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

BlowFish, you never define point 1 before point 4 is hit. I enclose a screenshot of GBPJPY with almost perfect Wolfe with imaginary point 1. The reason I did not take this trade is because I did not like the volume histogram that I observed from imaginary point 1 to point 4 and later. Had he volume been correct I would have traded this one.

 

]

 

I have to say I would have probably anchored it there too.

 

Indeed the time to draw is after point 4 and before point 5. In fact the way I understand it once you have 234 you place 1 and then wait for your trade. Of course if price is at 5 and showing exhaustion (through vol climax or whatever) then you could draw a quicky around entry time but having the lines in place after 4 is formed seems more relaxed.

 

Anyway enjoy your new board!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
I have to say I would have probably anchored it there too.

 

Indeed the time to draw is after point 4 and before point 5. In fact the way I understand it once you have 234 you place 1 and then wait for your trade.

 

This is correct understanding of what I do :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i only have a rudimentary idea of this, but thought this was interesting....

I have no idea where to place point one yet (??) , and not sure if 4 has completed (???) but the AUD/USD daily chart looks interesting?

ww1AUD.png.77dd1b005b794850c360b0e1dab89653.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i only have a rudimentary idea of this, but thought this was interesting....

I have no idea where to place point one yet (??) , and not sure if 4 has completed (???) but the AUD/USD daily chart looks interesting?

 

Strictly speaking the channels should converge i.e. it should be a wedge type construct. In fact historically Wolfes discoveries came from his exhaustive study of the "rising wedge" after meeting John Magee (Edwards& Magee).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
I have to say I would have probably anchored it there too.

 

Then you would have exited now with a few thousand bucks of profit. The price hit EPA / almost hit EPA. You never know with MetaTrader. Their charting is seriously screwd up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to do a little experiment with you WW'ers or those following this thread - -

 

Let's all look at the S&P via SPY and submit charts on where (if any) a wolfe wave exists. Start with most recent history.

 

Use the daily chart so we're all on the same page, and please try to explain WHY you chose the points you did.

 

We can all learn from this, and see how it turns out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
Strictly speaking the channels should converge i.e. it should be a wedge type construct. In fact historically Wolfes discoveries came from his exhaustive study of the "rising wedge" after meeting John Magee (Edwards& Magee).

 

Guys, how many times did you trade a wedging pattern that failed? Is Wolfe really about wedging pattern (only)?

 

Wolfes can also be non-wedging. And trading a non-wedging Wolfe is even a bigger fun because only a few people trade such pattern :) An example from 20 minutes ago attached.

 

What Wolfe is about? it is about identifying the market inbalance in point 5 and trading in the direction of the expected balance (EPA).

 

It really doesn't matter if point 5 is in a wedging or non-wedging pattern.

5aa70fd52442a_divergingWolfe.thumb.png.4d9d17786f32e8bb46edc345eb16ed76.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is (well according to Bill Wolf). A WW should be a wedge it is a fundamental element of the pattern. Parallel channels or megaphones may well work but they are not WW's

 

My Wave methodology is the product of about thirty some odd years of studying

technical analysis. Early on, I had the good fortune of having John Magee of

Edward’s and Magee fame, introduce me to some excellent books and reliable

chart patterns. One chart pattern that I found to be particularly reliable was the rising wedge. I found that pattern so intriguing that I literally took it apart to see what made it tick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
One chart pattern that I found to be particularly reliable was the rising wedge..[/i]

 

This doesn't mean that rising wedge is the only one he found, does it?

 

I remember having seen a number of non-wedging patterns in Mr Wolfe's website a year ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This doesn't mean that rising wedge is the only one he found, does it?

 

I remember having seen a number of non-wedging patterns in Mr Wolfe's website a year ago.

 

He seems pretty clear that it should be a wedge.

 

The site has not changed in years and years I guess the megaphone is still there. Maybe it was a mistake? As I say he is quite clear.

 

Megaphones are fairly rare anyway.

 

Why not ask your WW expert friend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought it has to be a wedge or you don't get an ETA which is an integral part of the formation.

 

Incidentally rising wedges show a loss of momentum shortening of thrusts etc. The price action is quite important. It as known as three little Indians, three drives to a top/bottom etc. etc.

 

Of course do whatever works for you :) but if it aint a wedge it aint a wolf wave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tresor -

 

The prob. I see is that if you draw 2 straight lines then you have a "pattern". You could do this all day and your mind would trick you into seeing patterns all day.

 

There needs to be more solid criteria here if you are going to trade in a systematic way (as opposed to intuition).

 

It sounds like you trade with a bit more intuition, and since you have traded "your" pattern (I think we settled it that it's not wolfe's pattern, not that it matters anyway) for so long, you know the in's and out's of it.

 

How about drawing up a PDF with some more "strict" and definable rules, then saying what you like to see in a pattern. Maybe you could start a new thread.

 

Otherwise I don't see what this thread is doing anymore. It was begun so that people could post patterns "in progress" and has degraded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Otherwise I don't see what this thread is doing anymore. It was begun so that people could post patterns "in progress" and has degraded.

 

Really that is where the value is seeing stuff unfold 'real time'. I might have imagined it but i think Tresor said he would post some before he went on vacation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
Otherwise I don't see what this thread is doing anymore. It was begun so that people could post patterns "in progress" and has degraded.

 

I hoped my posts and screenshots of real trades would addvalue the thread. Before I started posting there were maybe 2 - 3 (out of hundreds screenshots) properly identified Wolfes.

 

Since my help is not welcome, I am out of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wolf is absolutely crystal clear that it should be a wedge. Guess we will have to agree to disagree on that. How do you get an ETA with a megaphone? I dunno you seem to be presenting yourself as an authority on what constitutes a WW (which I have no issue with) however I seem to recall that you have never taken the course? Ask your trader friend (the WW expert) he will confirm that Wolf taught that it must be a wedge. Of course if you choose to trade megaphones that is fine but it is not a WW. If you test megaphones you will probably find they are less reliable as volatility increases but participants on both sides are not 'letting go'. Bulls force prices higher bears force them lower. It is my experience they are far less stable structures of course your mileage may differ :)

 

What we where talking about before was actually showing trades after 1 2 3 4 had set up, but before point 5 is hit. I am looking forwards to seeing some of those then we can all follow along and include our observations and see how it pans out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
"Trend line of 1 to 3 and trend line of 2 to 4 must converge."

 

For sure they must converge in a converging Wolfe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For sure they must converge in a converging Wolfe.

 

I dunno how to put this tactfully. :D You are wrong. ALL Wolf Waves must be converging full stop, end of story. It is absolutely a fundamental requirement look at page 6. All Wolf Waves converge by definition. It is unequivocal, unambiguous, and mandatory for all WW's.

 

With respect it seems that you have tried to reverse engineer things and have come up with some structures that may well work for you, that is great. They are not WW's. If you look at Wolfs 'sweet spot' you will likely see where you have gone wrong with the chart that you linked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And he purposely placed a non-wedging megaphone Wolfe picture on his website... to deceive potential clients.

 

Now do yourself a favour and find anything on his website that says Wolfe must be a wedging pattern.

 

Do yourself a favour and take the course. It is absolutely clear from the start that it must be a wedge. If you are unprepared to, ask your trader friend, that is the WW expert. Refer him to page 6 the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
All Wolf Waves converge by definition. It is unequivocal, unambiguous, and mandatory for all WW's.

 

Then why don't you e-mail Mr Wolfe and request that at least 2 of his pictures be removed from his website, because they do not depict the Wolfe the way you understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then why don't you e-mail Mr Wolfe and request that at least 2 of his pictures be removed from his website, because they do not depict the Wolfe the way you understand it.

 

Because it doesn't bother me in the slightest, though my 'understanding' does not come from trying to piece together the methodology from the web site. Wolf puts it quite well Perhaps because I have sample waves on my website, many think that they are now "expert"in Wolfe Wave and decide to give trades and or ridiculous drawings. Believe me--they are wrong!

 

You are wrong plain and simple :) Ask your friend, email Wolf or feel free to continue to disbelieve me (and WaveSlider) though I am not sure what you think we have to gain by lying. It is plainly stated over and over that they must converge. Perhaps he has purposely left a red herring or two on the website, or perhaps (more likely) you have missed the significance of the sweet zone and so have got point 1 wrong. I dunno. As I said before I guess we must agree to disagree though I am rather confused by why you should be so adamant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tresor
Because it doesn't bother me in the slightest, though my 'understanding' does not come from trying to piece together the methodology from the web site.

 

Just curious, where does your ''understanding'' comes from then?

 

continue to disbelieve me (and WaveSlider) though I am not sure what you think we have to gain by lying.

 

Trading is not about believing but about knowledge. And the knowledge you have been passing onto newbies is simply incorrect and may lead them to financial disaster.

 

Perhaps he has purposely left a red herring or two on the website

 

can't believe my eyes :rofl:

 

or perhaps (more likely) you have missed the significance of the sweet zone and so have got point 1 wrong.

 

Point 1 is precisely established with the extention of the following line: EPA point - point 4. I would be interested to know your alternative version of this line and your alternative version of point 1. Please post your interpretation of this chart :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just curious, where does your ''understanding'' comes from then?

 

 

I thought that was obvious, the course. Did you not read my posts where I quoted pieces? Hence the QED a few posts back. It is clear from the course and the follow up faxes that the lines must converge. It is you that re misleading people with your half baked ideas trying to reverse engineer the subject from the web site. Ask your trading friend, the Wolf expert if you don't believe me. Presumably you believe him. I m done with this smashing me head against a wall of foolishness here. I do wish you all the best with WW it would appear your 'variation' is effective which is all that matters :D

Edited by BlowFish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then you wouldn't mind enlighetning me with your interpretation of the ''megaphone'' Wolfe that I copied from Mr Wolfe's website and posted here, would you?

 

 

Would you please describe wherein this chart you see a "megaphone"? I do not see it myself, and I'd appreciate your help. My sense of this chart has always been that we are not being shown the whole story, i.e. relevant points are hidden in history beyond the left edge, in that instance. I thank you. I am not saying you are wrong, only that I myself do not se what you are seeing.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=19455&stc=1&d=1266633915

 

For what it's worth, though I never took the course as Blowfish has, I did have a very long conversation with Mr. Wolfe about six years ago, and I certainly came away with the understanding that, as Blowfish has stated, Wolfe Waves must wedge, i.e. the trendline described by points 1 & 3 and the trendline described by points 2 & 4 must converge. I believe that Blowfish quoted directly from Wolfe's manual in making this point.

 

I am no expert in Wolfe waves, and I do not pretend to know their traits nor to possess the ability to recognize them as Wolfe himself would define them.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Thales

5aa70fd677315_MegaphoneWhereArtThou1.jpg.3fe0f0bee2d14f1886d7ca1485d2c07f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlowFish,

 

Come on Man. Draw your 1-3-5 and 2-4 and 1-4 lines. Please do this for us :)

 

I am not sure what that proves to be honest? I have never claimed to be an expert at WW's or even to trade them or even to be interested in trading them. Having said that I am interested in market geometry and price patterns and have a decent library of courses and books on that subject. I like to think I have a reasonable understanding of the topic and have traded simple channels in the past.

 

Wolfes stuff does not particularly resonate with me, though there is some synergy with other things I am comfortable with. All I have done is point out that the rules are crystal clear and unambiguous I'll quote again from page 6 "Trend line of 1 to 3 and trend line of 2 to 4 must converge.".. My intention was simply to try to help clarify things, certainly not to intimate I was some sort of expert. I was kind of flabbergasted how adamant you where that this was wrong based on a couple of un-annotated charts.Again I am not saying that megaphones are not effective just that by definition they are not WW's.

 

I have annotated the chart you posted with 3 different waves. I would certainly not have drawn them in real time. Hell I would never have drawn them if I wasn't looking for them to see whether they could be drawn! For that reason I am not really sure if there is any value in posting them. I also fudged them a bit, the entries where OK but a couple came up short on the targets. That effected my placement of point 1 (knowing whether price would hit target) that's the trouble with hindsight. I guess I should have done it 'honest'. I would not want to lead people astray as I said up top I am certainly no expert on Wolf.

 

The main issue I have is that there are a couple of different ways of drawing point 1. Point 1 is the key point as 1-3-5 determines entry and 1-4-T determines target. Put another way change how you draw point 1 and everything changes. I think the thing to do probably is choose the most conservative point 1.

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

    • 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
    • NFLX Netflix stock watch, local support and resistance areas at 838.12 and 880.5 at https://stockconsultant.com/?NFLX
    • Date: 8th April 2025.   Markets Rebound Cautiously as US-China Tariff Tensions Deepen     Global markets staged a tentative recovery on Tuesday following a wave of volatility sparked by escalating trade tensions between the United States and China. The Asia-Pacific region showed signs of stability after a chaotic start to the week—though some pockets remained under pressure. Taiwan’s Taiex dropped 4.4%, dragged lower by losses in tech heavyweight TSMC. The world’s largest chipmaker fell another 4% on Tuesday and has now slumped 13.5% since April 2, when US President Donald Trump first unveiled what he called ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs.   However, broader sentiment across the region turned more positive, with several markets rebounding sharply after Monday’s dramatic sell-offs. Japan’s Nikkei 225 surged over 6% in early trading, rebounding from an 18-month low. South Korea’s Kospi rose marginally, and Australia’s ASX 200 gained 1.9%, driven by strength in mining stocks. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rose 1.6%, though still far from recovering from Monday’s 13.2% crash—its worst day since the 1997 Asian financial crisis. China’s Shanghai Composite added 0.9%.   In Europe, DAX and FTSE 100 are up more than 1% in opening trade. EU Commission President von der Leyen repeated yesterday that the EU had offered reciprocal zero tariffs on manufactured goods previously and continues to stand by that offer. Others are also trying again to talk to Trump to get some sort of agreement that limits the impact.   Much of the rally appeared to be driven by dip-buying, as well as hopes that the intensifying trade war could still be defused through negotiations.   China Strikes Back: ‘We Will Fight to the End’   Tensions reached a boiling point after Trump threatened to impose an additional 50% tariff on all Chinese imports unless Beijing rolled back its retaliatory measures by April 8. ‘If China does not withdraw its 34% increase above their already long-term trading abuses by tomorrow... the United States will impose additional tariffs on China of 50%,’ Trump declared on social media.   If implemented, the new tariffs would bring total US duties on Chinese goods to a staggering 124%, factoring in the existing 20%, the 34% recently announced, and the proposed 50%.   In response, China’s Ministry of Commerce issued a stern warning, stating: ‘The US threat to escalate tariffs is a mistake on top of a mistake... If the US insists on its own way, China will fight to the end.’ The ministry also called for equal and respectful dialogue, though signs of compromise on either side remain scarce.   Beijing acted quickly to contain a market fallout. State funds intervened to support equities, and the People’s Bank of China set the yuan fixing at its weakest level since September 2023 to boost export competitiveness. Additionally, five-year interest rate swaps in China fell to their lowest levels since 2020, indicating potential for further monetary easing.   Trump Talks Tough on EU Too   Trump’s hardline approach extended beyond China. Speaking at a press conference, he rejected the European Union’s offer to eliminate tariffs on cars and industrial goods, accusing the bloc of ‘being very bad to us.’ He insisted that Europe would need to source its energy from the US, claiming the US could ‘knock off $350 billion in one week.’   The EU, meanwhile, backed away from a proposed 50% retaliatory tariff on American whiskey, opting instead for 25% duties on selected US goods in response to Trump’s steel and aluminium tariffs.     Volatile Wall Street Adds to the Drama   Wall Street experienced wild swings on Monday as investors processed the rapidly evolving trade conflict. The S&P 500 briefly fell 4.7% before rebounding 3.4%, nearly erasing its losses in what could have been its biggest one-day jump in years—if it had held. The Dow Jones Industrial Average sank by as much as 1,700 points early in the day but later climbed nearly 900 points before closing 349 points lower, down 0.9%. The Nasdaq ended up 0.1%.   The brief rally was fueled by a false rumour that Trump was considering a 90-day pause on tariffs—rumours that the White House quickly labelled ‘fake news.’ The market's sharp reaction underscored how desperate investors are for any sign that tensions might ease.   Oil Markets in Focus: Goldman Sachs Revises Forecasts   Crude prices also reflected the uncertainty, with US crude briefly dipping below $60 per barrel for the first time since 2021. As of early Tuesday, Brent crude was trading at $64.72, while WTI hovered around $61.26.   Goldman Sachs, in a note dated April 7, lowered its average price forecasts for Brent and WTI through 2025 and 2026, citing mounting recession risks and the potential for higher-than-expected supply from OPEC+.       Under a base-case scenario where the US avoids a recession and tariffs are reduced significantly before the April 9 implementation date, Goldman sees Brent at $62 per barrel and WTI at $58 by December 2025. These figures fall further to $55 and $51, respectively, by the end of 2026. This outlook also assumes moderate output increases from eight OPEC+ countries, with incremental boosts of 130,000–140,000 barrels per day in June and July.   However, should the US slip into a typical recession and OPEC production aligns with the bank’s baseline assumptions, Brent could retreat to $58 by the end of this year and to $50 by December 2026.   In a more bearish scenario involving a global GDP slowdown and no change to OPEC+ output levels, Brent prices might fall to $54 by year-end and $45 by late 2026. The most extreme projection—based on a simultaneous economic downturn and a full reversal of OPEC+ production cuts—would see Brent plunge to below $40 per barrel by the end of 2026.   Goldman noted that oil prices could outperform forecasts significantly if there was a dramatic shift in tariff policy and a surprise in global demand recovery.   Cautious Optimism, But Warnings Persist   With both Washington and Beijing showing no signs of backing down, markets are likely to remain volatile in the days ahead. Investors now turn their attention to upcoming trade meetings and policy decisions, hoping for clarity in what has become one of the most unpredictable trading environments in recent years.   Always trade with strict risk management. Your capital is the single most important aspect of your trading business.   Please note that times displayed based on local time zone and are from time of writing this report. Click HERE to access the full HFM Economic calendar.   Want to learn to trade and analyse the markets? Join our webinars and get analysis and trading ideas combined with better understanding of how markets work. Click HERE to register for FREE!   Click HERE to READ more Market news.   Andria Pichidi HFMarkets   Disclaimer: This material is provided as a general marketing communication for information purposes only and does not constitute an independent investment research. Nothing in this communication contains, or should be considered as containing, an investment advice or an investment recommendation or a solicitation for the purpose of buying or selling of any financial instrument. All information provided is gathered from reputable sources and any information containing an indication of past performance is not a guarantee or reliable indicator of future performance. Users acknowledge that any investment in Leveraged Products is characterized by a certain degree of uncertainty and that any investment of this nature involves a high level of risk for which the users are solely responsible and liable. We assume no liability for any loss arising from any investment made based on the information provided in this communication. This communication must not be reproduced or further distributed without our prior written permission.
    • CVNA Carvana stock watch, rebound to 166.56 support area at https://stockconsultant.com/?CVNA
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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