It's not like optimal or the best thing, of course not. You can use EMA to effectively trade as well as MACD, it's not the crosses you're looking for. I mean at that point if you have the experience and context to use them you probably have moved on to more efficient indicators or may not even need indicators at all. None the less it's not like it's completely invalid.
Same logic I posted earlier. So let's say you did something that you see works and it works consistently. Now I post a video telling you it doesn't work and tell you to watch it, what is the point? Not to mention there's something called CONTEXT and experience. Context is absolutely critical when day trading potentially for exponential gains. Imagine just taking an indicator and running it over 6 months. If it worked that well it would just be automated. Did he take into account any context or experience? No. Indicators can be by designed just a deviation of price action. If you tell me nothing in the past movement effects future movement, that is factually incorrect. Also, if you say indicators lag so you can't use them, well price action lags than because by the time you see it, it's already done. It's just some talking points people say it's so over done and useless. Momentum absolutely begets momentum. Imagine thinking you can read PA on a chart,but yet an indicator based upon PA can't be used to effectively read the PA. That is a total joke. Indicator can be coded to update intra-bar they don't have to be on bar close as a side note.
This is about useless indicators. I would say macd and RSI are less useless than the EMAs or rvol. Unless it's an indicator that can tell me what the price is going to be in 6 months it's useless. Oh wait. There is one. It's called Elliott wave.
Has it never occurred to you that those indicators were specifically made for the noobs in order to get fleeced by the professionals? There's no place for naivete in trading.
Why do I care? I don't care if 99.9% of people lose trading those indicators. I know someone who has used MACD with success(they've since moved on to better things). Also, I could use a MACD and be profitable with it. It doesn't really matter, it's just more about the people using it than the indicator. It's like giving a monkey a hammer and if they don't build something, saying how much the hammer sucks. Most people don't even know how to properly use indicators. Probably majority of people failing with indicators aren't even using them properly to begin with, that's my point.
Don't even understand the logic. What chance does someone have being successful in trading if they are going to blindly just follow some recommendation of someone to use an indicator? If they are dumb enough to do that, they aren't going to succeed no matter what you give them. Indicators aren't required, but they can be extremely helpful. Particularly custom indicators. If you believe you can read PA and trade it with edge, but an indicator that is just a deviation of PA cannot be used to trade with edge, that is so absurd that let's just agree to disagree.
I'll invert this question in the spirit of the late great Charles Munger. The most useful indicator is obviously your p/l. The inverse of this is that of the biggest losers. Currently it is buyers of groceries, and holders of ev stocks that were hot a few years ago. Another useful indicator is the position of their stops, targets, and general mood. Because the market is always setting up to inflict MAXIMUM PAIN