Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Recommended Posts

A question if I may. Can we imagine a channel line (drawn parallel to 1-2 through point 3). Is it important that point 4 does not make it to that outside channel line? The reason I ask is that (I find) this is quite a useful observation in and of itself and shows potential weakness.

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HI blowfish,

 

I think you mean a channel line b/w points 1 and 3. Yes I agree, if this is truly a top, then the pattern is not valid and momentum will carry the price down below the 1-3 line. The 1-3 line would then act as resistance and I would use the 2-4 line as the accelerated channel line. ( I think you understand this since you know channels, sorry for anyone else who is lost ).

 

Basically what this is is a descending wedge pattern. When the lower line of the wedge breaks, 2 things can happen.

 

1. Price accelerates in a downward direction and a quick move down is made (down trend is intact).

 

2. Price tests lower line and rejects. In that case a dramatic reversal is made fueled by the short covering of those who sold short on the break down, and those re-entering that lost money on the previous attempt higher at point #1. (This means the market is locked in a range).

 

Sorry if this is a ramble, need to drink some water and coffee to wake up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not quite what I meant I have added and outside/righthand line to your last drawing. Point 4 fails to meet it (which can indicated weakness).

 

My question is for a 'classic' WW set up is it madatory that point 4 fall short of that outside parallel channel line (the cyan squiggles) I think you still provided the answer when you said that we should see a wedge? (i.e. the naswer is yes) So if point 4 had been on that outside channel line does that invalidate the pattern?

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bfish can you post a chart? Think I understand what you are asking and, yes that #4 pt should be well below the outside channel line. There should be a wedge formation.

 

Here's this same chart again, with more price data now.

 

This is what is going on. Currently the market is in balance, the axis is the yellow line on the chart.

 

Notice how the yellow line aligns with pivots on both sides of where it crosses price. Then notice how the line splits the pattern at the 50% mark.

 

The purple line below is a place where the market could accelerate lower. It is below the pivot #3, so those using that point as a natural location for their stops on a long position are going to sell here. Momentum players will jump on for what looks like a "matching move" lower (Many famous technicians mention matching price moves).

 

What often happens is that the move lower is rejected and, like a rubber band stretched in the wrong direction, it shoots higher for one last touch of the yellow line.

 

This happens in a volatile, ranging market. In a market where volatility is dying, a descending triangle occurs, and a move lower eventually comes.

 

So, bottom line with this one is that if price does a quick move lower and is rejected, the pattern dictates a move to the yellow line. If the market holds friday's lows, it will likely fill the gap from Thursday to Friday, and then re-test. This would invalidate the pattern.

 

Last option is for a move lower that accelerates below the purple line. The natural target for that would be a matching move lower to 763 (I think probably lower).

5aa70e19df0d8_er21104.thumb.jpg.ca8c6c164cfa070db0ee18a243f4adcf.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I'd like to discuss with anyone who'd interested are the differences between Gartleys (or Butterflies) and Wolfe Waves. They definitely share some similarities, but every Gartley or Butterfly pattern I've seen does not work out to be a successful Wolfe Wave, even though they seem to start out similarly. Apparently, the ratios of the swings are different, but I haven't yet discovered the exact differences. If anybody knows (or even understands what the heck I'm trying to get at) then kindly enlighten me!

 

The attached chart is the best example I can find right now. The "M" shaped pattern in dark green is a "Bull Butterfly" i.e. a butterfly pattern with a bullish expected outcome. If you're unfamiliar with the terms "Gartley" and "Butterfly" I'm sure there's a ton of info on the web.

 

As you can see from the pattern, it's possible to label the swings of the butterfly pattern as if they were Wolfe Wave swings, and indeed, in this case, if you extend the line segment from 1 to 4 you will actually get to the price that was eventually reached, but not in the time that the Wolfe Wave pattern expected---according to Wolfe, the price target should be reached at about the time when the extended line segments 1-3 and 2-4 meet. Clearly that didn't happen here.

 

Other examples I've found of Gartleys and Butterflies are even less Wolfe-like, usually alot less so. As I said above, there has to be something about the ratios of the swing highs an lows that's different between Gartley/Butterfly and Wolfe Waves, but as yet I'm clueless as to what the exact differences are. Like I said, if anybody understands this, please post!

WWWWQQQQ.thumb.png.6fc678a6b03da77662076f9be639622d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one you posted is not a true WW, but it does work. Remember that the #2 pt should be a recent new high or low. There is a WW in the chart you posted. Note how precise it is. The volume at pt. #4 was a good indicator.

 

Tasuki- What you posted is a version of the pattern. It does work often, but not as consistently as if you follow the rules. Post a recent, uncompleted one so that you can watch it play out live.

5aa70e1b81ba5_TUWW.jpg.152f899dfc2d4a557a9e8a8ae0968916.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tasuki, the QQQQ chart you posted - I remember that one. I think the #5 pt was too deep to take the pattern seriously. I have watched gartleys trade, but don't believe too much in the fib #s. To me, fibs are too static.

 

Waves in the market are always changing size and proportion. Fibs can work fine for a methodology with good money management, but so can many things.

 

One thing - don't take the timing of the WW seriously, it's very flawed. There are better timing methods. Even measuring distance b/w peaks/troughs.

 

There is a great book by a guy named Suri Duddela that gets deep into butterflies/gartleys. I know his work, but haven't read the book, heard it's good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

waveslider, thanks for your replies. Please explain why my first chart (@TU Weekly) was not a true WW. You said that the #2 point needs to be a recent new high or low--was this not a new high? OK, there were higher prices prior to point #1---does that disqualify point #2 from being a "recent" new high? It was higher than the high at the very beginning of October 2006--that doesn't count? Just trying to get the rules clear in my mind.

 

Ah, one more question--I didn't understand what you meant about the volume at point #4. Is volume analysis part of Wolfe Waves? I don't recall seeing anything about volume on Wolfe's site--maybe I missed it. Many thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tasuki, I can tell you what I see, but the more you see the pattern, the more you will get a feeling for not just wolfe waves, but market geometry in general.

 

Pull up the chart I drew and walk through it with me. The #1 point should occur within a range, not at an extreme. The reason for this is that #2 is a recent high or low and should panic people and cause volume. Above #3 point is where those who entered short will be setting their exits (bearish pattern). #4 point is a higher low putting confidence in longs. #5 point is where shorts cover and breakout traders enter long.

 

Then volume evaporates and the move fails, causing a quick move back to the 1-4 line.

 

That's the psychology of the pattern.

 

The chart you posted does have a pattern, but it is distorted. Imagine if your point #3 was a high instead of a low. Then you'd just have one big wave. What happened instead was a distortion into a mild expanding (broadening) pattern designed also to shake out longs.

 

I hope you can follow me on that. Post some more charts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the looks on pt #5 on this chart. If that's all we're going to get for a fakeout lower, it looks like volatility is dying in this market.

 

You want to see some good tails at that #5 location. Looks like the market may sell off a little tomorrow in the a.m. Maybe that will be the scary run for it.

 

If the # 5 isn't convincingly taken out, then the lower target line is more likely. We'll see.

5aa70e1cb4c13_er2update.jpg.614af22b0d60178b5ffd3a9e62ffb5f2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, waveslider, your description of a proper WW is perfect. Now I have a better idea what to look for--still not sure how to make my eyes see it. I'd give anything for an indicator for Tradestation like I have for Gartleys and Butterflies. There is a WW indicator posted on TradersLab, but comments below it say that it's not close to being correct for a true WW, so I don't want to try it and start seeing the wrong thing.

 

The best I can figure, your chart is for the Russell emini, something like a 120 minute chart? In future, could you (pretty please) include the X and Y axes in your charts, as well as the contract name? It would really help. Thanks.

 

I'll post some proper WWs if I can find them. Not as easy as I originally thought!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Tasuki, it is an hourly chart. They're trying to make a run at it this a.m.

 

As far as an indicator, I have never seen a good one. Seems likely there won't be a good one, the pattern can have so many nuances...

 

Anyway, glad to be of help. Keep looking and you will see them. Look for the #2 point first, it stands out the most since it is a recent high/low. If you see a good one and post it we'll both benefit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it might be making a move at it, the chop down around 790 is a good indication of the market trying to shake out abunch of participants.

I don't see the market going below 775 if the pattern is valid. Most likely the target is about 781.

This could be setting up a big up day for tomorrow if the pattern holds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

waveslider, see attached. This is how I see the pattern setting up on my chart in Tradestation. Since the price has dipped below point 5-----well, where would you put your stop on this trade, or more generally, where does one put one's stop on Wolfe Waves? For a bullish WW, shouldn't it be somewhere below point 5?

 

The profit target should be up around 840, yes?

5aa70e1d30f66_ER60.thumb.png.4982488b34ff997de1e379375804dcba.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stop would be below point 5 yes. Your chart is good, but I placed my point #1 at the low on the 25th.

The reason why is that this is where the move higher began after breaking out of a range. Also it is at 50% of the entire move higher.

The pattern seems to be activating nicely. Since the target is so much higher, a conservative approach would be to put on 1/2 here and another half on a trendline break higher.

I would say the actual target will be more like 845-850 or more as time passes. That's about 60 points, or $6000 per contract. Wow.

You know, we're not the only ones watching this, I guarantee. It could be a rough ride higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  waveslider said:
whoa... precision of market geometry

 

 

That was indeed a beautiful, almost textbook Wolfewave. What charting package? TS by chance?

 

I typically use 1500 share for ER2 but tried to replicate using 466tick chart and Clyde Lee's Wolfewave indicator but it did not pick up that pattern this afternoon on either the 1500 share or 466 tick. Not only would you have had a nice, low risk entry point against that upper wedge, you would have had negative advance decline and pathetically negative up/dn volume supporting the trade, it was almost bulletproof. Man, I wish my indicator would have picked up that pattern today as I surely would have taken the trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tradestation, yes 466 tick is nice for ER2. It was perfect, one of those ones you want to 2nd mortgage the house for...

 

Is this WW on the 60 minute chart a perfect storm?

 

Key level will be 782 tomorrow.

5aa70e1d68f8d_niceIWMchart.thumb.jpg.c60a7db488e8cc544affca41ddc76615.jpg

5aa70e1d6e6b5_ER2perfectstorm.thumb.jpg.2d46545f1d3c974cfef2a4abe1179443.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  waveslider said:
Tradestation, yes 466 tick is nice for ER2. It was perfect, one of those ones you want to 2nd mortgage the house for...

 

Is this WW on the 60 minute chart a perfect storm?

 

Key level will be 782 tomorrow.

 

 

My indicator may have missed the bearish setup earlier, but it is flagging the potentially bullish one you identified. After hours had pretty hefty downside penetration of the support line, but I noticed your data is day session. Perhaps if the market stabilizes some overnight and opens near today's closing price I would feel better about taking the trade, but right now I would not be inclined due to after hours weakness taking price below support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tasuki, I would say yes on your chart, it's a good one. But I would have taken the #1 point as that little pivot low b/w your point one and two.

 

The gap down tomorrow will either be a pretty evil continuation gap, and likely the 50% pt. of a whole new leg lower testing august lows, or it will gap down and be bought, forming an engulfing pattern on the day. Either way it is an inflection pt.

 

There is some evidence supporting a range and a move higher.

 

1. There are 2 unfilled gaps above.

2. ER2 began to outperform ES for the first time in quite some time. This is not typical of a declining market. ER2 also began to outperform NQ, which has been extremely strong on a relative basis.

In the attached 30 min. period chart, orange line is ES, blue line is ER2 the lines below are a MACD of their relative strength (ER2 vs ES) and the moving average of the RS line. This is an important chart to watch during the day.

3. This area has acted as support in the past.

 

4. Just looking at the chart - this market has done nothing but go sideways for a whole year. As far as I'm concerned, it's in a range until it's not. In a range you buy spikes into support and sell spikes into resistance.

 

There is some weird inter-market stuff going on - true. That dollar chart just scares the (#$# out of me for some reason. Crude oil getting volatile and toppy looking - or ready to blast parabolic.

 

Interesting markets!

5aa70e1d7ce13_ER2vsES.thumb.jpg.1adcd82cddd76ba9723c5a9a207e814b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Key level will be 782 tomorrow." I wrote yesterday. It closed on it today exactly. This could be a major turning pt. in the market since ER2 has been lagging for quite some time. The Russell index of smaller cap stocks usually leads the market into a new move.

 

We want to see some major strength quickly tomorrow, buyers with conviction, to validate this pattern.

 

A cross of the light green line would be a good conservative entry. The first target would be the andrew's line (dark cyan). The WW target is the 1-4 line, which would basically be the top of the range.

5aa70e1dd48ac_wwnov8.thumb.jpg.b805b1d6542766c6ed962cf87ef65883.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.