MTF Trendlines - Why Lower TF “Noise” Often Reacts to Higher TFPYTH / TetherUSBINANCE:PYTHUSDTAGProLabsMTF Trendlines - Why Lower TF “Noise” Often Reacts to Higher TF Diagonals If you trade lower timeframes, you’ve seen this: A local diagonal breaks… then price snaps back as if “someone defended it.” Often, the “defense” is simply higher timeframe structure. This script supports multi-timeframe (MTF) context so you can compare: - Local diagonals (execution context) - Higher timeframe diagonals (bias context) A clean top-down workflow: 1) Choose a higher timeframe for structure clarity (e.g., 4H / 1D) - Identify dominant diagonals at the higher horizon (Mega or higher-context lines). 2) Execute on a lower timeframe (e.g., 15m / 1H) - Treat any lower TF signal against a higher TF diagonal as higher risk. - Prefer alignment: lower TF setups that occur near higher TF structure. 3) Look for confluence with horizontal S/R Diagonal structure complements horizontal levels. Many of the best decision zones are where both align. Practical benefit: You stop treating every micro break as a regime shift, because you can see the bigger boundary above. Notes: MTF data is aggregated. Exact appearance can differ across timeframes and sessions — this is expected behavior in MTF analysis. Risk disclosure: Educational content only. Not financial advice.