 |
| S&P500 Cash Index - Weekly - The Eight Fold Path Method |
During this time, the Elliott Wave Oscillator (EWO) has had two close approaches to the zero line. The first in November 2016 signalling wave Minor 2, and the second, in May, 2018 signalling the end of the Minor wave 4 triangle. As we noted before, we found it amazing (and not surprising) that the Minor 4 triangle took up more time than the Minor 2 zigzag.
The wave count shown is the only one we could find that meets with "degree labeling requirements". This is the requirement that so-called smaller degree waves must, in fact, be smaller than their larger degree counterparts. This essential idea in wave theory is one reason why, once proposed, this count has not had to change over the many weeks.
Concomitant with this idea, we also proposed that a triangle would be likely for Minor 4, to shorten it's length - as measured to wave (e) - so that it would not be longer in price points than Intermediate (4) which was from May 2015 to February 2016. And - whether some services and sites wish to admit it or not - the triangle can clearly be seen, in full agreement with the Elliott Wave Oscillator. Yet, they did not predict the triangle. We did.
On this chart, we have sketched in the median line of the weekly price channel (dotted), and you will note that there is some resistance to price movement there. In fact, price change on the week is quite small.
We have said for weeks now that we expect Minor 5 to have absolutely horrible momentum. So far, in terms of volume it is living up to that expectation. Further, we said that pull-backs can now be expected - probably for minuet ii within minute (iii) of Minor 5. The pullback can be quite substantial but should not violate the lower daily up trend channel line shown on the daily chart below.
 |
| S&P500 Cash Index - Daily - Minuet i of Minute (iii) Possibly Completed |
Now that potential wave minuet i has made a higher high than the x wave of the minute (ii) flat, we have removed the tentative status of the up channel. Prices should now remain in the channel or exceed the channel to the upside - probably in minuet iii of minute (iii) which would be predicted to have stronger momentum. As it stands now - and as the Fibonacci ruler shows - minuet i is shorter in length than minute (i) also reflecting proper degree labeling.
So now we are at the point of monitoring for the minuet wave ii pull-back which should be more than 38%, but stay within the channel if minute wave (iii) is to be the extended wave in the sequence. The wave can go as deep as 62 - 78% of minuet i, but it can be shallower. First, confirmation is needed that minuet i is over. That would probably occur by price filling the gap shown as the red circle on the above chart.
Have a very good start to your weekend.
TraderJoe
Isn’t it a degree violation between the fourth waves started 1/3 2017 and 18/12 2017?
ReplyDeleteEwi is putting much emphasis on the ”throw over” of the parallell trendline from 3/10 2011-1/2 2016, is this something you consider being of lesser importance?
I'm not sure about the degree violation because this is the case where the first wave is the extended wave in the sequence. So, it seems like each of those waves 'should' at least be longer in time than the case where the third wave extends.
DeleteOh. I put very great importance on it. The issue for the other analysts is they have been committing to downward counts in recent months, and their downward counts simply have not yet materialized. Ball in their court. Again, we 'can' top here. There is just insufficient evidence for it at this time.
Thanks Joe. Your analysis simply cannot be more amazing!
ReplyDeleteI did some additional analysis on wave i the wave (iii), and I had to use /ES (E-minis) to get exact fibonacci retracements, and wave minute 3 of i exactly ended at 161.8%, minute 4 retraced to 100%, and minute 5 ended at 200% of wave minute 1 of i. We have already started a downtrend based on the chart you posted yesterday. (I do have a hunch though that we just finished wave 3, and we will have one last spike into wave 5 that is sharp and completes in a day). I can post a chart if there is a way.
Based on Neely's, should we expect wave ii of (iii) to be much longer than the wave i impulse?
Thanks. Regarding the question, sometimes, not necessarily. Neely claims 'every' correction is longer than it's impulse in time. That is not a claim I (or the market) finds to be true. Consider that 1929 - 1932 was much, much shorter than the 1857 - 1929 wave that preceded it. Or, even if you only count a bull market from 1921 - 9, then that is eight (8) years, but the correction is only three (3) years. I have no idea where Neely got that from. Elliott never said it in his original works, nor did Frost and Prechter make that claim.
DeleteIn fact, I think that (erroneous) claim is why Neely was forced to invent these unbelievable non-Elliott patterns like neutral triangles and diametrics, etc. Sorry, but that is one of the two places Neely and I part ways. I think it has served he and his service badly in the last many years. Note that Minor 4, above, is shorter in time than all of Minor 3, and yet, so far, it has yielded a correct prediction of higher prices to this point in time.
So to be clear, 'sometimes' corrections are longer in time than their respective impulses, but not always. That according to the market history I can find.
Very Nice!
ReplyDeleteWouldn't overlap of Minute (i) be a cause for concern? I would like for price to stay over Subminuette i but drop below Subminuette iv.