Friday, June 16, 2017

No Change to Short Term

The S&P500 Index 2-Hr Chart below is unchanged from that we showed you yesterday. There is still a potential of a triangle to help finish the upward wave in this index. Remember: if a triangle forms it often precedes the last wave in a sequence.

SP500 Cash 2-Hr Chart Potential Triangle already Validated

In very slow and quiet trading, the S&P 500 Index closed up by 0.69 at the end of the day, and the Dow was up +24.38, almost to a new all-time high. It is possible to count the waves since ((e)) and B as a 1, up, 2, down. But, we simply will not be able to substantiate that until there is a higher high wave -- we don't quite have that yet. And neither has Thursday's gap filled either. Still, the now slower trading may be indicative of a triangle.

The ES daily futures again closed above their 18-day SMA, and still have a positive bias, although the daily slow stochastic again closed under the 80 mark. So, something is going on, and it may be a sign of internal weakness. The invalidation level remain the same.

The Dow still remains well within the parameters of an expanding ending diagonal, and, as we noted the fifth waves can get quite aggressive - hence the near new all-time-highs again today.

GOLD has closed for the second day now under the parallel trend channel, we showed in a previous post (LINK) and has two full daily candles sticks underneath that channel, with gaps on the way down. It may be more clearly defining the C wave down.

Well, that's enough for today. Have a good start to the weekend!
TraderJoe

2 comments:

  1. I would argue that green circle c iS probably not done if it's a triangle (c should be the longest time-wise).

    Good stuff TJ!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi kckip .. with the new high on Monday, it should be pretty apparent now that was not the case. The problem was as I had drawn wave ((e)) it really couldn't go any lower and not invalidate by going below wave ((c)). Triangle time relationships do not have rules, but the guideline you cite is correct in certain triangles, not all triangles. Not to fret, triangles are 'tough calls' in every case.

      Delete