Custom Search

Thursday, July 31, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 31 July 2014

Pretty strong selloff. NYSE declining volume versus advancing volume ended the day at 9.42:1. Declining shares versus advancing ended the day at 10.2:1. So today was a very solid 90%+ down day across the board.  

I would hesitate therefore to call this wave (iv) of [v] of 5 anymore because this is the kind of wave that kicks off major downtrends, not a mere subwave (iv).

However, price-wise it is well within the range of an expected wave (iv). The Elliott Wave rule is of course that wave (iv) cannot move into wave (i) price territory. On the SPX wave (i) is labeled at 1883 SPX.  In fact, normally the "virgin space" of the entire Minute [v] wave structure would also not be violated by wave (iv) price. Minute [v]'s "virgin space" is located at approximately 1902 - 1906 SPX. So if this is wave (iv) then this price range should also not be breached.
The Wilshire's trendline is an important trendline. We shall see how prices will behave as it is very near the trendline.  Logical spot for a bounce. A failure of the trendline could be catastrophic.  Should be fun either way!
VIX way outside its bollinger band.
Yes long-run, I do believe hyper-inflation could occur....but as most of you know, I theorize that we must first experience a catastrophic credit collapse (deflation) before.

Note where the "virgin" wave space is located on Gold's chart.
Wilshire weekly. I like it for the channels and trendlines.


I use Think or Swim for charting only and now they want to make that a point by plastering "Paper Trading Only". Which is just as well I suppose as I don't daytrade anyway but they really tick me off and ruin a nice platform. All I want is to post current futures at this time. Douchebags.

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

The Wave Count Since the 2009 Low

This post is this blog's "Daneric's Opus" on why the current Elliott wave structure from the 2009 price low of 666 SPX (devilish yes?) is counted as a corrective three wave structure - specifically cycle wave b - as the preferred primary Elliott Wave count.

This "three" wave structure is currently counted as a "double three" - specifically a double 5-3-5 zigzag structure, or "double zigzag".  The degree wave labels are derived from Frost and Prechter's "Elliott Wave Principle" which can be ordered through Elliott Wave International. Join Club Elliott Wave International (CLUB EWI) by clicking on my links to them (to the left sidebar) and then order the book. (Side note: I get a small commission from Elliott Wave International (EWI) from any EWI product or service ordered via your signing up to be a FREE Club EWI through my website links)

This post will be a technical wave count explanation.  I'll try and keep it focused however I'll start off on a little background on "why" the cycle wave b to begin with.  The post starts out with a background discussion on why this is cycle wave b structure from the 2009 low. Then it primarily deals with why it best counts as a corrective "three" wave structure and not an impulsive wave (5 wave structure) and details the finer subwaves of the cyclic wave b.

This is in large part an influence from Robert Prechter of EWI. First, I subscribe to the count that the year 1999-2000 was more or less the "peak" in a Supercycle wave (V) of a Grand Supercycle wave [III] - see labeling in my left hand blog column.  Robert Prechter, through his Elliott Wave International, has been publishing EW charts for many decades on why the year 1999 - 2000 was a likely Grand Supercycle wave III peak. His (and Frost) book, Elliott Wave Principle, Key To Market Behavior, details much and why this long term count exists. I Highly recommend it, as it is the Elliott Wave "bible" so to speak. At any rate, I adhere to his wave labeling directory schemes.
The primary long-term count is a Super-cycle degree (a) expanded flat count. This is where the middle cycle-sized "b" wave price peaks higher than the actual previous market peak and than goes real low in "c" wave that exaggerates both the proceeding "a"and b waves. (You'll also see expanded flat subwave counts in my charts showing the 2009 - 2014 b wave advance below). So yes, EW theory allows for new nominal market highs even though it is correcting the preceding wave.  In this case the preceding wave was cycle wave "a"at the 09 low in the form as (also) expanded flat.

(NOTE: I often show and use the Wilshire5000 as a superior wave structure in conjunction with the SPX. The Wilshire represents total social mood better in my opinion. but sometimes the SPX is just cooler to use because people like it better. But you'll see both in this blog. Prechter prefers the DOW wave structure. My opinion is that the DOW structure was superior up until the early 1980's, but the changing nature of the modern market makes a broader index more relevant for wave counting at this time).

In the simplest terms, Mr. Prechter describes "B" waves of all wave degrees as basically false waves built on shaky foundations and shaky economics. If you agree this is the biggest bullshit economic recovery in the history of recoveries, then you could easily comprehend what a huge "bullshit" cycle-sized b wave this entails. Its the mother-of-all-B-waves!  Which is the same as saying its the mother-of-all-corrective waves (even though it is nominally higher priced than in 2007). And the fact that it is a cyclic b wave is of historic proportions. But it all makes sense, doesn't it?  Does it feel like a true bull market?  Or does it feel like the biggest bullshit market? Only a 5 wave structure impulse wave would be a true bull market, and we have yet to have that overall since the 2009 low. I posit that this is not a true bull market impulse wave from the 2009 low based on long term count, current wave structure over the last 5+ years, and the heartfelt feeling that I sense social mood is still eroding in the long term since the year 2000 which indicates "corrective" since the year 2000, not impulsive!

Again, if you subscribe to Elliott Wave International (my links in left hand column) you would understand the long term analysis of why this is theorized as a cyclic-sized "b" wave corrective rather than an impulsive move. One aspect that Mr. Prechter points out is the DOW/GOLD ratio which peaked severely in the year 2000 at an extreme ratio. It is nowhere near that now.  You could also use the PPI (producers price index) /DOW ratio to account for inflation over the last 14 years and also see that the market is merely correcting from where the true social mood peak was at the turn of the 21st century. In other words, in REAL MONEY the market HAS GONE NOWHERE IN THE LAST 14 YEARS!  This is not necessarily "proof" of the current long term count but it is largely supportive nonetheless.  In other words, inflation is hiding the bullshit. You know it and I do too. The cyclic b wave makes perfect sense. Its correcting the waves since the true 2000(ish) peak but its a false promise nonetheless.

The detailed analysis will be broken up into several charts. The premise of the cycle b wave is that it consists what is known as a "double zigzag" count. Basically the premise of a double zigzag is that one 5-3-5 zigzag corrective pattern is not enough price and/or time, therefore the market doubles the corrective pattern  in an effort to fulfill a corrective mandate to the preceding wave.  Social mood determines this. The preceding wave in this case was cyclic expanded flat wave "a" that existed from 2000 - 2009. See the Wilshire chart above for the big pink "a".

A "corrective" wave is simply known as an A-B-C "three" wave corrective pattern in Elliott Wave terminology. A simple zigzag is just such a labeled wave. It has 5 waves followed by 3, followed by another 5 wave pattern. Thus the label 5-3-5 zigzag.  But what if the market traces such a 5-3-5 pattern and then deems it is "not enough of a corrective". Prechter (and Frost) solved this problem by largely observing that the market will double its corrective pattern in either time (sideways double flat) or price (double zigzag) or by some other complex combination.

In this case, I posit the market is in a double zigzag corrective pattern due to the time requirements of cycle b and the price requirements. In other words, the market traced a single zigzag and realized this was inadequate for the requirements of current social mood cyclic demands.  So it therefore doubled its pattern. Yet this doubled zigzag pattern is still considered a corrective pattern overall (these are the rules!).

Hence even though the market traced a clear 5-3-5 zigzag corrective pattern to the peak in 2011, social mood turned out to be of cyclic proportion and thus the market required a doubling of the 5-3-5- zigzag pattern to fulfill its cyclic mood cycle. Thats the premise of the current cycle b wave double zigzag count as shown below in detail in the next few charts.

Since Prechter and Frost posited "combination" corrective patterns (doubles or even triples) they came up with a labeling system that signified a
corrective combination count. In other words, those corrective patterns that, in effect, "doubled" (or in rare cases, tripled) themselves. Since a simple A-B-C zigzag would become an A-B-C - 3- A-B-C zizgag (with the "3" in between also being an A-B-C correction), they needed a convention to denote that this was a complex count and to clarify the larger degree count. Thus was born the W-X-Y denotation.

The W-X-Y denotation can exist at any wave degree. In this case since the 2009 low is premised to be a cycle-sized "b" wave the subwave count of primary [W]-[X]-[Y] signifies a double corrective pattern in this case a "double zigzag". The subwave zigzags take on the lower primary degree label. Thus (A)(B)(C) = primary wave [W] then (A)(B)(C) = primary wave [X], then (A)(B)(C) = primary wave [Y]. Even though this seems like more than 3 waves, it is still considered a corrective pattern and for the sake of argument is still called a three wave pattern overall [W][X][Y]. The W-X-Y merely denotes a complex correction but a corrective wave still the same!

(Note: the brackets [] denotes circle on the chart. Sometimes its shown as an actual circle, but most times brackets are easier to work with particularly when explaining in a paragraph or putting together a small wave chart as I often do) see explanation of wave degrees in left hand ad column.)

Channeling can be tricky. Yet its still in an overall channel so it still qualifies as a "three" - hence corrective since 2009!.
There is not much to say about the first zigzag of cycle wave b. Primary wave [W] was a straightforward zigzag as viewed from a long term point of view. It seemed appropriately sized, and corrected the collapse of 2008-2009 very sharply. At the peak it very much qualified for a wave 2 on the rebound but turned out to be not the case. The zigzag pattern thus doubled itself is my contemtion.

The big thing that stood out at the time was a subwave "three" wave pattern into the peak from (A) to (B) in 2011). This created a problem for my terminal count at the time. It was prophetic.
There is lots to say about the current wave [Y] but I managed to annotate the chart with most of the points I wanted to state. So please observe the chart notes closely and they will suffice for any commentary I would add to this post.

Elliott Wave Update ~ 30 July 2014

Again, today was more of wave (iv) of [v] of 5 action most likely. It was predicted that the market would "hang up" in a wave (iv) that may take many weeks. So far price action has supported that notion.

Yes its a boring market at the moment, however I have an EXCITING post being formulated that explains the entire wave structure from the 2009 low (which is a proposed corrective cycle-sized - "cycle b" - double zigzag count) in a few SPX charts.

The charts will detail proposed wave [W] (the first primary-size zigzag), wave [X] (the large panic corrective between the double zigzags), and then wave [Y] (the second primary-sized zigzag) and give a detailed Elliott Wave explanation for why we have the preferred count the way we have it. It will also explain the top alternate count from the 2009 low and explain what price action must occur for this blog to change its preferred count from the 2009 low.  Cycle wave counts do not get changed on a whim. The separate post will be for hardcore EW theorists particularly for those that follow Robert Prechter's hierarchy count system (as I do).

The post will be closely monitored and any gross offenders of etiquette will be promptly banned. Also, any discussion of anything other than what the post is about (count from the 2009 low) will be deleted for brevity's sake.

My goal is to get the post out before midnight EST. If for some reason its delayed, tomorrow it will be published.

Ok back to tonight's post: Same charts just updated. Sometimes the simple thing is that we keep repeating the same charts because they work for us for long periods of time.  When they "break" we must change them and adapt. Not yet for these charts:

Monday, July 28, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 28 July 2014

Wave (iv) of [v] continues to develop.

Friday, July 25, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 25 July 2014

Yesterday it was suggested that some recent gaps up may be filled prior to the final wave (v) of [v] of 5. So far, so good.

Thursday, July 24, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 24 July 2014

Ok first off, its my birthday Saturday.  Looking forward to it!

The meandering lazy summer waves just keep plowing on as suggested many weeks ago.
The best count would have wave (iv) closing a couple of gap ups before embarking on Minuette (v) of [v] of 5.

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 23 July 2014

Updated charts. Adding more pieces to the puzzle.  Not sure if (iv) has completed or will take more time.

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 22 July 2014

SPX weekly shows the primary count: Extended 5th of Internediate (C) of [Y]. Again, note the start of extended wave 5: 1560 SPX. After wave 5 completes, this is the downside target for a starting bear wave. Confidence is high for this count.
Wilshire shows nice form. Same count .
SPX hourly shows the best count for Minute [v] of 5:
And Wilshire shows potential Minuette (iv) still playing out.

Monday, July 21, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 21 July 2014

The Wilshire 5000 shows the true count of the market. Since declaring the top of Minuette wave (iii) of Minute [v] of Minor 5 a few weeks back, we expected a corrective wave (iv) to meander about for quite some time. It has not disappointed.

Question is, is wave (iv) over or merely only half of the correction?
Still leaving room for more of a correction of wave (iv) of [v] of 5. Again, "look-wise" it makes perfect sense for the time to finish the final waves to play out through the end of summer. Its certainly not required but it won't be surprising if that's what it takes.

Another trendline hit for (iv)?
SPX probably has a slightly differing subwave count for Minute [v] but the gist is still the same.

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 15 July 2014

Its has been proposed that the market is in wave (iv) of [v] of 5. The price action of the past many sessions still supports that view. Note how wave (ii) of [v] was a very complex correction. So there is reason to suspect that (iv) of [v] will be simpler which so far appears to be the case.
Here is a 5 minute chart in an attempt to chart the subwaves. So far the correction has been somewhat simple as compared to wave (ii) in chart above.

Monday, July 14, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 14 July 2014

Primary count hasn't changed.

Thursday, July 10, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 10 July 2014

The notion that wave (iv) of [v] of 5 is playing out looks good. Agian, the total scale of time on this entire structure suggests that wave (iv) and (v) may take the rest of the summer to complete. This is not mandatory of course, but the chart suggests it may happen that way. So patience is required.
A closer look at the last Minute [v] wave in detail. Ideally the blue box "virgin wave space" should not be violated until the entire count is over.  A pullback to the previous subwave [4] of iv of (iii) - which is 1925 SPX - would be entirely appropriate.

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Elliott Wave Update ~ 9 July 2014

SPX version.  Note the three blue boxes that denote where the middle of wave threes occurred. These virgin spaces are one reason I have this as an extended wave 5 count and not some other.