Monday, January 24, 2022

Gap & Fill

I have written before in regard to degree labeling that stock indexes rarely make 2.618 waves in typical impulses, although they do sometimes in diagonals and triangles. That was the case today. Stock indexes & futures made a new low below the October 2021 low around a 2.236 extension, and then reversed. The daily chart is below.


Ira Epstein (broker with the Lind Group) might say (paraphrasing), "There were four consecutive closes below the lower daily Bollinger Band, and the probability of a fifth consecutive day has very, very low odds - around 1 - 2%". That wisdom proved itself today, as well - with prices closing just inside or perhaps right on the band.

The up wave is likely at least a portion of a fourth wave - given its size. The question for an impulse is whether the 50% retrace of the third wave is respected or not. If it is, or perhaps if the fourth wave forms a triangle, then an impulse wave, downward, might occur.

But I do have some concern about the internal wave labeling, and it is possible the downward wave might turn into a diagonal. So, we'll be watching the wave in the next couple of days to see how the count develops. Again, right now an impulse is still possible, but let's see if that develops or not.

Also worth noting - at a low of 4,212 the down wave came very close to the 38.2% retrace from the Sep-Oct 2020 low! That level in the futures is at 4,193 - 4,203, depending on which trough you use for the anchor.

Given that, it should be clear how the market makers are 'jerking the market around' getting close to levels and not making it, etc., making gaps and not following-through, etc. I have no beef with this, it is 'market survival time' and it is likely the powers-that-be are taking extraordinary measures to see that this occurs. There is no other way to comprehend it. The market makers are using your account and my account information (balances) and market-making-algorithms, that I wrote about yesterday, to make sure that the landscape is as difficult to understand as possible - and to maximize their profits at the expense of retail.

One just needs to be aware of this, and not get emotional about it, because as Ira clearly indicates in his videos there are a lot more algorithms using statistical and numeric (account balance & position size) information to run the market than programs using Elliott Wave counting. And using Bollinger Bands is a coarse example of it.

So, now we need to see if an impulse forms or is invalidated, or if a diagonal forms or is invalidated.

Have a good start to the evening.

TraderJoe

24 comments:

  1. Was that “short” covering today ?

    ReplyDelete
  2. ARKK (dly) Things looking up for ARKK?

    https://www.mediafire.com/view/ukg02tdeb3s47l9/ARKK.PNG/file

    ReplyDelete
  3. SPXcfd - today's turnaround -

    https://www.mediafire.com/view/uxqa16qdz0gycqq/Rally.PNG/file

    ReplyDelete
  4. Re-sending:
    TJ, going back to first principles for degree labelling, would it be correct to say for Nasdaq futures, the overnight drop from 14,524 to 14,202 is too big in both px and time to count the rally from 14,524 as a (i)-(ii)-i-ii... but must be of the same or higher degree as (i) & (ii). And further, since it has overlapped (i), it cannot be a 4th wave either. Hence the entire upmove from last night's low must, whenever it ends, MUST be a :3. Am I right to say this?
    https://imgbox.com/quGzeBk0

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yes, I would err on the side of a :3 at this point.
      TJ

      Delete
  5. The possible third wave doesn't look complete to me, not sure how you feel about it. Yesterday afternoon looks and felt like a fast abc of the 3 of 3. 1 more low would surprise the vast majority who are now looking for a large bounce here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't dismiss the possibility. The EWO in 97 candles 'might' only have made ((iii)) of 3. And yesterday's high might be a 'marker' of a fourth wave of a 'prior' third wave if it comes to it.

      TJ

      Delete
  6. The Qs were above their 50-day moving average, and well above the 200-day in Jan 2000, while this time around we are three days below it. Back then, the three-day break below the 200-day landed in May 2000 to complete Wave 1, with a multi-month partial retrace in Wave 2 happened, going nowhere near new highs. This time around, the three-day move below the 200-day is happening without the fourth and fifth wave down, so it's either corrective - so your new high call could be right - or more downside to come.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good morning all -

    So far, hourly SPY with about 97 candles has 1) two open gaps, 2) a volume signature that matches a third wave, 3) most recently three waves up, 4) a 38.2% retrace, and 5) an EWO that is not yet near the zero line.

    https://www.tradingview.com/x/TDGN7kjN/

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ordinarily, I would relegate this comment to the trash heap. Why do you not think it is rude to come to this site and talk about another market analyst? I am replying to you to show you the great "AVI" count. Look at how many "alt" labels there are.

    https://www.elliottwavetrader.net/images/charts/202201/full-206a7f61f9d5ee989f9794af92a337c81f7747c6.jpg

    And you will note his analyst went through the same thought process as 'any' analyst has to: first to rule out that triangle. I did exactly that same thing. Do you fault me for it? If so, why don't you fault Avi's analyst, too?

    I am not having a contest between me & Avi or anyone else. If you like Avi, then follow him. But this is a wave counting site, and if you have no interest in wave counting, then don't post comments here.

    P.S. I notice how well your hammer is doing this morning. Lol. Are new highs out of the question? They are not.

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  9. SPY (60m) - missed pivots above

    https://www.mediafire.com/view/cohr19g8jpya1ls/SPY60.PNG/file

    ReplyDelete
  10. triangle on $SPY 5 minute chart?

    ReplyDelete
  11. GC (Gold Futures) - 5-Min: I can't swear to it, but this is an awfully interesting pattern at the ~1855 level.

    https://www.tradingview.com/x/pJc93fRn/

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From 7th low, we have an apparent 3 wave move up at equality (currently).

      Delete
  12. SPY (60m) update -

    https://www.mediafire.com/view/2tbhotcu93hup3a/SPY60U.PNG/file

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. triangle today seems to suggest a more complex correction, my thinking is one more stab down overnight and after the fed tomorrow and then back up to the channel with the big tech earnings. Either way I think you're right about the target before lower. thank you

      Delete
    2. TL up from assumed 3 low is steeper than w2 low/high angle. Would not expect this to continue within 4th.

      Delete
  13. SPY 5-min: watch for overlap (to see if it does or does not occur) on the potential ((A)) wave up. There is no call until/unless that happens. The most recent up wave is 1.618 x ((A))/((1)).

    https://www.tradingview.com/x/11MysKuJ/

    There is a possibility of a double-combination wave: w-x-y, but only if an impulse up gets invalidated.

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ES/SPY 5-mi: overlap 'has' occurred. This raises the probability that 4 ended at the potential failure y wave shown. I'd put a 'wave counting stop' at today's high.

      https://www.tradingview.com/x/F9L5hx8I/

      TJ

      Delete
    2. ..also monitor the overnight to determine the extent of any retrace.
      TJ

      Delete
  14. I think the only thing you have done is notice a hammer candle. You have not provided any 'rationale' for why it has to be 'THE' low (your words not mine). You have provided no Elliott Wave analysis. In short, I think you are out-of-control and just commenting for your personal glory. You certainly aren't teaching anyone on here 'why' you are correct. Therefore, unless I see something useful the post may remain in limbo. It was after all you who came to this site to tout another analyst, and you are again trying to do it in this 'veiled' manner. Follow him if you want. It makes no matter to me. I'm just continuing to try to flush out the correct counting of waves, and will continue to do so - even as the information in several books has been incorrect.

    TJ

    ReplyDelete
  15. And, so what do you think about your rude dogmatism now? Notice the daily hammer has now been exceeded lower without a new high.

    https://www.tradingview.com/x/tsghPkMS/

    TJ

    ReplyDelete