Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Doji on a Divergence

While there is nothing concrete, yet, warning signs are building. In the chart below, today there was a Doji candle at the recent top of this upswing. The Fisher Transform is still on a divergence (a double divergence - which is quite rare for this indicator). Here is the chart again.

S&P500 Cash Index - Daily - Double Divergence from Fisher Transform

Relative to wave labeling - as awful as it is - for reasons of avoiding degree violations, one good way to label the chart, now, is as the minute ((a)) wave up. That count works as follows.

ES E-Mini S&P500 Index Futures - 5 Hour - Wave in a Wedge

It was not possible to show this count in its entirety until the final up waves today. However, as a five-wave-up sequence, the cash S&P500 truncated twice - the second time today - when compared to the Dow. In this sequence wave ii is only a 38.2% retrace - allowing wave (i) to be the extended wave in the sequence. And wave (iv) did not overlap wave (i).

This 5-hour count assumes there is no additional upward movement. There were signs at the end of the day - the possible truncation, and the Doji candle - that upward movement might be over. But there was nothing conclusive. So, the overnight futures need to be examined to see if the 2,745 level is exceeded lower or not. If it is, a downward wave may well have started. However, it is only overlap of wave (i) at 2,675 that will force that call.

If there is one more downward, and then one more upward wave sequence roughly equivalent to the former ones, then, and, only then, might it suggest that (i) = ((a)) and the new wave up = ((c)), as there would be seven waves up, not five, and that would be corrective. But such a wave is not at all in evidence, yet.

The market is not yet making this call definitive. So be patient, calm and flexible. Remember, even if this is minute ((a)) up, then a minute ((b)) wave could be anywhere from 38 - 78%, as typical. Then, we could only project minute ((c)) from the end of minute ((b)). But that is putting the cart before the horse. Tonight and tomorrow we need to determine if this up wave has ended or not.

If you would like more detail on the possible truncation count, see my comment at the end of the day in yesterday's post.

Have an excellent start to your evening.
TraderJoe

P.S. Is this count workable? All the sub-waves of ((c)) are smaller than ((a)). That much is clear. And there is no overlap between (iv) of ((c)) and (i) of ((c)). Such a count would prevent another round trip to the top.

SP500 Cash Index - Hourly - Zigzag Count

The question becomes, within a zigzag how does the degree labeling of the "b" wave of the zigzag relate to the waves that emerge after it? For those who are wondering, both the wave (ii) and the wave (iv), the downward waves, are smaller than ((b)), which is a downward wave. So, that portion of degree labeling is maintained.

68 comments:

  1. Thank you Joe. Do waves ii and iv of (i) have adequate alternation?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome. Yep. (iv) could easily be a flat depending on 'exactly' where (iii) ended.

      Delete
  2. Thank you, Joe! You have NO IDEA how much help you are!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had the wxy-x-wxy route to the same end point (sometimes those 3s and 5s are in the eye of the beholder :o)). But, I'll go with yours. Thanks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is one of the longest waves in time I've seen. I can't remember when I've ever had to use five-hour candles just to get the waves on the chart.

      Delete
    2. Lol. Its been long for everyone!

      Delete
    3. I may be wrong, but the longer this 'elastic band' wave has stretched, the further the snap back the other way is likely to be, and faster then most will expect, which I believe fits with a C wave.

      I did some calculations of SPX targets based on the golden ratio and came up with two targets within 50 points: 1933 and 1983.

      Separately a 1.618 extension of wave A gives a similar target area. What I think will surprise folk is that it'll all happen in 9 or 10 trading days, starting 13th or 14th.

      The future is bright, and futures are red!

      Delete
  4. I am a complete novice to EW, please kindly explain to me, at what levels will we need to lookout for a ATH or a downward thrust.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't understand your question. What are you looking for?

      Delete
    2. what levels will validate the downward move and what levels will invalidate the downward move to all time highs?

      Delete
    3. Below (iv) will validate the downward move. Unfortunately on the upside wave 2 does not invalidate unless it exceeds the start of wave 1.

      Delete
    4. are you referring to the (iv) level around 2690 from https://tvc-invdn-com.akamaized.net/data/tvc_498a55e055563df47759926a1026091f.png?

      Delete
    5. No, the (iv) at 2,680 in the 2nd of the two charts posted above.

      Delete
  5. 10 of the top 15 IBD Leaderboard stocks closed down for the day. There is still a lot of strength with the leaders, but it is a little victory for the bears.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks TJ. Lot of good technical analysis on the blog by everyone today.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Joe - I think I've discovered another thing with which you likely disagree with Neely, lol. Here's how one might lay it out.
    1. From Oct high, 3-3-3 to Dec low. Call it abc or wxy, resulting in 1 OR A.
    2. If I understand Neely's writings, should B (what I maintain we're in now) terminate at the .618 retrace of A (or higher), this qualifies it as B of a flat, not zigzag. A retrace of .618-.80 of A would be considered a "weak" B, but still within a flat (zigzag B doesn't terminate at .618/above retrace).
    This obviously has some profound implications. I trust this is one of those "other" things where you and Neely disagree? lol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marc-
      The one that comes to mind for me is that should C develop in 5 waves, then we'll have a completed flat. This would likely indicate the correction is over. Additionally, C could (possibility) actually terminate without reaching/exceeding A. This is what I suggested as possibility way back in early Jan when I offered that we could be in B of a flat. :o) We're not far enough yet to confirm, but the heading is on path.

      Delete
    2. @ta, #1; no. It matters what you call it. a-b-c, w-x-y, or 1 or A.

      Delete
    3. I think I understand the abc vs wxy. What determines whether its 1 or A?
      Can an abc not be A? If not, why not?
      Thanks

      Delete
    4. @ta, 12:08 am; a-b-c can only be A:3 (meaning you know it's going to be a large degree FLAT wave), and then such a construction 'MUST' be followed by a larger degree B:3 which has a 90% or better retrace on A:3. That is the 'only circumstance', that an a-b-c becomes A under the wave principle. It matters what you call the waves.

      Delete
  8. Joe,
    ES futures LeadingDiagonal?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IF you mean in the overnight 15-minute futures, then, yes, that is possible. Otherwise I can not read your mind, and more complete questions would be appreciated.

      Delete
  9. and you are right it was a poorly written post

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why does the market keep going up? It may just hit 2804 to form an inverse head and shoulder?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks TJ,
    In this count ii is bigger than ((ii))? If this is ok then the other zz count should also be ok with ii of ((a)) bigger than ((b))? No matter how one counts ii will always be the biggest down wave? Maybe degree isn´t that important in corrective waves? The reason i´m not letting go of the zz is that many big sector ETFs like XLV, XLI, XLC are doing nice zz from 26/12 and DJI is at 76,8% fib from ATH which leaves minimum room for a minute ((c)).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Erik, did I not say in the text if there are more up waves, it could easily convert to a seven-wave corrective structure?

      Delete
  12. Joe-
    Perhaps you can clarify.
    1. Its my understanding that a double zigzag is a sharp wave pattern comprised of two zigzags (W & Y) connected with a corrective pattern (X) [such as a flat]. As I look at the 3 waves down from Oct high (each 3 waves within), I see a zigzag, a flat, and a zigzag. This certainly appears to fit the definition of the WXY double zigzag. If not, why not?
    2. On your daily chart, you have labeled each of the 3 wave moves from Oct high as a, b, c (each being 3 waves themselves). The combination of those three is labeled "1".
    Could that not be labeled as "1" or "A"? Is there an objective "test or rule" that identifies it as only able to be "1" rather than "A"?
    These two items seem pertinent to our current situation, as well as being so overall.
    Thanks!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I answered 'part' of that question above. The way I have labeled them assumes a diagonal wave is forming where all the legs of the diagonal are 3:3:3:3:3. I have clearly shown this pattern in other posts (see Feb 7th). It truly does matter what you call the waves. As such, there is no problem with a 'deep' wave 2, as this is often called characteristic in a potential diagonal wave.

      Delete
    2. So, if I understand correctly, it is "1" simply due to your view that it's going to be a diagonal, thus subjective. Nothing wrong with having a view. I, among others, hold a different view. Nothing wrong with that either. So, I guess the real issue is as long as the market action "fits" 2 different views, is everyone not better served to consider both? As it is your site, its certainly your option. Im just trying to be sure what the policy is.
      Secondly, I'm not sure that 1 above was addressed as a stand alone question.
      Thanks!

      Delete
    3. @ta, unlike others, the evidence for my view is the degree labeling of the prior waves that preceded it, and how they allowed the correct 'top call' in October 2018. My policy is to go with the evidence.

      Delete
  13. Retail sales drop the most since September 2009

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/14/us-retail-sales-drop-in-december.html

    I won't put too many news articles on here, but this one seems relevant.
    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  14. So far, the daily ES has an "outside day down". We have not seen one of those since the beginning of the rally from Dec 24th. Let's see if holds through the close.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I have added a very important post-script to today's post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As an EW novice, I don't understand this, but nevertheless humble thanks for your blog and your attitude.

      Enjoy the next 2 weeks.

      Delete
    2. Thanks Joe
      Is it possible that we are forming an Expanding Leading Diagonal on the SP500 cash market? thanks

      Delete
    3. @dumonia; the significance of the P.S. is that wave Minor 2 could then be over at the minute ((c)) wave, and we would now be in wave Minor 3 down - which should see some strong declines.

      Delete
    4. On the 5 minute frame. Sorry about that.

      Delete
    5. @Mark T. I see nothing wrong with that count. The trend lines are beautiful. It would be the 5:3:5:3:5 variety.

      Delete
    6. Okay, that's what I wanted to know. Appreciate the feedback!

      Delete
  16. I find this interesting. There would now be a 1-for-1 Fibonacci relationship in time with the ((c)) = ((a)) count, to within one bar! Chart below.

    https://invst.ly/a1ddi

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  17. We didn't get the 4th wave triangle where we thought we may get it at the top, but we might get one here. Target would be the 2622 area.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Joe,

    I know it’s been a long time since you were a regular on the OEW blog, but just so you know, Tony passed away on Monday. As an astute EW practioner, I thought you would like to know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. I commented on it in yesterday's comments.

      Delete
  19. As far as I can tell, at this time, we have a Y = W, upward to a deep 78.6% retrace. It's just a question of if it holds, or not.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Here is a picture of the upward correction, so far.

    https://invst.ly/a1gh4

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cash did overlap. Futures didn't. With the slightly higher high, count could now be W-X-Y-X-Z

      Delete
  21. Trump says he "will accept deal, but also declare a national emergency".

    ReplyDelete
  22. Here's an update on the correction.

    https://invst.ly/a1g-h

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  23. Posted earlier at another site. Let's see if we stay on task.

    https://imgur.com/X1mm63Q

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How you planning on getting there now, ta?

      Delete
    2. ta
      good luck with that
      my guess is your counting the wave that "looks" right
      doesnt usually work out
      especially when its the most studied wave in years

      Delete
    3. @ta .. I believe you have measured 1.618 incorrectly. This is how you measure an expansion. Up wave did not quite make 1.618, as below.

      https://invst.ly/a1hhz

      TJ

      Delete
    4. I think the CFD presents a better picture with AO's help.

      https://imgur.com/uWy0Vpk

      Delete
  24. There is clear downward overlap in the futures before the cash close.

    https://invst.ly/a1h93

    For the new people this prevents a five-wave-up impulse count, because a fourth wave can not overlap a first wave in an impulse.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Futures continued lower into settlement. It looks like a good set-up for a third wave. I'd like to see a true 1.618 x i third wave, if it occurs. Chart below.

    https://invst.ly/a1hgh

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  26. Mark's Expanding LD still looks good as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Does not look like a 1,2, i,ii down is possible on either ES or SPX.

      Delete
  27. A new post has been started for the next day.

    ReplyDelete