the following: - Moving Average: Scale set to "Same as Region" - Cumulative Delta Bars - Trades: Scale set to "Constant Range - Re-Center to the Last Bar on Every Update". This created a problem, as a primary scale of "Same as Region" does not make sense, so there was no levels displayed on the side. And then changing the "Moving Average" to "Automatic" did not align things properly, as the Cumulative Delta Bars - Trades was not setup to respect that scaling. In the end, you need to set the scale using the first study in the list for that region, and then you should set any other study - that uses the same scaling - to be "Same as Region". This will always give you the proper results for what you are trying to do. For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2026-01-14 20:22:58] |
| n8trading - Posts: 68 |
|
Yeah, the MA being the first study is the pain-point I'm hoping can be made less painful in the future. We don't have any initial control over which study becomes that top study. It looks like it happens based on the order in which you add studies to the region, so to the end user it will seem random and not intuitive. It seems there should be a setting (probably in Scale Settings) to set that study as the default study for the region, similar to how the "Display as Main Price Graph" option works for studies on the main graph to specify which study is the default/primary study.
|
| [2026-01-14 22:19:15] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 44906 |
|
We have noted the request to have an option to define which study controls the scale in a region. We can not say when we would get to any particular request. Note that this sort of exists for the Left Side Scale - in that there is an option for "Use in Left Side Scale" to define which studies will use that left side scale. But still, the first one found in the list order is the one that drives the actual scaling. For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2026-01-20 18:02:31] |
| n8trading - Posts: 68 |
|
Thanks John. I'd like to add a couple of additional region related pain points. Let me know if you'd prefer I create a new thread, but this is all related and I think this thread helps keep them together and will hopefully lead to a handful of enhancements around regions. To keep things organized, I'll call the first enhancement we already discussed as #1, and the two new ones below are #2 and #3. 2. Region size - If you add a study and put it in a new region, or you remove a study from an existing region (and there could be other scenarios too), the size of your regions get expanded significantly. So any adjustment you had to your region sizes has to be re-done. My suggestion would be to somehow try to maintain the region sizes when making changes to studies/regions. For example, when adding a new region, make the new region's size very small so that it doesn't affect the size of existing region sizes and therefore all you would have to do is adjust the size of the new region instead of having to adjust the size of all regions. 3. Region order - It is tedious to adjust region order. If you have multiple regions (in my case, I often have 8 regions) and multiple studies within each region, I have them setup in a particular order. But say I want to add a new region, and I want to add it in a particular spot (not necessarily at the bottom). So if I have 8 regions, and I want to add another study(ies) to a new region, I might want the new region to be region #4. So intuitively I would move the current bottom region/studies that's in #8 to #9, #7 to #8, etc. But it won't let me do that - it appears a new region cannot be created just by specifying a new region #; If I try to set #9, it will stay at #8 when I Apply/Ok. So I have to add a study to the new region first (this causes issue #1 above to happen). Then, I have to try to start re-ordering regions/studies. You can already see how tedious this can be. So I'm proposing for there to be an easier way to re-order regions and their associated studies. Thank you, |
| [2026-01-20 18:39:07] |
| John - SC Support - Posts: 44906 |
|
We have noted these additional requests.
For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: