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

.... it is a bull M

 

otherwise known as a Gartley

 

  waveslider said:
Not sure what that was elovemer,

 

just wanted to note on this forum that the WW pattern identified has now played out.

It was identified in early july in post 543.

http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/2/wolfe-2229-55.html

I think there were 60+ ES points to be gained, my charts are down right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First time poster here.

Here's my WW analysis on SPY, FWIW:

 

we'll drop to point 1 from here, then move to point 2 due to a small bullish wave from 10/27.

Once point 2 is reached (i.e., over the 11/10 high) then the bearish wave (starting from long time ago, out from the left of the screen) to 8/27 low (point 2), then point 3 is 11/10, point 4 is P1 in the picture, and point 5 is P2 in the picture. The target is then P3.

Both P1,P2, and P3 are estimates, where P1 is from the far left to find the 'least resistance' from 8/27 to 11/10.

 

Sorry don't know how to attach pictures..

 

2010-11-19-TOS_CHARTS.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  nandv said:
please re-read the materials from Bill Wolfe.

WW (bullish or bearish) are all 5 points, the target line is from point 1 to point 4.

 

But there is no point 4 on the image? I think what Waveslider is saying is that a WW requires points 1 2 3 & 4 to be 'in' (described by price action that has already occurred). In your image price has not reached point 1 yet and does not have points 4 & 5 drawn at all. A truly remarkable feet if it pans out :). Could you draw in a 1-4 line and your final target projected from the intersection of 1-4 line and point 5?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologize if it was not clear in the 1st post. But if you re-read my post, and use the revised picture, it should be more clear.

P1, P2, P3 are meant for figure reference, NOT the point # for WW.

 

While/smaller font # are the wave counts for the smaller, bullish wave, yellowish/bigger font # is for the main bearish wave.

 

We'll see today's action will surpass the smaller bearish wave 1-4 line!

 

Comments welcome.

 

2010-11-19-TOS_CHARTS | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far it's still on track. How low is P1 is the real challenge, as I said, it's my estimate.

 

Also notice the on 4/16 there's a 'cross' of the price action against the p1/p4 line for the bigger bearish wave, this is what Bill Wolfe called 'Pressure points' and it usually means the bearish wave's P4 to P5 will be very straight. This, combined with the estimate of P1, makes a real challenge to catch the big rebound!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

today's action was a surprise, probably Uncle Ben at work, just look at TLT and TBT!

 

Attached are two pictures, one is QQQQ, one is SPY.

 

Notice the bearish wave just completed yesterday (target).

Sicne the target is higher than circle 2, which is also P3 of the potential larger bullish wave, this bullish wave has not formed yet!

On the other hand, as long as QQQQ is not over the recent high of 54, the even bigger bearish wave has not formed.

 

Same for SPY.

 

Truly bull vs bear now!

 

But looking at the EURO and Dollar actions, my assesment of the lower first then higher is still valid.

 

2010-11-25-TOS_CHARTS

2010-11-25-TOS_CHARTS1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

587 is more clarification of 582, since you guys asked.

the latest is of smaller scales, the last few days hourly chart.

If all my charts are inspected in detailed, you'll find they're consistent.

 

Waves are of different scales, and always running, smaller one down to min, large to multi-years.

 

Once you're well trained, you'll be able to spot them in all scales.

 

Examples are:

 

2010-11-25-TOS_CHARTS3 | SPX 15 Yrs monthly chart

 

and

 

2010-11-25-TOS_CHARTS4 | SPX 3 yr daily chart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The past two days' actions are most likely due to "the bernanke put"!

 

They just don't understand, if the price drops below the low of 11/16, making it a point 5, then the bullish wave is valid, then the 1 to 4 rebound would happen....

 

As Bill Wolfe once told me : "This system works for all 'freely traded' market, draw your own conclusion!"

 

See SPX Daily

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi nandv,

 

I am no expert in Wolfe Waves. I am trying to understand your charts on posts #593 and #594. Doesn't P3 and P5 should be lower than P1? Also P1 should be at least a minor SwingPoint? Both charts in posts #593 and #594 show P3 > P1 and P1 is not a SwingPoint.

 

Pl. explain.

 

Regards,

Suri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Wolfe wave, there are NO requirements of P3, and P5 smaller than P1 in a bearish wave. As a matter of fact, often times, P5 will 'overshoot' higher than P3, making the 'short' even sweeter going from P5 to Target. And there's no such term called SwingPoint in Wolfe wave, at least not from Bill.

 

It's evident from Bill's website that the true Wolfe wave technique is VERY different from what you see from the Internet. From my personal experience, taking class from Bill is the best investment I've made. Lots of hard work from your own, of course, in order to master the technique. Real charts are rarely text book style, being able to spot one in real time, be it 5 min, days or months, is the real challenge. Plus the external 'Uncle Ben' factor make analysis very difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's action makes it more and more likely the smaller bullish wave (please re-read my thread) is completed. Also as stated in #588, the bigger bullish wave P4 to P5 will be 'swift'. Indeed the last two days actions are almost 'straight up‘.

 

Once the price action is over the recent high (circle) then the bearish wave is formed. But since P5 often times will overshoot, there's no estimate of how high it will go before start dropping.

 

today's SPY hourly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  nandv said:
In Wolfe wave, there are NO requirements of P3, and P5 smaller than P1 in a bearish wave. As a matter of fact, often times, P5 will 'overshoot' higher than P3, making the 'short' even sweeter going from P5 to Target. And there's no such term called SwingPoint in Wolfe wave, at least not from Bill.

 

It's evident from Bill's website that the true Wolfe wave technique is VERY different from what you see from the Internet. From my personal experience, taking class from Bill is the best investment I've made. Lots of hard work from your own, of course, in order to master the technique. Real charts are rarely text book style, being able to spot one in real time, be it 5 min, days or months, is the real challenge. Plus the external 'Uncle Ben' factor make analysis very difficult.

 

Hi nandv,

 

Thanks for your response.

 

Seems like you have good knowledge of Wolfe Waves and I am trying to clarify what I read and what I know. I have also not taken Bill Wolfe's course/class so I cannot compare what Bill Wolfe says and what others say. But I am sure you agree that every pattern must have clear *RULES* on how to identify and how to trade. From 'StreetSmarts' book (Larry Connors and Linda Raschke), the rules clearly say multiple times in Chapter 15 titled WOLFEWAVES that P3 must be Lower than P1 and P5 must form on/below the Trendline connecting P1 and P3 (vice-versa for bullish/bearish), suggesting P5 is at least at the same level as P3 or Lower than P3. My research on Wolfe Wave says P1 cannot be arbitrary, it must be at least a minor (minimum strength of 2) SwingHigh or SwingLow. Also, P1 to P2 must have symmetry with P3 to P4 both in Price and Time. I do agree with the rules from Larry Connors/Linda Raschke's book as they clearly define proper channels and action/reaction lines to trade.

 

As you say the rules from Bill Wolfe are different from rules published else-where, please educate me on his rules to identify the WW pattern.

 

Regards,

Suri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some additional comments on this thread, in predicting the market path.

 

1. It is NOT recommended to predict, or even act on the WW waves other than from P5 to target. Ie., The charts I have posted so far are possible paths, based on potential WW formation.

 

2. In predicting the overall market path, one should look at all major indices to get confirmation. Today (I should have done this much sooner) we look at the RUT as belows, and the smaller bullish wave is formed (P5 is lower than P3), and we're on our way to the target (following the P1/P4 line). With this, there's no point doubting whether Q and SPY are still waiting for the P5 to go lower than P3....

 

The last chart is, once the smaller bullish wave completes, then the larger bearish wave will form, now all we have to do is to wait for the P5 overshoot to complete. This again, is a MAJOR challenge. Often times the clue is big spikes in volume.

 

RUT hourly

 

RUT daily

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suri, thanks for the feedback.

 

All I can say is the book you referred is NOT correct in describing the WW rules.

My advise is to study my charts (there're many of them now) and you'll see the common themes.

 

 

Second advise of course, is to contact Bill for the class.

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

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • 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/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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