thanks joe. what would be degree violation? im assuming he is looking at chart above and calling recent low (A). so is (A) or future ( B) the violation and why? if you are referring to a different violation can you explain. thanks

If an expanded flat is made, as the gentleman claimed, then C would force the wave to be even larger than (4); since it would be larger than A. It is 'already' larger than Wave (4). It would, thus, become even more so. The wave since wave (4), i .e. wave (5), 'can not' be corrected with a wave that is larger than wave (4), and by a wave which is larger than any of the internal sub-waves of (5). It must be a larger scale correction.

ok. im going to try to keep it simple. lets say wave (5) ends either 1 3 or 5 of a larger degree. if the correction after (5) is "too large" compared to its subwaves or (4), then we know that (5) ended 5, not 1 or 3, thus making the correction a higher degree. In the diagram above i assume that the (5) is (5) of 3, which is why the correction would be too large. Is this accurate?

ET per my calculation (4) = 266 days wave A (from 2942 top to 2331 bottom) = 98 days Don't you think there is plenty of time for B up and C down considering this volatile market.

higher degree of waves of degree which contains (1) (3) (5). That degree has no label on chart, but (5) ends a higher degree wave. I am calling that wave either 1 3 or 5. It would be the label above (5).

in the gentleman's example about expanded flat, are you inferring that he believes (5) has not occurred and the flat is still part of (iv) of (5), and you are making it clear that it (5) has to be counted as done?

Marc: Your 4:30pm comment is a great example of reverse engineering to determine what would have to be different to allow the possible flat. Kudos! :o)

I think we kan count an impulse down from the Friday top on 1 min chart with ii as an expanded flat iv as a sharp and v as an expanded diagonal. And after that we might also finished a regular flat for the bigger (ii) correction that retraced 78.6 in price and almost 200% in time before close.

joe this is an excellent post which ties together a lot of your thoughts. I have checked and even a retest of the trendline as (iv) will stay below wave (i) and be consistent with your current count.

Joe, right now if we make a lower low as your count suggests, then there will be degree violation as well it will be longer than (4). So either we are in higher degree or we have to end ((iii)) - not (iii) - at 12/24 940 am. I'll dig deeper later but its another example of a wave knowing how long it can travel...

Wave (2) looks the same as (ii) of (3) and wave (iv) of (3) is much shorter in time than wave (ii) of (3) but it looks like an irregular flat followed by an ending diagonal (v) of (3). So by alternating time in this case would make this correction wave (4) still, with a target around 15-1600 on SPX, much longer in time than wave (2) and also an irregular flat with wave (5) still ahead??? Ending diagonal wave (5)???? Thank you Joe for Great analysis!

No. There is a daily triangle on the daily for wave 4 of (5). The triangle precedes "the last wave up". There is also a clear diagonal for v of 5, which called the top to the day. The triangles and diagonals have already occurred and now everyone is trying to find them.

Just be aware I was later able to resolve this conflict by the proper location of minute ((i)) and minute ((ii)) which resulted in the exactly correct count to the top.

If this is a (iv) triangle shouldn’t this wave be shorter in time and price than the higher degree minor(4)? Maybe we can compare the internal legs as well? The (a) wave of minor (4) took 10 days and we have 7 for this potential (a) of (iv). Or can’t we compare these waves because of this (iv) triangle most likely is part of a different trend so the degrees that matter are only ones from 3/10?

does b wave of (iv) have any limit on its size based on subwaves of (iii) or (i). at some point does it matter that its counteryrnd yet bigher than same degrre waves that are within trend

Joe, I've been trying to consider the larger picture of the market position at this point. We are 52 pts away from overlap of minuette (i) and 72 pts away from overlap of minute ((i)). These are not great distances given the market swings of the last few weeks. There is ample room on both the bollinger bands and the stochastic readings to allow us to move higher to those levels. I would think if we do head in that direction we are at some point going to have to start to consider the possibility that we are in a minor 1 diagonal from the top or the remote possibility that the count at the top is wrong at the intermediate degree level. Would like to hear any thoughts you may have on this.

PT, is it possible to have a multi year "bear" market, where we would have 3 wave moves. So recent move from top is WXY, then next few months we get 3 waves up, then aother WXY down, giving us a larger 3 waves down. Can we entertain or reconcile the idea of large degree correction AND a recent WXY from top as first move? thanks in advance

Some food for thought: 1. Assuming we're in (iv) of ((iii)), and we violate (i). This would seem to suggest that ((iii)) is actually a "C" wave, with a possible exp. diagonal. OR 2. From Oct 3rd high we have a WXY (3 waves) ending Dec 24th. This all being larger A wave. As it is 3-3-3, would seem to rule out zigzag (5-3-5). With a 3-3-3 A wave, this could suggest (among other things) a possible flat (a .886 retracement takes us to a retest of Jan '18 peak). 90% isnt much further from there. This assumes we are now in the move to larger B as A completed. Of course, if our current move violates ((i)) as well as (i) of ((iii)), needless to say this raises additional questions. But, we haven't violated either yet.

Marc, I believe w-x-y is a complete corrective pattern and can't be used as a sub wave of a larger pattern. What you are proposing would make w-x-y a motive wave as opposed to a corrective wave.

tacharts, Point 1 - No c wave in a diagonal, only 1-5. Point 2 - My point above described as remote was addressing the fact that a 3 wave move from the top if not a diagonal would make the move corrective regardless of it's final form and therefore would mean the top was not the top.

PT- Point 1 - Perhaps I wasnt clear. I was suggesting that if (iv) violates (i), this could suggest a diagonal (exp in this case), implying that we have an abc (c with ending exp diagonal) rather than a ((1)), ((ii)), ((iii)). Point 2 - exactly. :o)

Joe, someone posted a video showing the 1917-1929 chart and how its almost identical to 2000-2018 chart. Thought I would share. If ok with you I would share. Thanks for your insight.

I offer the following strictly from a price action point of view: 1. Every day of (iii) (on my cash chart) was a down day (red bar), with final of Dec 24th closing at the bottom of the range. Given this, one might expect to see a weak (iv) retracement. 2. Instead, we get a 3 close reversal day following (made lower low and closed higher than 3 prior days). Follow through on following day as well. 3. (iv) retracement to date has exceeded 50% of (iii).

Given these factors, it would seem reasonable to consider that perhaps something else is in play. This does not say we can't be in (iv), but I believe it prudent to consider the possibility that we may not be.

2550 is where C =.618% of A. If that is exceeded it would imply the next fib relationship which is equality. 2557 is the 61.8% retracement of (iii). If that is exceeded the likelyhood of this move up being (iv) begins to decrease and the possibility of a minor 1 diagonal off of the top increases.

Marc, you did bring that up awhile ago, Kudo's. I am still having problems with it though. I will admit my thinking might not be correct but here is what I'm wrestling with.

1. You may recall that I've mentioned several times in the past that the initial move off of the top (currently labeled Minute((i)) could be counted as a 3 or as a 5. It looks more like a 3 to me than a 5. 2. It is impossible to count the last down move to 2347 as 5 waves. 3. That leaves us with 3-3-3 4. Leading diagonals are supposed to be 5-3-5-3-5. I know it has been said that they can be all 3's like an ending diagonal but I'm not convinced. As the book says it is a replacement for an impulse and should be actionary in nature. All 3's is corrective in nature. 5. The implications of this is the top was not "The Top" and we could be in a prolonged sideways pattern such as a triangle or a flat with a very wide range. Again, there may be flaws in my thinking and I'm sure someone will point them out if so.

PT thanks for taking time to write that comment. its very easy to count the move down as 5 waves. IF you were to take out the fed pop you would see the brief 4th wave. including the fed pop doesnt create any violations. my guess is looking to retest that channel as joe wrote about over weekend. whether we pullback from here 2600 or 2630 is only pressing matter

ES is yet to make a new high for 5th wave on 15 mins chart for the wave which started on 1/7 @ 6.15, it might fail but cash might hang in there until then.

Eric, i dont see a (4th) wave in 5th wave, we atleast need to see 4th and then 5th for conclude end of move. Am referring to move which started 6.15 on 1/7 as the 5th wave.

wave 1 - 2523 - 2534 wave 2 - 2534 - 2524 wave 3 is in progress.

ES having hard time taking out 2564.75, now going lower. Not sure if wave 3 = wave 5 allowed in ending diagonal or may be lower time frame has correctly formed ending diagona. Don't want to go below 5 mins chart.

Hmm once again we might have seen one of those shallow 4 if that’s the case your diagonal was the 5, but no overlap yet and ewo still ok (-40% at 14.4)

Just awakened from sleeping off a midnight shift, so my tired eyes may be deceiving me. However, this entire move off the 12/24 lows in the SPX looks like a potential w-x-y-x-z, with w,y,z each 121-123 points. This would be either all of or (more likely) just part of (iv) with the implication of lower lows ahead. Plus, there is a clear impulse lower off today's highs, followed by an almost exact 61.8% retracement...

Not sure what this means (if anything): Our move from low on Dec 26th to our high today (2hr cash) is virtually symmetric both in price/time with the rally from Oct 29th low to Nov 7th high.

Add'ly, the Nov 7 rally retraced to .618, and our rally has retraced to a smidge above the .618 (of (iii) as designated), and .50 of the move down from Dec 3rd. fwiw.

Heh, oh ye of little faith. I'm fully loaded with shorts and puts now.

I'll mention the Puetz cycle, low odds I know, but we have lunar and solar eclipses at this time, very risky time, easy to see investors turn to panic.

IF today's gap closes fully, it would provide increased confidence that wave (iv) has reached its maximum; wave (iv) may also go on to form a triangle to provide better net travel with wave (ii).

Joe, while the current rally up from 2347 has no overlap, it is larger in points and percentage than your wave ((ii)). Why wouldn't you call that a degree violation? Thanks

Just like in the bull market on the way up, I said wave Minor 4 'needed' to form a triangle, otherwise it would be longer in points than Intermediate (4), that is because triangles are measured to their (e) waves. The triangle is what we got at the top. A special kind of triangle is what I am expecting now.

Both COMP and NDX have overlapped, and according to Neely, no part of a wave 4 triangle can overlap any part of wave 1 or 2. https://www.neowave.com/qow/qow-archive-46.asp

#mbicta - comp and ndx overlap at (i) but interesting not overlap at ((i)) October low. NDX actually came within .01 overlapping ((i))! I do not know what to make of it.

Joe, there are a lot of EW detractors out there, but watching ES repelled at 2581 today show me that it works as long as it's done properly. Thanks for your posts and comments here.

I will make the effort to get to grips with it this year, hope you bank some nice coin in this next wave down.

Possible correction ending. Wave A a - 10.50 - 11.15 b - 11.15 - 11.35 c - 11.35 - 12.25 B - 12.25 - 12.50 C - 12.50 - 14.15 forming an ending diagonal.

joe - im going through the work, need clarification

This first post

" So, either the wave ends at the arrow or wave (iii) ended at the bottom of the wave on 12/20 - and there is a long b wave in a flat - which adds more cushion. "

suggests wave (iii)did not end at low of wave, yet the next post " Three FED chair persons were interviewed today, and the result, so far, is 'three-waves-up". The three waves up, so far, are: 0 = 2,347, a = 2,521, b = 2,444, and c = 2,538. " suggests you are now ending (iii) at bottom of the move down.

336.32 points 2939.86-2603.54 ((i)) from (ii) 2685.44 is 2349.12 farthest (iii) can travel

so (iii) ends before the low in December.

its not clear then when (iii) ends and (iv) begins and if 4 contains the actual low of the move down how do we count from there? thanks

We have retraced .382+ of the drop from 10/3 - 12/26. This would allow for being in "a" of an abc (of larger B). This would imply that A is in. Additionally, from 12/26 low, the AB=CD measure comes in around 2616 area.

I think ET is expecting a descending barrier triangle in this case. This would work well with alternation of (ii), but this better turn down soon, not much room left before invalidation. ET thanks for all your posts!

Arguably, our move down from 10/3 high could be viewed as 4 3 wave legs. Should we turn down, if this 5th leg were to be 3 waves as well, seems a case could be presented for a WXYXZ complex corrective pattern, ending the overall correction. I'm certainly no expert, but on the surface appears viable.

I still consider that our current rally can be the "a" of an abc to larger B high.

As an add'l note, at this time the SPX-USD has taken out this morning's high.

Joe, last year i raised possibility that the top in October could be first wave of extended 5th, not the entire 5th. you mentioned at the time that it looked too small. Based on what we now know is it possible that we are extending this larger wave from 2016?

Something that speaks for this is that the xlk tech sector which is the biggest sector in sp500 can be counted 1-2 from 2002-2008 and might be in 4 (same with ndx). Anyone that has another alternate on how to count the higher low on 2008?!

How come you guys are not considering the fact that last high could be the third wave (highest EWO recorded on monthly chart) ...the fifth wave may yet come.

Or the start of wave B to retest Jan '18 high? Or B to new highs for an expanding flat?

ReplyDeleteNo, it is already way longer than (4); that is a degree violation.

Deletethanks joe. what would be degree violation? im assuming he is looking at chart above and calling recent low (A). so is (A) or future ( B) the violation and why? if you are referring to a different violation can you explain. thanks

Deletethank you joe

Deleteso is it then possible if (5) is really (5) of 5?

If an expanded flat is made, as the gentleman claimed, then C would force the wave to be even larger than (4); since it would be larger than A. It is 'already' larger than Wave (4). It would, thus, become even more so. The wave since wave (4), i .e. wave (5), 'can not' be corrected with a wave that is larger than wave (4), and by a wave which is larger than any of the internal sub-waves of (5). It must be a larger scale correction.

DeleteI have no idea what your comment of 3:15 pm refers to.

Deletelooks like you added to post. if i still have question i will carefully reword.

Deleteok. im going to try to keep it simple. lets say wave (5) ends either 1 3 or 5 of a larger degree. if the correction after (5) is "too large" compared to its subwaves or (4), then we know that (5) ended 5, not 1 or 3, thus making the correction a higher degree. In the diagram above i assume that the (5) is (5) of 3, which is why the correction would be too large. Is this accurate?

DeleteET per my calculation (4) = 266 days

Deletewave A (from 2942 top to 2331 bottom) = 98 days

Don't you think there is plenty of time for B up and C down considering this volatile market.

@ Marc.. No. The specific symbols (1),(3) and (5) are used for a reason. I have no idea what your symbols of 1, 3, or 5 then refer to.

Delete@Dandrew; no 3 x ~100 = 300; longer than 266.

Deletehigher degree of waves of degree which contains (1) (3) (5). That degree has no label on chart, but (5) ends a higher degree wave. I am calling that wave either 1 3 or 5. It would be the label above (5).

Deletein the gentleman's example about expanded flat, are you inferring that he believes (5) has not occurred and the flat is still part of (iv) of (5), and you are making it clear that it (5) has to be counted as done?

DeleteYes.

DeleteTx TJ for yr patience

DeleteMarc:

DeleteYour 4:30pm comment is a great example of reverse engineering to determine what would have to be different to allow the possible flat. Kudos! :o)

Thanks for the update, Joe!

ReplyDeleteThat's a great one TJ!

ReplyDeleteI think we kan count an impulse down from the Friday top on 1 min chart with ii as an expanded flat iv as a sharp and v as an expanded diagonal. And after that we might also finished a regular flat for the bigger (ii) correction that retraced 78.6 in price and almost 200% in time before close.

There is nothing impulsive about the decline off Friday's highs.

ReplyDeleteWhat you have are clearly overlapping corrective waves imho....

No overlap between ii/iv on ny data feed, What overlap do you mean?

Deletei/iv*

DeleteErik B:

DeleteWe could be looking at different charts. I am looking at the cash indices

Im also looking at cash with terminal points for i=2532.63, iv=2531.61 as you see no overlap!

Deletejoe this is an excellent post which ties together a lot of your thoughts. I have checked and even a retest of the trendline as (iv) will stay below wave (i) and be consistent with your current count.

ReplyDeleteJoe, right now if we make a lower low as your count suggests, then there will be degree violation as well it will be longer than (4). So either we are in higher degree or we have to end ((iii)) - not (iii) - at 12/24 940 am. I'll dig deeper later but its another example of a wave knowing how long it can travel...

ReplyDeleteWave (2) looks the same as (ii) of (3) and wave (iv) of (3) is much shorter in time than wave (ii) of (3) but it looks like an irregular flat followed by an ending diagonal (v) of (3). So by alternating time in this case would make this correction wave (4) still, with a target around 15-1600 on SPX, much longer in time than wave (2) and also an irregular flat with wave (5) still ahead??? Ending diagonal wave (5)???? Thank you Joe for Great analysis!

ReplyDeleteNo. There is a daily triangle on the daily for wave 4 of (5). The triangle precedes "the last wave up". There is also a clear diagonal for v of 5, which called the top to the day. The triangles and diagonals have already occurred and now everyone is trying to find them.

Deletehi joe

ReplyDeletethis increase would be phase (iv) or phase ((iv))?

in any case it becomes complicated

thank you joe for your work

Still (iv).

DeleteET how can i learn on degree violation

ReplyDelete@Dandrew

DeleteRead this post for example

http://studyofcycles.blogspot.com/2017/11/profound-conflict-and-ways-forward.html

Just be aware I was later able to resolve this conflict by the proper location of minute ((i)) and minute ((ii)) which resulted in the exactly correct count to the top.

DeleteThx

DeleteDandrew, if you have not heard this audio interview on degree labeling and Elliott Wave mistakes, it will get you started.

Deletehttps://www.neowave.com/audiointerviews/201710/interview.mp3

TJ

Thx very much Joe + John

DeleteTJ here comes a long-shot.

ReplyDeleteIf this is a (iv) triangle shouldn’t this wave be shorter in time and price than the higher degree minor(4)? Maybe we can compare the internal legs as well? The (a) wave of minor (4) took 10 days and we have 7 for this potential (a) of (iv). Or can’t we compare these waves because of this (iv) triangle most likely is part of a different trend so the degrees that matter are only ones from 3/10?

All degrees matter.

DeleteThat’s very interesting and useful thanks

ReplyDeleteHi ET Im always afraid using long term trend line and log chart

ReplyDeleteCan you help me doctor...

does b wave of (iv) have any limit on its size based on subwaves of (iii) or (i). at some point does it matter that its counteryrnd yet bigher than same degrre waves that are within trend

ReplyDeletei meant countertrend yet higher

ReplyDeleteJoe,

ReplyDeleteI've been trying to consider the larger picture of the market position at this point. We are 52 pts away from overlap of minuette (i) and 72 pts away from overlap of minute ((i)). These are not great distances given the market swings of the last few weeks. There is ample room on both the bollinger bands and the stochastic readings to allow us to move higher to those levels. I would think if we do head in that direction we are at some point going to have to start to consider the possibility that we are in a minor 1 diagonal from the top or the remote possibility that the count at the top is wrong at the intermediate degree level. Would like to hear any thoughts you may have on this.

PT, is it possible to have a multi year "bear" market, where we would have 3 wave moves. So recent move from top is WXY, then next few months we get 3 waves up, then aother WXY down, giving us a larger 3 waves down. Can we entertain or reconcile the idea of large degree correction AND a recent WXY from top as first move? thanks in advance

DeleteSome food for thought:

Delete1. Assuming we're in (iv) of ((iii)), and we violate (i). This would seem to suggest that ((iii)) is actually a "C" wave, with a possible exp. diagonal. OR

2. From Oct 3rd high we have a WXY (3 waves) ending Dec 24th. This all being larger A wave. As it is 3-3-3, would seem to rule out zigzag (5-3-5). With a 3-3-3 A wave, this could suggest (among other things) a possible flat (a .886 retracement takes us to a retest of Jan '18 peak). 90% isnt much further from there. This assumes we are now in the move to larger B as A completed.

Of course, if our current move violates ((i)) as well as (i) of ((iii)), needless to say this raises additional questions. But, we haven't violated either yet.

Marc, I believe w-x-y is a complete corrective pattern and can't be used as a sub wave of a larger pattern. What you are proposing would make w-x-y a motive wave as opposed to a corrective wave.

Deletetacharts,

Point 1 - No c wave in a diagonal, only 1-5.

Point 2 - My point above described as remote was addressing the fact that a 3 wave move from the top if not a diagonal would make the move corrective regardless of it's final form and therefore would mean the top was not the top.

PT-

DeletePoint 1 - Perhaps I wasnt clear. I was suggesting that if (iv) violates (i), this could suggest a diagonal (exp in this case), implying that we have an abc (c with ending exp diagonal) rather than a ((1)), ((ii)), ((iii)).

Point 2 - exactly. :o)

Sorry, typo. ((1)) should be ((i)).

Deletetop as in first of degree since 1927? we can be in a 4th wave if hifh degree of top in 3 waves pt?

DeleteJoe, someone posted a video showing the 1917-1929 chart and how its almost identical to 2000-2018 chart. Thought I would share. If ok with you I would share. Thanks for your insight.

ReplyDeleteWould love to see it thanks

DeleteMy guess is the best clue as to what comes next will be delivered via wave degrees and violation insight. Thats why we are here. Thanks ET.

ReplyDeleteES finding trouble at the bottom of base channel.

ReplyDeleteI offer the following strictly from a price action point of view:

ReplyDelete1. Every day of (iii) (on my cash chart) was a down day (red bar), with final of Dec 24th closing at the bottom of the range. Given this, one might expect to see a weak (iv) retracement.

2. Instead, we get a 3 close reversal day following (made lower low and closed higher than 3 prior days). Follow through on following day as well.

3. (iv) retracement to date has exceeded 50% of (iii).

Given these factors, it would seem reasonable to consider that perhaps something else is in play. This does not say we can't be in (iv), but I believe it prudent to consider the possibility that we may not be.

If the triangle Joe mentioned Friday was a B wave it opens the possebility for an ending diagonal in the making

ReplyDeleteMaybe no triangle at all, but the top on Friday need to me (i) if an ending diagonal shall have a chance

DeleteWe're thinking the same; since 'a' was 'not' a diagonal in cash; then 'c' can be.

Deletehttps://invst.ly/9ppm3

TJ

That’s great TJ let’s see

DeleteFrom a time standpoint 4 should not complete until Tuesday at a minimum if 4>3 (time wise). Is this correct?

ReplyDeleteSorry, wasn't clear as to degree should state (iv)>(iii) in time.

DeletePoint being: there is no purpose in trying to count (iv) complete in price before it is complete in time.

DeleteLooking to reach 2554-66 on this push up. We'll see.

ReplyDelete2550 is where C =.618% of A. If that is exceeded it would imply the next fib relationship which is equality. 2557 is the 61.8% retracement of (iii). If that is exceeded the likelyhood of this move up being (iv) begins to decrease and the possibility of a minor 1 diagonal off of the top increases.

DeletePT, I noticed that yesterday and thinking the same.

DeletePT thats diagonal that once seemed highly unlikely

DeleteMarc, you did bring that up awhile ago, Kudo's.

DeleteI am still having problems with it though. I will admit my thinking might not be correct but here is what I'm wrestling with.

1. You may recall that I've mentioned several times in the past that the initial move off of the top (currently labeled Minute((i)) could be counted as a 3 or as a 5. It looks more like a 3 to me than a 5.

2. It is impossible to count the last down move to 2347 as 5 waves.

3. That leaves us with 3-3-3

4. Leading diagonals are supposed to be 5-3-5-3-5. I know it has been said that they can be all 3's like an ending diagonal but I'm not convinced. As the book says it is a replacement for an impulse and should be actionary in nature. All 3's is corrective in nature.

5. The implications of this is the top was not "The Top" and we could be in a prolonged sideways pattern such as a triangle or a flat with a very wide range.

Again, there may be flaws in my thinking and I'm sure someone will point them out if so.

2 is false

Deletethe only criticism of my count was one wave looked too small. Welcome to EW - where 3's and 5's are interchangeable in hindsight.

Reached the top of the 2554-66 range at 2566.16. A nice day on the Spoos (so far).

DeletePT regarding 1 how do you count initial move as 3??

DeletePT-

DeleteReplied to your list of 5 below. Nice observations. :o)

PT thanks for taking time to write that comment. its very easy to count the move down as 5 waves. IF you were to take out the fed pop you would see the brief 4th wave. including the fed pop doesnt create any violations. my guess is looking to retest that channel as joe wrote about over weekend. whether we pullback from here 2600 or 2630 is only pressing matter

DeleteJoe -

ReplyDeleteI thank you for all of the things I have learned here! I bid you adieu.

:o)

ES is yet to make a new high for 5th wave on 15 mins chart for the wave which started on 1/7 @ 6.15, it might fail but cash might hang in there until then.

ReplyDeleteIf ES finished triangle 15:50am last wave should fit with diagonal on cash

ReplyDeleteEric, i dont see a (4th) wave in 5th wave, we atleast need to see 4th and then 5th for conclude end of move. Am referring to move which started 6.15 on 1/7 as the 5th wave.

Deletewave 1 - 2523 - 2534

wave 2 - 2534 - 2524

wave 3 is in progress.

yes diagonal invalidated and I now see same on cash as you as best alt but I meant bigger degree triangle on ES finished 15:50

Deletehttps://imgur.com/a/sY9bb6u

ReplyDeleteAs i warned a week ago, 240 minute SPX, 112 bars, confirms wave 4 from October high. Higher degree move in progress. Not necessarily a wave 4.

annotated chart

Deletehttps://imgur.com/a/6dtOq8G

Without question,and that has been abundantly clear for a host of reasons, imho...

ReplyDeleteyep

DeleteSeeing ending diagonal on ES 5 mins chart.

ReplyDeletewave 1 2545 - 2562

wave 2 2562 - 2555

wave 3 2555 - 2564

wave 4 2563 - 2559

wave 5 2559 - 2564.75

This is happenng on 162nd bar on 15 mins chart which is also a golden ratio no.

2567.5 is the invalidation point where wave 5 will become longer than wave 3 of ending diagonal

DeleteInvalidated !

Deletewave 3 = wave 5

DeleteES having hard time taking out 2564.75, now going lower.

DeleteNot sure if wave 3 = wave 5 allowed in ending diagonal or may be lower time frame has correctly formed ending diagona. Don't want to go below 5 mins chart.

Now below 4th wave of diagonal pointed out earlier.

Deletediagonal confirmed, 0 of diagonal has been taken out.

DeleteWhat about 2566=3 EDT? And there are some room for 5 without an overlap of (i) but it’s narrow maybe 5 will truncate

DeleteEric am thinking 4 happened at 11.30 and then ending diagonal started for 5th and we are done with up move, might be wrong.

DeleteYes that’s likely a fourth wave but how do you count from the 2443 low cash? I count 123 so far with the 1 as the extended wave

DeleteI was unable to count it on cash, hence i started watching ES on which 8 fold path was fitting.

DeleteYou are right, in cash may be 5 failed !

On 5 min chart there are 123 bars, because 1 was the extended wave and 3 had weak momentum 4 is already in target area on ewo

Delete5 waves down = a?

DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.

DeleteLets give some time for it to develop.

DeleteHmm once again we might have seen one of those shallow 4 if that’s the case your diagonal was the 5, but no overlap yet and ewo still ok (-40% at 14.4)

DeleteIn context of how close we are to (i) I prefer to say 5 and C is finished

DeletePT -

ReplyDelete1. True

2. True

3. True

4. ...

5. True

The very first comment on this post.

A trendline from the Oct low ((i)) through the Dec 10 low (i) is just a stone's throw away and a likely target for (iv) without invalidating. IMHO.

ReplyDeleteThis is what an impulsive wave looks like...remarkable that so few people get this right.... :)

ReplyDeleteJust awakened from sleeping off a midnight shift, so my tired eyes may be deceiving me. However, this entire move off the 12/24 lows in the SPX looks like a potential w-x-y-x-z, with w,y,z each 121-123 points. This would be either all of or (more likely) just part of (iv) with the implication of lower lows ahead. Plus, there is a clear impulse lower off today's highs, followed by an almost exact 61.8% retracement...

ReplyDeleteCorrection: I meant to say ((iv)). To me, (iv) is a lower probability, but not completely impossible as we have not yet overlapped (i).

Deleteyes. that is only rule. everything else is guidelines

DeleteInteresting post I read today. Any views around it?

ReplyDeletehttps://www.marketwatch.com/story/investors-prepare-for-a-fake-out-rally-in-the-stock-market-2019-01-07

Not sure what this means (if anything):

ReplyDeleteOur move from low on Dec 26th to our high today (2hr cash) is virtually symmetric both in price/time with the rally from Oct 29th low to Nov 7th high.

Add'ly, the Nov 7 rally retraced to .618, and our rally has retraced to a smidge above the .618 (of (iii) as designated), and .50 of the move down from Dec 3rd. fwiw.

Deletehow many are focused on counting up waves to find entry point? hmmmm

ReplyDeleteExactly. Many long term investors probably want shot at the low again. My bet is it may take several months to eventually go lower, if it does.

DeleteBasis ES, at 2602, (iv) = 2.618 (ii)

ReplyDeletewell time for a new count I think. We are points away from overlap of 1 of 3

ReplyDeleteHeh, oh ye of little faith.

DeleteI'm fully loaded with shorts and puts now.

I'll mention the Puetz cycle, low odds I know, but we have lunar and solar eclipses at this time, very risky time, easy to see investors turn to panic.

5 waves for wave C can be seen on ES 30 mins chart with around 120 candles & daily has tagged 34 ema.

ReplyDeleteOn SPX too we have 5 waves for wave C.

ReplyDeleteIF today's gap closes fully, it would provide increased confidence that wave (iv) has reached its maximum; wave (iv) may also go on to form a triangle to provide better net travel with wave (ii).

ReplyDeleteGap fully closed on cash.

DeleteDidn't you mention something about patience once? lol.

ReplyDeleteA quick attempt to preserve an impulse count from the top.

ReplyDeleteAm short on time today so i haven't checked this for degree violations and internal counts.

http://tos.mx/Ugv4Qj

Your count has degree violations in it. iii longer than minute i; not allowed. My count is still working and needs no revision.

DeleteJoe, while the current rally up from 2347 has no overlap, it is larger in points and percentage than your wave ((ii)). Why wouldn't you call that a degree violation? Thanks

DeleteBecause triangles are measured to their (e) waves; we're not there yet.

DeleteET, can you please elaborate your comment. Am not quite sure what it meant.

DeleteJust like in the bull market on the way up, I said wave Minor 4 'needed' to form a triangle, otherwise it would be longer in points than Intermediate (4), that is because triangles are measured to their (e) waves. The triangle is what we got at the top. A special kind of triangle is what I am expecting now.

DeleteYou're assuming that the rally from 2347 is wave (a) of a triangle?

DeleteSee the second paragraph in this study under "Deep Triangle"

Deletehttps://studyofcycles.blogspot.com/2018/03/how-you-can-tell.html

TJ

Thnx ET !

DeleteSo under the deep triangle model today's high would be A? Trying to reverse engineer the bull triangle shown.

DeleteBoth COMP and NDX have overlapped, and according to Neely, no part of a wave 4 triangle can overlap any part of wave 1 or 2.

Deletehttps://www.neowave.com/qow/qow-archive-46.asp

#mbicta - comp and ndx overlap at (i) but interesting not overlap at ((i)) October low. NDX actually came within .01 overlapping ((i))! I do not know what to make of it.

Delete@scout, re the deep triangle. It would seem to mean we are actually at the same point as labelled c today, as this wave 4 can't overlap wave 1.

DeleteSo a move down next, then up into another b, then down again. That's my read anyway.

Thanks watchman that make more sense time-wise.

Deleteas is mine. good luck everyone

ReplyDeleteAssuming 5 waves are over & can be counted as 1/a, 2/b becomes longer than 1/a @ 12.02 pm EST.

ReplyDeleteLooking at 5 mins chart.

DeleteJoe, there are a lot of EW detractors out there, but watching ES repelled at 2581 today show me that it works as long as it's done properly. Thanks for your posts and comments here.

ReplyDeleteI will make the effort to get to grips with it this year, hope you bank some nice coin in this next wave down.

joe in regards to somilarities with 2018 wave 4 triangle what is violstion it needs to overcome by being too long

ReplyDeleteare you still counting (iv) from 12/20 with b wave down option 2

ReplyDelete@scout, interestingly, back in March, the triangle was busted to the upside by a few points before the re-test of the bottom took place.

ReplyDeleteFrom the high today, is anyone counting a small impulse down followed by a double zigzag w-x-y up in progress?

ReplyDeleteYes same thought

DeleteYep!

DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.

DeleteI can meassure a diagonal so probably a C wave so: A=2559 B=2554(running flat and the diagonal for C 2572 as EDT mentioned

DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.

DeleteDiagonal for C invalidated so maybe Y otherwise im out of options

DeleteY=W at 2575

DeletePossible correction ending.

ReplyDeleteWave A

a - 10.50 - 11.15

b - 11.15 - 11.35

c - 11.35 - 12.25

B - 12.25 - 12.50

C - 12.50 - 14.15 forming an ending diagonal.

Can be seen on 5 mins chart.

DeleteNeed to take out low @ 12.50 by 3.45 pm today to confirm ending diagonal.

DeletePlease ignore, not a valid ending diagonal as there is no overlap in iv and i of C.

DeleteWave at 14.20 (iv) has overlapped with 13.30 (i). Lets see if this gives ending diagonal.

DeleteYes I see same

DeleteDiagonal co-ordinates.

Deletewave 1 12.50 - 13.30

wave 2 13.30 - 13.45

wave 3 13.45 - 14.15

wave 4 14.15 - 14.20

wave 5 14.20 - 14.45

wave 1 > 3 > 5

wave 2 > 4

wave 4 overlapps with wave 1.

Need to take out low at 12.50 by 10.10 am tomorrow.

Invalidated.

Deletejoe - im going through the work, need clarification

ReplyDeleteThis first post

"

So, either the wave ends at the arrow or wave (iii) ended at the bottom of the wave on 12/20 - and there is a long b wave in a flat - which adds more cushion. "

suggests wave (iii)did not end at low of wave,

yet

the next post " Three FED chair persons were interviewed today, and the result, so far, is 'three-waves-up". The three waves up, so far, are: 0 = 2,347, a = 2,521, b = 2,444, and c = 2,538.

"

suggests you are now ending (iii) at bottom of the move down.

336.32 points 2939.86-2603.54 ((i))

from (ii) 2685.44

is 2349.12 farthest (iii) can travel

so (iii) ends before the low in December.

its not clear then when (iii) ends and (iv) begins

and if 4 contains the actual low of the move down how do we count from there?

thanks

We have retraced .382+ of the drop from 10/3 - 12/26. This would allow for being in "a" of an abc (of larger B). This would imply that A is in. Additionally, from 12/26 low, the AB=CD measure comes in around 2616 area.

ReplyDeleteHello ET...got alot of opinions going on here...hope you can share some of your thoughts tonight..Thank You and hope the new year is treating you well

ReplyDeletehttp://www.elliottwave.net/educational/basictenets/basics3.htm

ReplyDeleteI think ET is expecting a descending barrier triangle in this case. This would work well with alternation of (ii), but this better turn down soon, not much room left before invalidation. ET thanks for all your posts!

Arguably, our move down from 10/3 high could be viewed as 4 3 wave legs. Should we turn down, if this 5th leg were to be 3 waves as well, seems a case could be presented for a WXYXZ complex corrective pattern, ending the overall correction. I'm certainly no expert, but on the surface appears viable.

ReplyDeleteI still consider that our current rally can be the "a" of an abc to larger B high.

As an add'l note, at this time the SPX-USD has taken out this morning's high.

Joe, last year i raised possibility that the top in October could be first wave of extended 5th, not the entire 5th. you mentioned at the time that it looked too small. Based on what we now know is it possible that we are extending this larger wave from 2016?

ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.

DeleteSomething that speaks for this is that the xlk tech sector which is the biggest sector in sp500 can be counted 1-2 from 2002-2008 and might be in 4 (same with ndx). Anyone that has another alternate on how to count the higher low on 2008?!

DeleteHow come you guys are not considering the fact that last high could be the third wave (highest EWO recorded on monthly chart) ...the fifth wave may yet come.

ReplyDelete4/30/14 using log prices something to consider

DeleteWe meet 50 dma first before any downward pressure?

ReplyDeleteJoe, No doubt you're aware that last night, ES overlapped its (i) — 2583.00.

ReplyDeleteDoes that change the count, or do we wait for SPX cash to confirm it? Thank you.

See the next day's chart.

DeleteI have added a new post for the next day.

ReplyDelete