Based on degree labeling considerations, I was wondering, perhaps, if the Dow and the S&P are just "out-of-synch" time-wise. It has happened before - maybe it's happening again. I want to preface this post by saying we do not have "proof positive" that the upward movement in equities is over. But, we do have the Dow and the Russell providing a different message than the S&P500 Cash Index. Let's assume for the moment that the upward movement is over, and the 90% level upward in equities is NOT reached, which means the waves since October 2018 would not qualify as a flat.
That would mean that the downward diagonal can be back on the table, and in that case, both the Dow and the S&P500 would be seen as zigzags, upward, since the December 24th low. So, play along for a moment. Here are the degree considerations on the Dow.
 |
| DJIA Cash Index - 4 Hr - Close Only |
If we remove some of the noise from the charts by just using a line chart, then we see the DOW 'might' be able to be counted as five waves in a channel for a minuet (a) wave, followed by a break of the channel, lower, representing a minuet (b) wave, followed by a re-acceleration upward in five waves for a minuet (c) wave of Minor 2.
Now if we look at the S&P500 Cash Index in the same manner, we might find that the main difference is the nature of it's minuet (b) wave. Perhaps this wave just "takes longer" in the S&P500 than it does in the Dow.
 |
| S&P500 Cash Index - 4 Hr - Close Only |
In this case, the S&P makes a (b) wave that is much more proportional in time to it's (a) wave than the Dow does. The S&P has 470 more stocks than the Dow. Perhaps that is what accounts for the difference.
Again, there is no proof, yet, that upward movement is over. But, what I am saying is that if the 90% level is not met to qualify for a true flat, then a schematic like this might explain it. Yes, the Dow and the Russell 'could' re-accelerate higher. But those are not the patterns we are not seeing yet in those indexes.
Are there aspects of this count I don't like. Yes! One would be a third wave not reaching a 1.618 extension. But, again, if this is a 'corrective sequence' then that may go a long way toward explaining it.
Have a good weekend.
TraderJoe
The drop in BA stock last Monday seems to have caused a disproportionate move downward in the Dow as compared to the S&P.
ReplyDeleteYes! Does the Dow get an 'excuse'?
DeleteI like how it channels in the (a) wave. Why would they have to be out of sync? Both have overlap back into (a) on 3/8. The triangle that was at the beginning of the month could have been c of (b).
ReplyDeleteSorry, The triangle that was at the beginning of the month could have been c of b within (b).
Delete@BBR .. yes, I completely agree if the Dow makes a new high. It can have the elongated 'b' wave, too. It's just that the new high in the Dow and the Russell is not in evidence yet. That could happen - because where the Russell stopped Friday 'could' still be a triangle b wave.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletewhere you have the last wave; can have 5 < 3 < 1.
DeleteNo matter how one tries to manipulate the charts in order to force a count, what you have labeled as wave iii of (a) only subdivides by 3, therefore that can not be an impulse wave.
ReplyDeleteThat's only because all you and people like you want to do is criticize. You don't do 'any' work at all. You certainly don't 'post' your precious work so it can be held for scrutiny. All you do is scream "triple zigzag" at the top of your lungs so you can try to get other people to sell to help support your almost always incorrect positions. And that's even when almost none of the first zigzag overlaps with anything.
DeleteHere's exactly how you can count the middle wave as a "five". But you could never stop screaming loud enough to bother to do the work. And you certainly don't take the time to calmly remember what happened on certain FED days, and how we were scratching our heads.
And you certainly don't take the time to look at the totally unexplained non-overlapping five-waves-down to red -c, and ask "how could that have happened without a further five-waves down after it?". In short, you are the worst analyst I know because you don't analyze, you just criticize.
https://invst.ly/aar-w
TJ
nice work you have done joe
DeleteThx, marc. Appreciate it greatly.
DeleteJoe, maybe mblcta has a point. I'm pretty sure he was referring to the cash count in your blog post above. Even with the futures (your 2nd update), I don't see 5 waves. See both images - (ES & SPX). It's pretty self explanatory.
DeleteES - https://ibb.co/5Ycs7XL
SPX - https://ibb.co/kmRHM3f
With all due respect, "The fragile line between confidence and arrogance is humility."
NORMAN E. BOWIE & MEG SCHNEIDER, Business Ethics for Dummies
That's what measurements are for. You haven't done any. You too are just putting letters on a graph. No ego. Measurement.
DeleteMaybe its time to sit out until further clarity is possible? Just count easier things like currencies or gold.
ReplyDeletePrice is over the 18-day SMA on the ES. All I 'am' doing is 'counting'.
DeleteHi, Joe. The count you have in the chart in your 3/15 blog post is wrong. I was wondering if you read my comment at 8:02 am in that thread and we could work out a valid count. It would help me learn this stuff.
ReplyDeleteAs I said, we have no proof upward movement has ended. Next best alternate is a truncation in the Dow at the red *. That bar is actually higher (not above the high, just higher that the prior red bar), using my quote system.
Deletehttps://invst.ly/aas61
Then, that might make :3, down, and :3, up. But that is why the second :3 has a question mark. But, why are the Dow and Russell diverging? It 'could' be a (b) wave with a (c) wave up to make 90% for a FLAT wave. I can not 'count' waves that are not there. No one can. Will this upward wave make a FLAT? It could. It just hasn't yet. I'm just counting until there is something recognizable, and asking "why the divergence in markets?".
TJ
Equal time from starts to e waves.
ReplyDeletehttps://imgur.com/sk4z69Y
FWIW - have a look at the volume bars. In October only about a week away from futures roll-over? In Dec - just before the low. Getting close?
ReplyDeletehttps://invst.ly/aasb6
TJ
Yesterday's volume apparently due to quadruple witching and S&P rebalancing.
Deletehttps://www.wsj.com/articles/trading-frenzy-ahead-thanks-to-quadruple-witching-11552647600
This really reminds me of the fractal of B from 2010.
ReplyDeleteAs in a new bull market?
DeleteNo, that messy B wave up to 1375.
ReplyDeletehi Joe
ReplyDeletethank you for your work
but nothing is safe and clear yet
it's a green candle compare to the others. red candle.
does it affect joe? thank you
See below at 3:02 pm.
DeleteJoe, i want to know if i have this right. I am trying to understand labeling rules.
ReplyDeletewxy is a 3 wave move. w is 3 waves. x is 3 waves. y is 3 waves. x is x because it did not make a 90% retrace of the move from 0 to w. if a retrace of 90 is made the count is ab looking for c. that c would be made up of 5 waves.
therefore a x wave is always less than 90%.
I did some looking on the blog and found this blog post.
Deletehttps://studyofcycles.blogspot.com/2018/12/market-outlook-likely-long-term-top.html
here, the x goes under (i) so it is more than 100% of w. so x can clearly be more than 90%. Joe, can you try to help me here. i am not sure why that is not labeled abc. is it because if that last wave that you have labeled y is made up of 3 waves and not 5. if it was made up of 5 it would be abc.
Yes, ending in three waves, not five is w-x-y.
Deletety
Deletehere is another count for dow
ReplyDeleteusing DJones futures and neely daily chart with highs/lows
abc -x - abc
3 diagonals
still need help on b waves...
https://imgur.com/NZwzeha
joe, can you talk about about restrictions on
b waves:
1) when in a second wave, and
2) when following an a wave?
marc, you cant have diagonal followed by diagonal in your first 3. one or the other not both.
Deleteok. its easy fix on first abc just adjust b and c is impulse
DeleteIf we drift sideways to around 4/1 this could be the 2 of leading EED. This is why this is a SOB to count off the bottom.
ReplyDeleteit becomes complicated everyone has another opinion.
ReplyDeletewho has the right graph?
See my reply at 3:02 pm, below.
DeleteOn a side note. I will take any input on the below. Its beans off the recent low. I cannot get any diagonals to work. Maybe a fresh set of eyes can see something.
ReplyDeleteThank you.
https://imgur.com/SaS6cJi
This is like marriage, as soon as I open my mouth, I realize my mistake.
DeleteLooks like a running .786 running triangle in the middle. Damnit!
https://imgur.com/1JeSp1J
The best way I can prove my case is to do "a thought experiment", or what Einstein called a Gedankenexperiment. Let's assume we are going to have a rip-roaring bull-market higher in a channel that makes new all time highs. I don't think that, but let's assume it. The most likely way to do that is with a "rip-roaring third wave".
ReplyDeletehttps://invst.ly/aasxq
And so, 1, 2, 3 is the same as (a), (b), (c) and vice-versa, until it is proven differently. And so, this ups the likelihood that we are in a wave (c) or wave 3 until there is a break of the channel lower.
Yes, the up-wave can form in other ways (such as a the 'c' wave of a diagonal (i), but that would be 'over-the-top', too, as the first wave of a diagonal is almost always 'over-the-top'.) And that 'still' makes this wave a (c) wave!
The question is does upward movement end here or continue? There are some divergences. Nothing is proven. But I think this thought experiment demonstrates my case better than anything provided, so far.
TJ
By-the-way, the problem for the 1-2 count is that 2 is very short in time in relation to 1, so it may count much better as a (b) wave.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSame as what I showed above. No different; and no clarification.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete@tacharts; the AO only works well in an impulse when there are 120 - 160 candles on the chart. Also, see the second AO pullback is "too deep", or more than the -40% guideline for a fourth wave. It is also very interesting that you haven't taken a "stake" in your chart.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt is Neely based. If the AO pullback is "relative", then isn't the last one the biggest one?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletelovely.
DeleteJoe, I have the Advance Decline line at new highs. Would you see that in a corrective wave or impulse wave. Thanks
ReplyDeleteAlready noted elsewhere on the blog. Why do you think I did the 'thought experiment' above?
DeleteSome historical data & statistics here
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ccmmarketmodel.com/short-takes/2019/3/15/this-stock-market-signal-has-only-occurred-two-times-in-the-last-seventy-years
that show that only in 1991 there was a situation like in the beginning of 2019.
PS
Why all tacharts's posts in the entire blog have been deleted?
Dunno, and I specifically did not delete the tachart's posts.
Delete