How to calculate simple moving average faster in C#?

Question

What is the fastest library/algorithm for calculating simple moving average? I wrote my own, but it takes too long on 330 000 items decimal dataset.

• period /

Answer 1

// simple moving average
int moving_average(double *values, double *&averages, int size, int periods)
{
    double sum = 0;
    for (int i = 0; i < size; i ++)
        if (i < periods) {
            sum += values[i];
            averages[i] = (i == periods - 1) ? sum / (double)periods : 0;
        } else {
            sum = sum - values[i - periods] + values[i];
            averages[i] = sum / (double)periods;
        }
    return (size - periods + 1 > 0) ? size - periods + 1 : 0;
}

One C function, 13 lines of codes, simple moving average. Example of usage:

double *values = new double[10]; // the input
double *averages = new double[10]; // the output
values[0] = 55;
values[1] = 113;
values[2] = 92.6;
...
values[9] = 23;
moving_average(values, averages, 10, 5); // 5-day moving average

Answer 2

/// <summary>
/// Fast low CPU usage moving average based on floating point math
/// Note: This algorithm algorithm compensates for floating point error by re-summing the buffer for every 1000 values
/// </summary>
public class FastMovingAverageDouble
{
    /// <summary>
    /// Adjust this as you see fit to suit the scenario
    /// </summary>
    const int MaximumWindowSize = 100;

    /// <summary>
    /// Adjust this as you see fit
    /// </summary>
    const int RecalculateEveryXValues = 1000;

    /// <summary>
    /// Initializes moving average for specified window size
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="_WindowSize">Size of moving average window between 2 and MaximumWindowSize 
    /// Note: this value should not be too large and also bear in mind the possibility of overflow and floating point error as this class internally keeps a sum of the values within the window</param>
    public FastMovingAverageDouble(int _WindowSize)
    {
        if (_WindowSize < 2)
        {
            _WindowSize = 2;
        }
        else if (_WindowSize > MaximumWindowSize)
        {
            _WindowSize = MaximumWindowSize;
        }
        m_WindowSize = _WindowSize;
    }
    private object SyncRoot = new object();
    private Queue<double> Buffer = new Queue<double>();
    private int m_WindowSize;
    private double m_MovingAverage = 0d;
    private double MovingSum = 0d;
    private bool BufferFull;
    private int Counter = 0;

    /// <summary>
    /// Calculated moving average
    /// </summary>
    public double MovingAverage
    {
        get
        {
            lock (SyncRoot)
            {
                return m_MovingAverage;
            }
        }
    }

    /// <summary>
    /// Size of moving average window set by constructor during intialization
    /// </summary>
    public int WindowSize
    {
        get
        {
            return m_WindowSize;
        }
    }

    /// <summary>
    /// Add new value to sequence and recalculate moving average seee <see cref="MovingAverage"/>
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="NewValue">New value to be added</param>
    public void AddValue(int NewValue)
    {
        lock (SyncRoot)
        {
            Buffer.Enqueue(NewValue);
            MovingSum += NewValue;
            if (!BufferFull)
            {
                int BufferSize = Buffer.Count;
                BufferFull = BufferSize == WindowSize;
                m_MovingAverage = MovingSum / BufferSize;
            }
            else
            {
                Counter += 1;
                if (Counter > RecalculateEveryXValues)
                {
                    MovingSum = 0;
                    foreach (double BufferValue in Buffer)
                    {
                        MovingSum += BufferValue;
                    }
                    Counter = 0;
                }
                MovingSum -= Buffer.Dequeue();
                m_MovingAverage = MovingSum / WindowSize;
            }
        }
    }
}

Answer 3

The current (accepted) solution contains an inner loop. It would be more efficient to remove this as well. You can see how this is achieved here:

How to efficiently calculate a moving Standard Deviation

Answer 4

You don't need to keep a running queue. Just pick the latest new entry to the window and drop off the older entry. Notice that this only uses one loop and no extra storage other than a sum.

  // n is the window for your Simple Moving Average
  public List<double> GetMovingAverages(List<Price> prices, int n)
  {
    var movingAverages = new double[prices.Count];
    var runningTotal = 0.0d;       

    for (int i = 0; i < prices.Count; ++i)
    {
      runningTotal += prices[i].Value;
      if( i - n >= 0) {
        var lost = prices[i - n].Value;
        runningTotal -= lost;
        movingAverages[i] = runningTotal / n;
      }
    }
    return movingAverages.ToList();
  }

Answer 5

Tested with Dotnet Core 3 & Linq:

int period = 20;
for(int k=0;data.Count()-period;k++){
   decimal summe = data.Skip(k).Take(period).Sum();
   summe /= (decimal)period;
}

It does rely on Linq and its internal optimization, did not time it.
Uses Skip() and Take() as a "rangeBetween" solution for moving average and then divide the summe by the period quantity.
*The for loop is upper capped to avoid incomplete sum operations.
Reference (C# Microsoft): Skip(), Take(), Sum();

Answer 6

How aboutQueue ?

using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;

public class MovingAverage
{
    private readonly Queue<decimal> _queue;
    private readonly int _period;

    public MovingAverage(int period)
    {
        _period = period;
        _queue = new Queue<decimal>(period);
    }

    public decimal Compute(decimal x)
    {
        if (_queue.Count >= _period)
        {
            _queue.Dequeue();
        }

        _queue.Enqueue(x);

        return _queue.Average();
    }
}

Usage:

MovingAverage ma = new MovingAverage(3);

foreach(var val in new decimal[] { 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 })
{
   Console.WriteLine(ma.Compute(val));
}