tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post3144572541821781004..comments2024-03-29T02:43:21.464-04:00Comments on Elliott_Trader: Volatility ContinuesElliott_Traderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14941335198945083652noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-49181610294255126792018-02-13T13:11:01.995-05:002018-02-13T13:11:01.995-05:00I mean thats what characterizes the 5th wave of an...I mean thats what characterizes the 5th wave of an index...a drop in breadth, momentum and volume..Erik Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14192236925594985316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-70967839460255101492018-02-13T13:08:42.552-05:002018-02-13T13:08:42.552-05:00Hi Joe,
I can´t come up with any kind of bullish c...Hi Joe,<br />I can´t come up with any kind of bullish count on Transports after last weeks selloff on the weekly chart. But this doesn´t need to mean that s&p500 can´t do a 5th wave from here? Because S&p500 is a much more diversified index and not all sector collapses at the same time..I still see a 5th wave missing on XLF, XLK, XLY. <br /><br />Thanks..ErikErik Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14192236925594985316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-68064296732158501102018-02-13T12:27:02.945-05:002018-02-13T12:27:02.945-05:00I wish you would cover GDX. ThanksI wish you would cover GDX. ThanksAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06496343741934226733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-45561399866251773922018-02-13T08:02:57.904-05:002018-02-13T08:02:57.904-05:00Ok, but a few months ago you posted a possible exp...Ok, but a few months ago you posted a possible expanding diagonal count from 1810, where the 4th wave was going to have to come all the way back down to approximately 2200 (I'm guessing on that number,) and that 4th wave of the diagonal also would have been much larger in points than the 2135-1810 decline. So how would that have been valid but the current decline is invalid (as it currently stands)? Thanksmblctahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07740912421131972048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-80722159492242353602018-02-13T04:19:24.761-05:002018-02-13T04:19:24.761-05:00Hi Joe
Thx for sharing
If you find some good EW vi...Hi Joe<br />Thx for sharing<br />If you find some good EW video in the net pls let us knowAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01784095616249019678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-59604059633840085002018-02-12T23:02:52.358-05:002018-02-12T23:02:52.358-05:00Don't go around in circles. The very first per...Don't go around in circles. The very first person to write about "degree" was R.N. Elliott in The Wave Principle. In chapters II, III and IV he explains what he means by degree. He says, among many other things, "the five waves of one dimension become the first the wave of the next greater dimension or degree." In other words, in order to make up that next wave, they must necessarily be smaller than it.Elliott_Traderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941335198945083652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-78625411816266199162018-02-12T22:38:40.764-05:002018-02-12T22:38:40.764-05:00Welcome Roger & much appreciated.Welcome Roger & much appreciated.Elliott_Traderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941335198945083652noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-13950874980484912342018-02-12T19:45:04.354-05:002018-02-12T19:45:04.354-05:00Joe, is the degree rule found in any of the EW boo...Joe, is the degree rule found in any of the EW books, or is it a "common sense" rule that you came up with? Also, as I was thinking about it, as the market goes higher and higher, the point totals of waves will naturally get larger and larger. However, the percentage totals won't get larger and larger. For example, 2872-2533 is larger in points than 2135-1810, but it's smaller on a percentage basis. If the waves were measured in percentages, then it wouldn't violate the rule. Thanks.mblctahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07740912421131972048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-88084718090786587802018-02-12T19:16:26.830-05:002018-02-12T19:16:26.830-05:00Thanks for pointing out the degree issue, Joe. It&...Thanks for pointing out the degree issue, Joe. It's very helpful. As I pointed out over the weekend, while all of the cash indexes made a lower low on Friday, none of the futures did, except NQ. I also said that it's impossible to count the move from Wednesday's high to Friday's low as an impulse wave because there is no alternation in any of the futures indexes. (waves 2 & 4 would be mirror images of each other.) So Friday's low has to be a b wave. That means we could have completed a running flat today, or it could turn into an expanded flat, or a running triangle as you mentioned. The only upward alternative that I see is if 2872-2593 is an abc, 2728 is an x wave, and now we're forming a non-limiting triangle where 2533 was wave (a). That means wave(e) would end higher and solve the degree issue.mblctahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07740912421131972048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251274909260261631.post-11180965308404283202018-02-12T19:15:20.001-05:002018-02-12T19:15:20.001-05:00Superb analysis as always Joe..this is why i follo...Superb analysis as always Joe..this is why i follow you..you are one of the best analysts i've seen in my 20 year trading career...thanks for sharing you insights sirRoger Marishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13917181328607230864noreply@blogger.com