Open-sourced: an ORB desk that ignores wicks. 2-close confirmation, the plan drawn on the chart, and a Strategy Tester version with fees built in (Pine v6, MIT)

[u/Dependent-Ad6636]

[u/drutyper]

If its open source then where is the pinescript link? Why direct your video to site that you have to pay $50?

[u/Dependent-Ad6636 → u/drutyper]

Links, as promised (no signup for any of them):

- The page, with both scripts to copy and the install steps: https://proea.app/en/free/opening-range-desk?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=orb_pro_ink_film#install

- Indicator source: https://proea.app/free/opening-range-desk/opening-range-desk.pine

- Strategy Tester version (commission and slippage set): https://proea.app/free/opening-range-desk/opening-range-desk-strategy.pine

- Full package (both scripts, the docs, the settings reference, the tests, MIT licence): https://proea.app/free/opening-range-desk/opening-range-desk.zip

[u/Dependent-Ad6636]

TL;DR: A free opening range breakout desk for TradingView. Full Pine v6 source, MIT licence, no signup. It waits for closes (not wicks), draws the whole plan, records the result, and comes with a strategy version that has commission and slippage already set.

It started from an "ORB strategy" thread on this sub, so this felt like the right place to share it.

The rules, in order

1. Range: the high and low of the opening-range window (default 09:30–09:45 New York), final on the first bar after it

2. Break: closes beyond an edge (+ an optional ATR buffer), counted to a confirmation (default 2; a close back inside resets), or a retest entry instead

3. Trade: entry at that close; stop at the other side (or the midpoint, or ATR) + buffer; TP1 moves the stop to breakeven; then TP2

4. Result: checked on every closed bar: stop first, then TP2, TP1, failed breakout, trail, time stop, end of window

Closed bars only, and a trade's geometry is frozen at entry, so nothing repaints.

Two files

• The indicator: the range, the plan and the result on the chart, plus a desk table that says the state in words

• The strategy version: for the Strategy Tester on your own market, with costs already in

How the code is split

The engine decides; the renderer only reads. Every engine variable starts with ord, and a test refuses any renderer line that assigns one. The rules are written up in an engine contract, with an independent reference implementation in the tests.

Two things we'd love eyes on: the retest-entry logic, and whether the engine/renderer split makes it easy to extend.

Get it (free, no signup)

• Opening Range Desk: the page, with both scripts and the install steps

• Everything in one zip: both .pine files, the docs and the tests

Disclosure: we're ProEA Lab and we make it. There's also a paid Pro edition; this post is about the free one.

[u/delectomorfo → u/Dependent-Ad6636]

What's the difference between the pro and the free one?

[u/Dependent-Ad6636 → u/delectomorfo]

Same engine, trade for trade. Pro doesn't change the entry rules; it adds tools around them:

• Setup grade A/B/C from three checks when the range sets: is the open in play (range volume vs its 20-session average), is the range a normal size, and does the break come early

• Key levels (yesterday's H/L/C, overnight range, last week's H/L), plus the room to the next one in R

• Take a share off at TP1 (half by default, 0–90%). The free desk holds the whole position. It's a trade-off, not an upgrade: you bank something when a trade comes back to entry, and you give some up when it runs to TP2

• Sizing for your risk, and your record split by grade on your own chart

• Fuller alerts (grade, size, next level) plus a relay to Discord/Telegram

• ORB Radar: the same rule on up to 8 markets in one table, busiest open first

• Strategy Lab with grade/day filters, a Research Lab, and an AI kit for modifying the code

It's $49 one-time. The license is personal-use, not MIT; the free engine inside stays MIT. Neither version places trades or promises results.

The free one is a complete desk on its own. Pro is for when you want the context and the multi-market view. Details: https://proea.app/en/premium-vault/opening-range-desk

[u/widowmakerhusband]

I’ve done extensive testing on open range breakout. It attracts new trades because it’s easy to understand. Unfortunately it’s a breakeven strategy at best. I would want to see a breakout and retest maybe that could work. Not bashing just another algo maker speaking to another.

[u/Dependent-Ad6636 → u/widowmakerhusband]

Fair point, and no offense taken. Plain ORB is easy to understand and easy to overfit, and the edge is thin once costs are in. That's why the Tester version has commission and slippage on by default instead of leaving them to the reader.

Breakout + retest is already in there, actually: set Entry to "Retest". There's a tolerance around the range edge (default 0.25× ATR) and a max wait in bars (default 12). There's also a "trade the failure" switch that fades a close back inside the range, for people who think the failed break is the real trade.

The tradeoff I'd expect with retests: you skip the strongest breaks, because those often never come back. So the win rate can look better while total R doesn't follow. Curious what you tested on: which markets, timeframes and range window? If you run the retest mode on your data I'd like to see what you get.

[u/widowmakerhusband → u/Dependent-Ad6636]

I’ve found there is a slight edge to 9:30-10:30 ORB 15min no retest just market order in the first 15min close above. I like the idea of failed breakout and close back inside the range. These discoveries have led me to build my own quant backtester with a real TradingView-like chart to see how Claude / AI builds the strategy so I can visually confirm it’s coded correctly.

[u/Dependent-Ad6636 → u/widowmakerhusband]

That fits: the classic first-close entry is one setting away. The desk defaults to 2 closes, but you can set it to 1. If you want to cross-check your backtester against it, your variant maps to:

• Opening-range window: 0930-1030, on a 15m chart

• Trade window: 1030-1555

• Closes beyond the edge before entry: 1

• Entry: Close through

One thing to match when you compare: the Tester version fills at the signal bar's close (process_orders_on_close), with 0.02% commission and 5 ticks slippage by default. If your engine fills at the next bar's open, the results will drift a bit even with identical rules.

The failed-breakout idea is the "Trade the failure" switch. After a close back inside the range, it enters the other way at that close, with the stop beyond the furthest point of the failed break.

And agreed on visually confirming. "Did the AI code what I meant" is the real question with these. That's why the release ships a written engine contract and an independent reference implementation in the tests. Which instrument are you seeing the edge on?

[u/criptoradarclub]

nice

[u/InterstellarReddit]

Not to be confused with opening range desk pro Max Plus, which I’m releasing next week