Weekly Review - Two Plausible Scenarios & Just One Preferred

Some websites want to send you back to the beginning of recorded stock price history in the U.S. to tell you why their Elliott Wave counts, which don't seem to work out when viewed under close scrutiny, must work out in the future. Just recently, one (ahem) shall we call it alternative Elliott Wave site, which claims it is objective, was projecting higher and higher third waves - which, as you know now - never developed. But, the odd thing is the authors of such sites rarely, if ever, say, "we got it dead wrong". How can a site be objective if it won't admit when it's tools and techniques just don't work? Wrong at the May 2015 high. Wrong at the 2016 bottom. Wrong at the March 2017 high.

I on-the-other-hand prefer to stick to real Elliott Wave analysis, as I understand it. And I think many, many people really don't understand it that well yet either. That's why I try to help show you how real wave analysis works - on any time frame from 5-minutes (as in yesterday's post) to weekly, monthly or more. I prefer to live with some uncertainties of true Elliott Wave analysis because I know that's what mirrors life. There is almost always a choice. There is almost always an alternate. This week I will show you the two most likely Elliott Wave Counts on weekly charts, and tell you which I prefer and why. It is no change from the past several weeks.

SP500 Cash Weekly - Primary 5 Impulse Count - ALTERNATE

The first count above is of the potential Primary 5 impulse wave upward. As of this point in time there is nothing that breaks any true Elliott Wave Rule in this count. It would be made up of five Intermediate sized non-overlapping waves higher, and that would normally be fine. Just, if Intermediate (2) were a flat with the higher B wave, as shown, then one would expect Intermediate (4) to be a triangle or a more simple zigzag to provide alternation with the flat wave (2). That could still happen.

But, there are five reasons why I don't like this count that go beyond 'simple' wave analysis, and proceed to more modern wave analysis as it has been further delineated by the likes of Glenn Neely, and Bill Williams.

Fibonacci Five Reasons for Alternate Designation of the Impulse Count

1. Part of Wave (3) breaks the Primary wave ((4)) to (2) trend line, indicating loss of momentum at that point. Wave 2, as you can see, drops below this lower channel line, and it is more extreme if the real zero-to-(2) trend line were drawn in. 'Usually', 'most-often' all of wave three is above the zero-to-two trend line except in diagonals.
2. Wave (2) does not have a very deep pull-back - it is only 38.2% at maximum. 'Usually', 'most often' second waves are between 50 - 78% or more except when the first wave is the extended wave in the five-wave sequence. But, the supposed third wave is longer, ruling out wave (1) as the extended wave in the sequence.
3. Wave (2) is not a sharp wave. 'Usually', 'most often' second waves within true impulses are sharp or zigzag waves, and this one is a flat. While not a deal-breaker, it is a cause for concern.
4. Sentiment. As you know, we track sentiment weekly. And you can see from the chart below that while sentiment is falling off - as expected - from the high of March 1st, it is nowhere yet near the lows of prior waves. I would expect, before an upward turn, that sentiment will fall lower yet.
5. Finally, the NYSE Advance-Decline line has recently made new all-time highs. 'Usually', 'most often' the $NYAD will diverge with price before the all time highs are made. That just hasn't happened yet. 

Sentiment Chart

Weekly Bullish Sentiment is Not Yet Near Prior Wave Lows

For the reasons above, and not because of any sacred mystical cycles or hidden proprietary analysis, the count below is currently the preferred one.

SP500 Weekly Cash - Ending Diagonal Count - PREFERRED

As you can see, because there is no Intermediate third wave yet, this count eliminates all of the problems with a third wave breaking the zero-to-two trend line. In fact, in this count you can see from the channel that minute wave ((iii)) exactly lives up to that guideline. Yes, it is not a rule, but it is a guideline we would rather waves live up to than not. Also, there would be four more Intermediate sized waves in the near future to show divergence with that advance-decline line.

So, that's the rationale. We can see both sides of this coin, but clear and unequivocal reasons are provided for preferring one over the other. The real item of interest is that in either the Intermediate Wave (4) wave in the Alternate, or the Intermediate wave (2) in the Preferred count, it is very likely that that down wave could have the form of a zigzag! And that is the amazing part. And that is why the ES 8-hour count published previously may be taking the form of the downward expanding diagonal that we have been showing for weeks now - because in a true zigzag, a real minor A wave is needed - made up somehow of five minute-sized waves.

But, the most important thing is that it is regular Elliott Wave analysis. There is nothing mystical about it. There is nothing mysterious about it. There is nothing here that doesn't already appear in two or three books, and a couple of videos all of which are available for only modest cost or no cost.

Are you learning your Elliott Wave? We hope so. Can we be wrong? You bet. But when we are, you hear it here first - along with why!

Have a great rest of the weekend.
TraderJoe

SUPPLEMENTAL: At the request of a comment that asks good questions, I am posting these two one minute charts from the live chat room  that were done in real time.

SP500 1-Minute April 21 1546 PM ET

The first chart shows the detail that is possible today with good measuring tools and speedy equipment. At the time of posting this in the live chat room, I intentionally left all of the wave marker data on the chart, so a person could see that the measurements are exact for an expanding diagonal. Wave ((v)) is longer than wave ((iii)), which is longer than wave ((i)), and wave ((iv)) is longer than wave ((ii)), overlaps wave ((i)) but does not travel beyond the low of wave ((ii)). They are all three wave internal sequences that look like zigzags to me because they don't have "pull backs" in them.

But, this is  the key to me, if it is really a diagonal that I had identified, and not a series of one's and two's higher, then, it should have - as a prediction - at least a deep retrace if it is a Leading Diagonal wave up, or a failure lower if it is an ending diagonal. And here is what the result was ...

SP500 1-Minute Chart April 21 1559 PM ET

Well, there it is! Another Elliott Wave prediction come true. So, please be careful about criticizing building up larger fractals from smaller fractals because they are definitely there! But, stop being amazed there, and think. Look at the very top of the wave in the first chart. You notice that I did not call ((v)) done by placing it on a wave bar? That was because I couldn't find an ending formation yet.

And when you look at the second chart, what do you notice? C'mon now. There is a perfect little ending contracting diagonal for the (c) wave of ((v)). I just didn't draw in the trend lines. Can you?