I thought it might be nice for people to know that the S&P500 Cash Index has not touched its 200-day simple moving average for 296 days, as the chart below shows. The last time it touched was Nov 1, 2023, when it touched from the underside. The next day was up over the average, and there has not been a touch since. The brown curve below prices is the 200-day MA.
Now the uninitiated might think something like, "well shouldn't price touch the 200-MA every 100 days or so in order to average out to 200 days? And shouldn't it trade both above and below that average in order to produce an average?" Well, no, not necessarily so. Maybe it would touch more often if price generation was a more random process. But if there is a cause to the increase in prices - not random - this does not have to happen. That cause, is, by now, clear to most. Companies sell stocks to shareholders, and then they buy them back to show better profits. Company buy-backs have not stopped. They were last at an all-time high. (Read about the record at this LINK). They can continue to engineer their stock prices higher until they are faced with a bad earnings report, a change in leadership, or a significant increase in interest rates or other terms that affect their financing making the buy-back more of a poison-pill than a golden egg. Still, 296 days seems to be pushing it a bit.
Today the S&P500 cash index held within the tentative down parallel shown and came back at the end of the day to close on its 18-day SMA (another number worth noting). It could still go higher. There are ways to do it. But it is not required. So, now just another number for grins.
IF the market were to make a simple 1.618 downward extension - as shown in the chart - look how close it might come to that 200-day MA. That just seemed interesting.
Have an excellent rest of the evening,
TraderJoe
Thanks for all your insightful publications! Keep us posted on the publication of your book! Your posting of Nov 23, 2023 showed various scenarios and one of them had a turn date near the Presidential election! Amazing accuracy 13 months ahead!
ReplyDeleteLooking at the ES Futures overnight, I saw a very nice setup with a w-x-y correction of yesterday's downward (impulse-looking) move, at a confluence 61.8% retracement level and 161.8% extension of the y wave vs. the x wave.
ReplyDeletehttps://postimg.cc/sQVQ94n7
I am curious if anyone else spotted this setup?
ES Hourly - after the up channel break; a down wave and an apparent up corrective sequence, there is now a "running gap" lower, and a lower low. Haven't seen too many of the running gaps on the downside recently. Is this a change of market character? If there is a steep retrace for an internal second wave it 'could' fill. But it certainly does not have to.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/gx4eAzMY/
TJ
Nice observation on the "running gap", TJ. 😀
DeleteThat was a quick move down: ~47 ES Futures points in 30 minutes. 😮
Once can even see the "running gap" on the 15-minute chart! 💡
With the clear lower low, it is now time to draw in the potential base channel and take downside measurements to see if a 1.618 wave occurs. There are two levels of overlap of interest. Overlap Level L#1 has already occurred. It was a prior high. There might be bounces here. Overlap L#2 would likely mean it will be difficult for any further up wave (barring an expanding diagonal of some sort). Note Overlap L#2 and the 1.618 extension lower are co-located.
Deletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/b8u0zw9E/
TJ
SPY 2-min: look at this beautiful impulse with alternation. Try to keep this as a 'model'. This is the way you want to try to see the 'classic' impulse at any degree of scale.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/BRnsS0xf/
TJ
Now breaking the ii to iv channel line and likely into the corrective sequence (with the alternate being this channel was only a three-wave a,b,c down, and it wants to go over the high again). Sweet patience!
Deletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/BTHrycyR/
TJ
TJ, I have a question: one can see a slight overlap [6004.50] in the corrective sequence versus wave 3 / c [low of 6004 in ES]. This overlap does not exist (yet) in the SPX index.
DeleteI am thinking that this overlap can be interpreted in a few ways:
o Evidence of further impulse nesting, e.g. 1-2-1-2-1-2
o Warning that an a-b-c correction has now completed.
o A sign that a leading diagonal triangle is forming (does not seem likely).
My question is with regard to the correct Elliott Wave interpretation of the ES Futures versus the SPX. In this case, where the SPX has not overlapped, should one just count this corrective sequence as a potential wave 4 forming in the decline, and ignore the slight overlap in the ES futures?
I uploaded a simple chart to illustrate this question about the overlap in the ES Futures:
Deletehttps://postimg.cc/0M9pVw5R
And I just realized that the answer may actually be that there has not been any overlap (yet) in the ES Futures, if the terminus of wave 1 or a is counted as 6009. 🤦♂️
Delete..and don't forget in both bull markets and bear markets there can be things like 'running triangles' 😃 TJ
Deletewith the earlier wave count, it may have been 3 down followed by a triangle and now we are in fifth wave, i say this becasue the 5 wave move you have would have ha to be all of 3 from top and we have subsequent overlap. so if you think its going lower probably need to adjust
ReplyDeletehttps://postimg.cc/B8xjvGMg
..and don't forget in both bull markets and bear markets there can be things like 'running triangles' 😃 TJ
DeleteSPX 5-min: I don't know for sure, but when looking at the position of the EWO, a running triangle is a 'possibility'. Not worth anything until we know more.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/m2A2CXJT/
TJ
Very weak up waves so far. Maybe a "running flat" for iv with 118 candles on the chart and equal numbered waves on an alternate side of the EMA-34. The triangle still has not quite formally invalidated though.
Deletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/uazCeewt/
TJ
Triangle now invalidated. Not a triangle? That could spell 'lower'. Anyway, we can be getting a fifth.
Deletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/pvXywSA3/
TJ
yes same page
DeleteES 1-Hr: just a follow up fyi. The overlap L#2 has been exceeded lower. This makes up movement from the previous wave more difficult (not impossible yet).
ReplyDeletehttps://www.tradingview.com/x/VvRC1Mkd/
TJ
This being a triangle b of C..C being the wave of bigger triangle just got a bit more validation after today..I think
ReplyDeleteSee the next day's post which is up now. TJ.
DeleteA new post has been added for the next day.
ReplyDeleteTJ