Recently, while reviewing trading records, I suddenly had a question—why is it that with the same MACD, some people find it smooth and easy to use, while others repeatedly fall into traps? After careful study, I realized the problem isn’t with the indicator itself—it’s that the MACD parameters aren’t set correctly.

Most people use the default 12-26-9 combination. These parameters are indeed relatively stable: the fast line EMA (12) reflects short-term momentum, the slow line EMA (26) shows the long-term trend, and the signal line EMA (9) filters out noise. But that doesn’t mean it’s the best fit for you. I found the key is that there’s a kind of “consensus effect” in the market—because these are default values, when important signals appear, they do attract a lot of investors’ attention, and that actually becomes one of its advantages.

That said, if you’re a short-term trader or you trade in a highly volatile crypto market, 12-26-9 may feel a bit too smooth. I tried the MACD (5-35-5) parameters, and the response is definitely much faster, allowing you to capture the points where price starts rising and falling more precisely—but the trade-off is that noise also increases noticeably. There’s also 8-17-9, which fits short-term forex charts; 19-39-9, which is more for medium- to long-term swings; and 24-52-18, which is for long-term investors. Sensitivity and stability are always inversely related— the more sensitive the signals are, the more false signals you get; the more stable they are, the fewer signals you have, but the higher their reference value.

I’ve done my own comparison experiment: I used Bitcoin daily data from the first half of 2025 (from January to June) for testing. Using 12-26-9 produced 7 clear signals—after 2 of the golden crosses, price successfully moved upward, while the other 5 failed. Switching to 5-35-5 produced 13 signals—after 5 of them, there were clearly noticeable rises or falls, and the rest were only minor fluctuations. What’s especially interesting is the surge on April 10: both parameter sets captured the move, but the death cross for 5-35-5 appeared earlier, so the profit ended up being a bit less.

Here’s a trap that many people easily fall into—overfitting. In order for MACD parameters to perform perfectly in backtests, some people deliberately adjust them to match past price action exactly. The result is that it looks like you’ve aced an exam by filling in the answers from the past, but it can’t be used in real live trading. My suggestion is to first choose a set of parameters that fits your trading style, then do long-term observation and backtesting. Only use them in live trading after you confirm they match your entry and exit logic. If you find that this parameter set hasn’t been performing well recently, consider adjusting—but don’t change parameters frequently. Otherwise, it will only make MACD become a stumbling block in your analysis.

Someone asked me whether it’s possible to use multiple MACD parameter sets at the same time. Yes, some people do monitor two sets simultaneously to filter out noise, but that also means more signals—you then need to be able to effectively judge which one is the real golden cross.

In the end, there’s no single “best” MACD parameter—only the one that’s most suitable. For beginners, I recommend starting with the default 12-26-9 to get a feel for the market rhythm. If you find the default values can’t effectively judge the market, try other combinations based on your trading habits—but remember to backtest and verify. Recently, I’ve also been observing the MACD performance of different coins across different timeframes. If you’re interested, you can try it yourself and find the parameter set that works best for you.