It has been way too long since I have posted. To those who have followed in the past, I apologize. But, considering the state of the market at the moment, I have contemplated starting to post again. Since it has been so long, I will spend a few minutes catching up. Those who have followed in the past know that I have been looking for 5 waves to be completed from the 3/6/2009 low of 666.79. I saw 1219.80, which was reached on 4/30/2010 as the first wave. The following correction to 1010.91 I considered Wave A of a 5 wave corrective wave. The subsequent high on 5/5/20111 of 1370.58 was Wave B of this corrective wave, and the low of 1074.77 Wave C. The market then underwent a lengthy rally that carried the SPX to 2134.71 on 5/22/2015. The market action from 9/22/2014, with the SPX at 2019.26, until 216/2016, when the SPX fell to 1820.66, was a bit muddled. At the time the SPX rose to 2134.71, I was looking for a low below 1810 to complete Wave C of the corrective wave from the 1219.80 high. There a couple of possible counts for this, but at the moment it is moot, since the count remains the same regardless of the exact points. So I will go with 2019.26 completing a 5 wave sequence from the 1074.77 low, and then an extension of that wave to 2116.48 on 11/6/15. Taking that as Wave D of the 5 wave correction from 1219.80, the following low of 1810.10 meets my requirements for the completion of 5 wave from 1219.80.
So we have this entire wave starting at 666.79, Wave I completing at 1219.80, and a 5 wave corrective sequence completing at 1810.10, for Wave II. Considering that, my model would be looking for Waves III. IV, and V to follow. I counted a 5 wave sequence from that 1810.10 low, to 2872.87, thus possibly completing Wave III. I saw a complex corrective wave from there to 2346.58 low reached on 12/31.2018. This completed Wave IV. The SPX then rallied to 2393.52 on 2/25/2020.
So if you take the 5 waves 666.79, 1219.80, 1810.10, 2872.87, 2346.58, 3393.52, who find a correlation of .9925, which meets my model's requirements for the completion of a 5 wave sequence. If so, the target for this corrective wave would be around 2030.
I will continue to post, depending on interest.
Thx, very innovative.
ReplyDeleteCould events causes a review of your calcs. (eg if Corona came in Jan2018 iso Jan2020, I guess your count/picture would differ?).
Question:
What would be a "LOW" based on the (many future) actions: 0% rate (negative rate?); extra QEx; new debts; etc.
eg: for that reasin I increased this weekend from 2020 to 2239, based on assumption that Trump actions will impact the "fibonacci factor" to be used.
Grts
Thank you. An interesting question. Events may impact the count, but not the waves themselves. The endpoint of a wave is determined by a specific relationship. The count is my interpretation of the most likely scenario given the wave structure. Events would have likely changed the way the waves unfolded, creating a different pattern. In my mind the ends of waves are more important than the count. I am not one who thinks it is inherently wrong to adjust a count to fit new data.
ReplyDeleteMy targets are also based on some relationships between waves. They generally only point to one target, unlike something like fibonacci targets. So I can't really adjust it. These aren't always as accurate as the one that determines ends of waves, so it is more an initial guide. Once the waves get to point where I can determine the probable end of a wave, I can calculate a better target.
Some of my work still points towards 2030. This week I mentioned some possible targets close to your levels. You make a fair assumption. A lot of things have happened that affect the dynamic. Those are what usually show up in the waves. That's what happened Thursday, and it actually made me rethink how soon this all will end. Planning on taking a more in depth look over the weekend.
Appreciate the comment, and the insight. Thanks.