RSI is almost perfect indicator.
Ion Ex: RSI made top on 10 June and stock closed at 2178.9.There was a divergence on the chart as RSI kept making LH but price kept up.But in yesterday's correction, price exactly visited the closing price of RSI top and cleared the divergence.

More from Mayank Narula
More from Rsi
Have put it in pictorial form.
Read the whole thread to understand better.
Retweet to help everyone understand better. https://t.co/vPYoGgQEqm

A Tattoo has been posting selective screenshots of my Tweets to this followers to showcase how I do not know how to use RSI.
— Nishant Kumar (@nishkumar1977) November 29, 2020
While he runs his shop showing other people down, here are the basics for the wise:
1) RSI above 70 gets into overbought zone but it's the crossover from
Thought provoking, cant learn this sort of applications so quickly from books.
Learnt new ways of looking at RSI 👍
RSI is one of the most versatile indicators in the stock market.
— elearnmarkets (@elearnmarkets) July 3, 2021
View Webinar: https://t.co/Mlov60NPY2
Join @jhunjhunwala_b and learn how to pick multibagger stocks based on some RSI range rules
Use Code WEB20 for 20% OFF.#rsi #stockmarketindia #stocks #profits pic.twitter.com/eVu3SlsxaJ
You May Also Like
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?