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.

alchemist

Market Bottom?

Is the market bottom in place?  

56 members have voted

  1. 1. Is the market bottom in place?

    • Yes! Unlikely to reach new lows
    • No! Still more room to the downside


Recommended Posts

Monthly chart on the ES posted below. Notice the increasing interest by market participants; both buyers and sellers. Insitutional funds have liquidated but at the same time smart money has stepped into buy? Tall wicks to the downside with rising volume. Are we seeing a market bottom in place? Would like to cast a vote. Thanks!

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=9779&stc=1&d=1237259083

es.thumb.jpg.db568c8a447dbfe648ed180bec84585a.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to be having trouble even making it to the top of the channel at the moment. Yesterdays action showed that there were few buyers about.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=9780&stc=1&d=1237274879

 

IMHO the dead cat bounce will probably be over this week.

es20090317.thumb.png.cda5a70779ea0f61413f56df48b63026.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Harlequin said:
Seems to be having trouble even making it to the top of the channel at the moment. Yesterdays action showed that there were few buyers about.

 

We've moved 10% from the lows and we are back above the November lows. Did you expect to see 900 again in one week? :)

 

Besides there's also plenty of overhead resistance to work through.

 

  Harlequin said:

IMHO the dead cat bounce will probably be over this week.

 

How do you define 'dead cat bounce'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  firewalker said:
We've moved 10% from the lows and we are back above the November lows. Did you expect to see 900 again in one week? :)

 

Besides there's also plenty of overhead resistance to work through.

 

 

 

How do you define 'dead cat bounce'?

 

No the first thing I'm looking for a a close above that upper trendline (currently 793 ish). What I was trying to get at was the way yesterdays action run up a bit ran out of steam then closed slightly below Fridays close. Also take a look at yesterday NQ action. NQ has been holding up much better than the other indices (still above November lows) but yesterday it was the leader on the downside. This makes me think this is may be spreading from the financials/housing/motor industry etc. through to the techs.

"Dead cat bounce" is just a throw away comment, but I use it to indicate I'm still seeing this as a bear market. I will be until we work through all that overhead resistance you mentioned.

 

It's been interesting reading many of the on-line market commentators, opinion seems to be split on this one. I'm just offering my interpretation of the charts as an alternative view to the OP. I'm certainly not claiming 100% that I'll be proved right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Harlequin said:
No the first thing I'm looking for a a close above that upper trendline (currently 793 ish). What I was trying to get at was the way yesterdays action run up a bit ran out of steam then closed slightly below Fridays close. Also take a look at yesterday NQ action. NQ has been holding up much better than the other indices (still above November lows) but yesterday it was the leader on the downside. This makes me think this is may be spreading from the financials/housing/motor industry etc. through to the techs.

 

Yes, that was definitely what caught my attention as well. Especially since the broader market has been weaker than the NQ recently, and yesterday was a case of the other way around.

 

I know rallies in bear markets can be sharp and recover quickly. I'm paying close attention right now to see whether we can hold above the November lows. If that area gets confirmed as support, a continuation to the upside seems likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  firewalker said:

I know rallies in bear markets can be sharp and recover quickly. I'm paying close attention right now to see whether we can hold above the November lows. If that area gets confirmed as support, a continuation to the upside seems likely.

 

My interpretation on that is 3 days closing above the November low. Yesterday it did that but not in a convincing way. So as you said it's down to whether it now holds as support. As a day trader my bias today is down but if it takes out yesterdays highs I expect to see 793 soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I vote - I don't care? ;)

 

Good question and something the EOD traders can discuss, but as a pure intraday trader, I honestly could care less whether it's at a bottom or just bouncing a little. As long as the market is moving intraday, I'm happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  brownsfan019 said:
Can I vote - I don't care? ;)

 

Good question and something the EOD traders can discuss, but as a pure intraday trader, I honestly could care less whether it's at a bottom or just bouncing a little. As long as the market is moving intraday, I'm happy.

 

Good point Brownsfan. I think it also depends what type of intraday trader you are though. The biggest breakthrough I had in my trading was when I started looking at the bigger time frames and coming up with a plan everyday to identify areas for entries and also to determine key levels where I would switch from long/short bias. I also know other successful traders who only look at the here and now and stay away from any idea of bias. Whatever works for you as they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Northern boy said:
I don't think this is a call that should be made with TA. You need to figure out how much more damage is left to be unveiled in Europe imo.

 

 

.... and China.

But fundamentals always show up in the charts first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Harlequin said:
I also know other successful traders who only look at the here and now and stay away from any idea of bias. Whatever works for you as they say.

 

That's me - I'm that guy.

 

It's funny b/c when I go out to dinner, meet up w/ friends, poker games, etc. people ask how the market did that day or that week and I honestly have no clue unless the local news was carrying a story. As far as I am concerned, I'm done no later than 12pm EST and whatever happens the rest of the day happens. As for my knowledge, I'm clueless.

 

:rofl:

 

That's also an easy way to get people from constantly asking you questions about the markets. When you tell them 2 or 3 times that you don't know and don't care, they get the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think thatA blown out trading account or suffered a significant loss?

- A lack of understanding how the trade calls are made in a trading room?

- Frustration from not being able to get in a trade?

- Difficulty understanding the proprietary software you've purchased or leased?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know things have changed on Wall Street when the housing industry saves the day. A surprise government report that home construction picked up in February caught traders off guard and injected a week-old stock market rally with new energy Tuesday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Harlequin said:
Seems to be having trouble even making it to the top of the channel at the moment. Yesterdays action showed that there were few buyers about.

 

You may be interested in some charts I posted Sunday. All the major averages are in pretty much the same fix (the boxes are drawn around consolidations). And so far, everything is going as expected.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=9791&stc=1&d=1237332170

 

 

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=9792&stc=1&d=1237332170

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=9793&stc=1&d=1237332170

Image1.gif.4f375b2c4e74e61deded707246722db0.gif

Image1a.gif.244a965b6f959503f617d60ce018392e.gif

Image1b.gif.adfa9dfaa3b1e875563f13046193efa2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  DbPhoenix said:
You may be interested in some charts I posted Sunday. All the major averages are in pretty much the same fix (the boxes are drawn around consolidations). And so far, everything is going as expected.

 

Would you care to expand on "the same fix", or point us to your post on Sunday where I assume we can find your interpretation of your charts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Harlequin said:
Would you care to expand on "the same fix", or point us to your post on Sunday where I assume we can find your interpretation of your charts?

 

The post was made to a private group, but it didn't amount to more than "here are some charts". They're pretty much self-explanatory.

 

As to "the same fix", they're all in downward channels -- as you pointed out for the ES -- and they all have those congestion zones to contend with. And though it's not in the chart, the volume of advancers has been relatively weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  DbPhoenix said:
The post was made to a private group, but it didn't amount to more than "here are some charts". They're pretty much self-explanatory.

 

As to "the same fix", they're all in downward channels -- as you pointed out for the ES -- and they all have those congestion zones to contend with. And though it's not in the chart, the volume of advancers has been relatively weak.

 

Thanks Db, That's pretty much what I thought you meant, but I'm not familiar with the significance of congestion zones other than consolidation followed by breakout. Something for me to look into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Harlequin said:
Thanks Db, That's pretty much what I thought you meant, but I'm not familiar with the significance of congestion zones other than consolidation followed by breakout. Something for me to look into.

 

Congestions become important due to the S and R they provide (because of all the trading volume that takes place there). Sometimes they're no more than a speed bump. At other times, they present an impenetrable block.

 

Midpoints can also be important as they represent the "equilibrium level" within that particular range (or consolidation or congestion). Here's the Q, for example:

 

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=9803&stc=1&d=1237381103

Image1.gif.a3e18564c79d36345d27005f38961a52.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  DbPhoenix said:

As to "the same fix", they're all in downward channels -- as you pointed out for the ES -- and they all have those congestion zones to contend with.

 

It seems to depend on where you get your charts... Bigcharts cash indexes show we've already reached the top of those congestions on the S&P and Nasdaq Composite.

 

9805d1237382868-market-bottom-congestions.gif

congestions.thumb.GIF.907c45c8f9e96f3916c5a2d2c4454980.GIF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  firewalker said:
It seems to depend on where you get your charts... Bigcharts cash indexes show we've already reached the top of those congestions on the S&P and Nasdaq Composite.

 

Also when one creates them. These were done last weekend.

 

Did you mean to post a chart of the Dow utilities?

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.