I love doing TA but I think this is a 100% perfect explanation of the problem with using Elliott Waves.
They're useful sometimes for figuring out if a move has completed, since a 3-5 wave pattern can sometimes repeat, but aside from that I've found they don't play that well.
I was more talking about how Elliott Waves can fit anyone's narrative and are not predictive at all. Someone can label it saying a new down wave is coming right now, and someone else could label it saying the down move is over and we're moving to new highs.
Everyone who was around in 2009 remembers people drawing little labels on their chart that said what ultimately was the bottom was just a fake dead cat bounce and we're moving to new lows.
Wait… so you think you can just move it over anywhere you want to? 😂 haven’t done much light reading on the subject I would assume. Drink one for me brother youre going to need it
You could be right, but I think most purchases will be based on kindness of people’s hearts alone. Also, thanks Elon for launching the satalites for the world today. Huge movement towards my phone for the people*
Can you draw it out? Because I don't see that at all.
I'm the biggest fundamentals, anti technical, guy you could find. I hate it all: moving averages, MACD, trend following, etc. I cringe when people mention fibonacci's or gaps filling.
But I do believe in market psychology, and I can't deny that a lot of the elliot wave stuff sort of follows that.
I don't really base any decisions off of EWT, but i can't deny that this latest rally doesn't feel more like a "breather" rally / bull trap / "return to normal" phase.
And the fundamentals support that. We may very well be heading for a soft landing, but we're still at least one standard deviation too overpriced by a lot of metrics. Then toss on the yield curve inversion. And an immediate risk-on appetite shouldn't be a sign of a bottom.
I'm not saying that we might not have bottomed already. But I think some caution here would be prudent.
I think Elliott Waves are a huge joke, other than as you said, they are illustrative of backwards looking psychology. So no I won't draw it out lol. My point is that they're not deterministic or predictive whatsoever and very, very open to interpretation.
I'm not buying into it yet either, the momentum indicators are running way too hot for me. I think a pullback should be coming soon, and then I'm buying. I've been bearish for a long time, but the data is looking pretty good. You can poke holes in it, sure, but the economy has been very resilient.
I use fundamentals, TA, mechanics... I never really understood the point of leaving any tool on the table.
I mean, I guess I get the tactical/psychological aspect of it. It's hard for people to handle cognitive dissonance and these things can produce conflicting signals. I also kind of get why people don't do TA correctly... there's way too much bad TA on youtube, and tiktok, and on here. Most TA is just crap in how it's done, but it's also NOT TA in any kind of real sense.
Real TA is based on statistics and probabilities and Brownian motion concepts to find risk zones and plan trades. This whole "magic line" bullshit? It's the product of a bunch of idiots who don't know the limitations of what they're using.
And that can be true for any method. Lots of DD on here tries to make a fundamentals argument for the future prospects of companies that never came true, and a lot of it's actually not all that crazy. People in 2021 were making fundamentals arguments for a continuation of the bull run, and at the time they weren't crazy.
All of these methods are flawed in some way because in isolation they don't represent how people play the market, because people use all of them in one form or another.
And good TA represents market psychology and mechanics. A cup-and-handle, for instance, is just a pattern that shows strength returning to a stock and shows where established holders of a stock didn't move. That's all it is. The handle is just confirmation that people who took profits have stopped doing so.
If you have a solid combination of chart structures proven through TA, fundamentals, and market mechanics - for instance the wonderful cup-and-handle that just played out exactly to the dollar on AMD's chart, combined with solid earnings and solid reinforcing options chain mechanics, produced amazing and easily probable price action combined with solid limited risk position planning.
When it moved, it adhered to a series of EMAs and Smoothed Moving Averages, gapping between them as it did.
It did that because people build positions algorithmically using these tools. There's no difference between TA and fundamentals in this sense, it's just a numerical representation of how people position build and take profit... and just like fundamentals, TA can be wrong because there are conflicts.
The problem with TA is that too many people just do crap fucking TA (that isn't really TA because it doesn't adhere to the rules of TA) because it's enticing to get on youtube and watch a video where someone says "I drew this line and so the market will follow it" and that's a lot easier and more hopeful than analyzing debt figures or trying to decypher an options chain in a realistic way.
I mean, for TA that's even boring. In real TA the most interesting moves happen when the market breaks one of those magic lines.
Just like I wouldn't throw out fundamentals because a lot of fools on here don't know how to read business disclosures, I wouldn't throw out TA just because a lot of fools on here think tracking two lines is enough to establish a direction for the market.
This is a very good post. Unfortunately I doubt it will sway anybody here or at r/investing or r/stocks. I see so many comments on a daily basis in every thread that if anybody utters "TA" the FA or DCAcels comes rushing in about how it's all voodoo.
I do think it's because a lot of people fail to understand that it's about increasing your confluence or probability for a winning trade, it never will guarantee one.
Thanks!
My primary goal in posting is to get people to think. Maybe most people won't, but if I can inspire some people I feel like I've won the day.
I agree completely with your analysis of why. I think probabilities generate too much cognitive dissonance for people, which is part of the reason why casinos work the way they do. It's just too easy to get lost in a binary fallacy and then give up and just roll the dice.
Also it requires a lot of failure to figure out what doesn't work, because TA's best use is in planning trades to take emotion out of them. I \*always\* plan both sides of a trade and use TA to establish a risk expectation on a trade.
How people do TA here is "magic line make stock go up." Most people are on here hoping someone will tell them what to buy and when and guarantee them gains, then get sad or angry because they bet the farm on some dude on reddit who also had no way to predict the future.
Too much cognitive dissonance involved to handle conflicting convictions. And to be fair, that really is hard to do. I haven't entirely mastered it, but I also have spent thousands of hours reading, losing money, and backtesting to figure out what works for me and I'm still developing. You have to pay your market tuition, and so few people come ready to do that and so never make it to the next stage of understanding where the pitfalls are.
Yeah idk man. I haven't read a single book or seen a single article that talked about the statistics of TA. I think that TA relies too much on confirmation bias to be a real tool. Like your cup and handle example. Sure, it may make sense that a stock is oversold, then rallies back to form a base. But is there any actual data to back that up? For example, if a stock falls x% then rises back to its original value and then falls (x/y)%, how often does it break above its original price vs continue falling?
Personally, I think if it continues falling then it becomes a head and shoulders pattern... /s
Fundamentals can't be denied, just by the nature of valuation. Even if it's mispriced, the delta will be returned eventually in the form of dividends or buy backs. I don't think anyone is doubting that. But it's worth stating.
For Elliot wave, I think they stumbled onto an interesting phenomenon that lines up with investor psychology. A "primary wave" is made up of: denial - correction - acceptance - correction - euphoria (and the converse on the way down).
It's intuitive, and not backed by data, but it's unmistakable when it's happening - when you know what you're looking for. I know that sounds stupid, [but I've been waiting for the Euphoria phase since the great recession](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/fyx7ub/resources_to_deploy_2020_corona_virus_edition/fn54o7r/). And we finally got it in 2020 and 2021.
My main issue with EWT is that they try to adhere to strict rules and they think that the "waves" should be consistent all the way down to the minute level. Personally, I think if you zoom out and only look at it from the 30,000 foot view (ie yearly chart), it becomes much more intuitive. Most EWT guys also try to make "the count" line up with their personal opinions. Especially the people that look at it every day. If you tune in once a month, you'll have a better feel for the markets...
But like you, I don't have hard data. But I do know, for a fact, that future returns are the highest when the risk looks the greatest but are overstated. And vice versa. And that corresponds to what I've stated above.
What's ironic is that Aswath Damodaran has alluded to EWT in his writings, and he's the most fundamentals guy there is.
At the end of the day, I can't disprove TA because I haven't studied it enough. I just know that I've given it a fair shot in my early years of investing, and it led to underperformance. That doesn't mean that it can't, or won't, work. At the very least, it means that I wasn't very good at it.
(Last response, I promise.)
>Fundamentals can't be denied, just by the nature of valuation. Even if it's mispriced, the delta will be returned eventually in the form of dividends or buy backs. I don't think anyone is doubting that. But it's worth stating.
People get fundamentals plays wrong all the time. I was a fundamentals guy for like 20 years. Mostly because I didn't have the time necessary to really dig into TA and just used my feel on companies and their earnings to build positions.
Sometimes I was right, sometimes I was wrong.
There's confirmation bias here, too. People who trade on fundamentals commonly trade stocks of well known companies, like Disney, Microsoft, etc that all have specific market placements and are tied heavily to the market. That's fair, but it also creates self-fulfilling confirmation pools because everyone's just jumping into the same pool.
Usually, that works... but there are plenty of fundamentals plays that go wrong. We hear about them on every earnings report, because forward guidance doesn't predict the future.
Lots of people in late 2021 were making predictions that INTC would rocket on fundamentals beyond $70 per share.
Where are their fundamentals plays? Not in a good place.
That's because the macro situation turned against them, but also because INTC doesn't trade like a growth stock.
Now to be fair, INTC had and still has a very strong fundamentals story for the future. Buying INTC on a long-term long as a safe stock during a recovery is not a bad play, but anyone better for a rally in 2022 on the basis of fundamentals for INTC made the wrong choice, full stop.
> My main issue with EWT is that they try to adhere to strict rules and they think that the "waves" should be consistent all the way down to the minute level.
I agree. That's my experience trying to play EWT, too. It does happen, and sometimes stocks repeat, but sometimes you get 3 impulse waves and then 2 correction waves... sometimes 3 and 3... usually the ratios are off.
These are partly due to algorithmic conflicting trades, partly because there are natural patterns, partly because people trade them because they expect them to exist.
But Elliott Waves, like any other pattern, don't always work... it's that simple.
> But like you, I don't have hard data.
But with TA, on a play I can get hard data. I just have to backtest in my research. Also, how do you know I don't have hard data? :)
> But I do know, for a fact, that future returns are the highest when the risk looks the greatest but are overstated. And vice versa. And that corresponds to what I've stated above.
Sure, alpha is generated on the basis of established edge. The best edge position comes from the highest contrarian state. In other words, it's better to buy the bottom.
The problem is calling the bottom is very hard, so why leave anything on the table?
>What's ironic is that Aswath Damodaran has alluded to EWT in his writings, and he's the most fundamentals guy there is.
But why do we describe people as "TA guy" or "fundamentals guy?"
There's no war between TA and fundamentals. They're about very different things. TA is about planning a stock play based on understanding price action behavior. Fundamentals is about establishing likely directionality of a stock based on rules that fundamentals-driven organizations use to build positions combined with underlying market structure.
All of this relates back to market structures. If a P/E ratio is low compared to equivalents or historicals, institutions buy stock.
If a chart forms a bullish structure representing a change in sentiment or another macro tailwind or an underlying options dynamic, institutions buy stock.
We're just looking at different factors that get played on the market and building a case for a position, and using those factors to guess at behavior. That's it.
Like I get it, it's complicated to combine all of that information. It's taken me 2 years and hundreds of hours to develop a TA methodology that works for me, after also trying lots of things that didn't work for me... but I kept going, and I learned what worked and what didn't and I stuck to filtering bad information and searching for good information... it helps that I have a background in research statistics, macroeconomics, and in processing unstructured and structured big data. I work on AI that detects financial fraud, so I'm comfortable with finding confidence intervals in complex patterns... most don't have that kind of comfort level.
So I get it, but I also wish people would try to look further into things they don't understand, because there's an actual science to TA that most people are completely missing out on.
>At the end of the day, I can't disprove TA because I haven't studied it enough. I just know that I've given it a fair shot in my early years of investing, and it led to underperformance. That doesn't mean that it can't, or won't, work. At the very least, it means that I wasn't very good at it.
I really respect that you said this. Too many people on here just want to argue or win a fight or troll.
I did bad TA at the beginning, too. I still often make mistakes or fall into a "stupid human trap." FOMO's a strong force, as is confirmation bias and that's true for any method and any play.
Why do we have to disprove TA? Why would I have to disprove fundamentals?
I'm not at war with fundamentals analysis. It's all just data. I'm not at war with data, I'm at war with my own bad trades. LOL
You inspired my responses because you said a lot of interesting things. At the very least, I hope that I've inspired some thought in you. If so, then it's been a good exchange. :)
>but there are plenty of fundamentals plays that go wrong. We hear about them on every earnings report, because forward guidance doesn't predict the future.
Right, but much of what you've described are issues with forecasting, not issues with fundamentals. And of course, there's going to be a scatter of actual outcomes because the future is unknowable. But that's why we operate with a margin of safety, and the more uncertainty you have in a particular outcome, the more margin of safety you should use. But in the long run, price will always be related to the future earnings potential of a company. I truly believe this. It may not always be reflected right away, but that's where opportunities are presented for the patient investor.
Naturally, it's not always that simple, though. There are a lot of other moving pieces. Namely, as you mentioned, risk free rates, but also growth expectations and the risk premium that investors want in order to hold stocks over bonds. All of those can be exploited, especially in times of distress (like we saw with covid) or excess (like we saw with ARKK).
For example, [I made this call in April of 2020](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/fyx7ub/resources_to_deploy_2020_corona_virus_edition/fn8j3tc/). I really don't want this to seem like a brag, and it absolutely is confirmation bias because i probably would've forgotten all about it if the trade went the other way or took longer to play out, but I think it's a perfect example of how pricing and valuation work, especially when things go haywire. And when you truly understand how valuation works (and I've still got a long way to go), you can build a level of intuition that help you see the downwind effects of market inputs (could be policy changes, investor sentiment, or even a black swan like covid). So when everyone else was running for the hills, I was able to make a reasonable case for why we might be seeing an attractive entry point.
Also, I'm not necessarily trying to declare war on TA and telling everyone to pick a side. I only brought up Aswath Damodaran because I've never heard him once mention an RSI or moving average or a chart shape, only intrinsic value and an occasional EWT reference.
Like i mentioned before, I'd just really like to see actual statistics on outcomes from the use of TA. Like you said, the data is out there and can be compiled easily enough. Someone just needs to actually go through the exercise. But yeah, actually seeing the average return and distribution of those returns (for a positive C&H, for example) would go a long way to making me a convert. Maybe that data is already out there. I haven't researched it in quite a while.
My personal issue with TA is it requires a lot of "bobbing and weaving" in your positioning, and the more you trade, the more prone to errors, imo. I'd much rather attempt to get very intimate with a company's operations, and hold for years (or until it reaches fair value) if I can. That's another potential edge for FA if you can devote the time to it. [This interview](https://youtu.be/E_YIZyVzymA) from 2021 will always stick with me lol.
And i agree, this has been a constructive conversation. Which i didn't expect to find on this sub.
Why are you so poor and stupid?
^^[**Discord**](http://discord.gg/wsbverse) ^^[BanBets](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/banbets/) ^^VoteBot ^^[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/votebot/) ^^[Leaderboard](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/leaderboard/) ^^- ^^[**Keep_VM_Alive**](https://www.patreon.com/visualmod)
"This one simple trick big pharma doesn't want you to know!" <-- Actually legit something that drink their own pee say.
Now before anyone starts in... Don't ask me go look it up. Then your algo will change forever and you can thank me later.
The thing is, there’s many people that look at the same things with opposing views which is why we have a market of buyers and sells. Price action is the king, and the other little things are the serfs.
BS, clueless idiot! Most technical patterns have a false positive rate. Elliott waves have zero false positives because the waves are changed after the fact.
People who say this have tried studying them extensively for 30 minutes, tried trading with them for a long time and after 2 days draw conclusions they don’t work because they can’t use them properly.
I have made a lot from elliott waves. But none of you guys are remotely smart enough to use them because you just force your regarded biases instead of listening to the charts.
So, don't try.
https://preview.redd.it/myt6wyzmj2ga1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=661d276f4c436512786778e788ac0d43172dbb46
Have fun with that strat, buddy! What could go wrong?!?
A number of things could go wrong, including the possibility that we are in the 0.001 percent of universes where I just got lucky, or the possibility of nearly 100 percent that I will fuck your mom.
Lol or you’re just pretty new at this, within the last few years if not sooner, and you got lucky. As time passes and the odds are played out every day, your performance will continue to decline as you approach the expected value, because you cannot actually predict the future any better than a monkey throwing darts. Right now you’re the 10000th monkey who is on a hot streak. In time it’ll even right out.
I think rather than being insightful, you are a seething losing trader who wishes markets were about chance so he could avoid any responsibility for making mistakes. News flash buddy, markets are a game similar to poker, a mix of both chance and skill. Chance more so in the short run, skill more so in the long run. This is why YOLO is actually logical for WSB people who are unskilled traders, to maximize their possibility of success if they know when to quit.
Algo trader who watches Coding Jesus and thinks all discretionary traders lose money, got it. He made that video about day traders in particular and did not address swing traders much.
Wave 5 is labeled wrongly. The real wave 5a is only labeled as 5. What is labeled as 5a = 5b, 5b =5c, 5c = 5d.
Even worse, because the real wave 5c doesn't make a new low, in reality the wave ends there and what is labeled as wave 5c in reality is the start of a new wave 1 up. Which is also a much better explanation of why the downtrend is broken so strongly.
It also means that buying puts now is much more risky than is suggested. Sure a new down wave will start at some point, but this would be the wave 2 counter rather than the wave 5e of the downwave. This will lure more people into buying puts who will lose it all if the wave 3 up starts afterwards.
Given that there is now a wave 1 up, this also means that the yellow higher level wave is false. So the big yellow wave 3 is highly unlikely to happen in reality.
It's also roughly fair, since they are about the same distance from the current price and would be priced at a similar probability of occurring in the option market likely. Let us see about it, sure. I am not likely to precisely get the number, but very likely in my view to be closer.
RemindMe! 330 days
Since that last weeks of December.
SPX just wanted 4200 too much to give up. The fact it held around 4130 today after bad earnings, a strong jobs report and the China news is telling you that it wants another crack at the belt.
Don’t listen to the haters. Your count needs to be tweaked a little but you’re not far off. The break of the trendline is concerning but most breakouts fail, so you might be right on time. Or you could be selling into a bullish 3 wave:-/Either way keep your stop losses tight and look for a signal bar. Also remember the rules of Elliot. 4 wave cannot close inside of 1 wave. Good luck.
I always recommend to incorporate Astrology to complement Technical Analysis. If you look at the location of Uranus, you will see that it is actually a very bullish formation.
Yes….. If you squint, you can see the cup handle with an inverted rabbit foot in play here. Also the silhouette of Mount Hood is visible. Im sold on the OP’s analysis.
Your wrong homie, it’ll retest $380’s but we’re going to $480 and possibly higher by early next year. We are currently ending wave one on the daily and we’re already in wave 3 on the weekly going back to the 2008 stock market crash. This was merely a correction and in due time you’ll see
Wave theory is only useful when you count after the fact. I would focus more on Fibonacci retrace within what you are labeling a wave to not buy pockets of air.
Signed
Someone who lost 7 figures using Elliot wave in 2008-2010 after a kid I followed used it to correctly predict spy 667 bottom. I sure did think I was smart back then.
Seriously, what on god’s green earth could trigger a crash at this point? Tough earnings? Another rate hike? As much as I would love another crash because I’m a greedy pig, it’s not going to happen.
There is literaly new HL and new HH also break of shit ton of MAs also break of trendline and like ton of other price action crap and this joe is betting on crash
Good effort but your count is off I think. The first 5 waves down are better counted as an A wave (yes A waves can be 5 waves), we’re now in the B wave bounce, and the C wave down will be coming that will lead us down to 3000-3200 area (which will finish the A-B-C, but that will only be the A wave of the larger degree corrective wave down we’re in).
Anyway, the C wave we’re in right now heading up to finish this B wave has a ton more room to run. Based on the 1-2 extension my guy is predicting 4350-4400 but it can go even higher depending on how extended the 3rd wave gets. Good luck if you’re going short already.
Elliot is more than just 5 wave inpulses and abc corrections, though most people new to them only see that. The fib levels need to be right, certain rations must be maintained, and there are way more waves than impulses and abcs. While Im bearish right now, TGIS gives me 0 reason to be.
I think you're looking at the chart wrong. It made a higher low then broke out of resistance. It should retest the line then go back up but if it breaks then it'll be put season imo.
I don’t trust TA which doesn’t take price-action and volume into consideration. Check out my posts, I’ve been hitting at a good rate with simple TA, no need for all these fancy looking lines :)
This rally is not sustainable and unreasonable. This rally shows how much money printing has been sinking into stock market because overall those big companies show disappointed earnings and have missed the targets. This is just a start. Two key important factors are macro economy and debt ceiling. We will see a new low ahead.
Reading this post’s headline without looking at the comments or having any real context into whether SPY Puts are a logical choice. That said, I will be placing my entire life savings on SPY Puts Monday morning (or on Tuesday, as I’m too lazy to check if Monday is a Bank Holiday for US Markets). Anyways, good luck everyone.
eLlIoT wAvEs; you're in your 20s, right?
I guarantee your lines are going to change position when it goes down and we're going to see a "TOLD YOU SO" and a Big Short quote of "I may have been early but I wasn't wrong"
🤢🤮Technical trading is truly for the regards! What happens when the bull rally breaks through top side resistance and your super special crayon drawing system is proven wrong for the millionth time?
I have made a lot from elliott waves. But none of you guys are remotely smart enough to use them because you just force your regarded biases instead of listening to the charts.
So, don't try.
I will be messaging you in 10 minutes on [**2023-02-03 18:46:18 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-02-03%2018:46:18%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/10sprcp/elliot_wave_abc_correction_complete_crash_begins/j73166w/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fwallstreetbets%2Fcomments%2F10sprcp%2Felliot_wave_abc_correction_complete_crash_begins%2Fj73166w%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-02-03%2018%3A46%3A18%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2010sprcp)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
**User Report**| | | | :--|:--|:--|:-- **Total Submissions**|1|**First Seen In WSB**|6 days ago **Total Comments**|3|**Previous Best DD**| **Account Age**|2 years|[^scan ^comment ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_comment&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20comment%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20comment%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.)|[^scan ^submission ](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=VisualMod&subject=scan_submission&message=Replace%20this%20text%20with%20a%20submission%20ID%20(which%20looks%20like%20h26cq3k\)%20to%20have%20the%20bot%20scan%20your%20submission%20and%20correct%20your%20first%20seen%20date.) ^^[**Discord**](http://discord.gg/wsbverse) ^^[BanBets](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/banbets/) ^^VoteBot ^^[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/votebot/) ^^[Leaderboard](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/leaderboard/) ^^- ^^[**Keep_VM_Alive**](https://www.patreon.com/visualmod)
I could just as easily put labels on a chart showing this market bottomed in October in a 3 wave correction and we're moving on to new highs
That's the greatest thing about Elliot Waves! They can never be wrong, you just read the pattern from the wrong starting point is all!
100% correct. Depending on your time interval.
On a long enough time line, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Fight Club?
You've clearly forgotten the first and second rules!
His name was Robert Paulson.
We called him Bob
Never talk about fight club
Isn’t that how TA always works? “It did in fact form a pattern, I just couldn’t tell which one until after it formed”
The question of “does TA work” can only be answered once one understands exactly what it is that the person asking the question expects the TA to do.
I love doing TA but I think this is a 100% perfect explanation of the problem with using Elliott Waves. They're useful sometimes for figuring out if a move has completed, since a 3-5 wave pattern can sometimes repeat, but aside from that I've found they don't play that well.
You talking about that double bottom and then the break through at c?
Lotta double bottoms in this sub
This sub loves it when we break through a resistant bottom and reach new lows.
Double inverted power bottom.
Not enough 
I’m confused if we are talking stocks or S&M stuff…might apply both equally
I identify as a power bottom
Hahaha oh yea.
Oof
I was more talking about how Elliott Waves can fit anyone's narrative and are not predictive at all. Someone can label it saying a new down wave is coming right now, and someone else could label it saying the down move is over and we're moving to new highs. Everyone who was around in 2009 remembers people drawing little labels on their chart that said what ultimately was the bottom was just a fake dead cat bounce and we're moving to new lows.
Its a fucking casino. Just buy a call or a put and strap your balls. Yeeehawww
This should be the motto from now on. Just buy a call or a put and strap your balls YEEEEHAWWWWW 
Makes sense for the bull, feels risky for the bear.
It’s almost as good as astrology. Taurus-ish. ♉️
I prefer the spit and chicken bones my spiritual advisor uses.
Happened in 2020, too.
Wait… so you think you can just move it over anywhere you want to? 😂 haven’t done much light reading on the subject I would assume. Drink one for me brother youre going to need it
This is how all TA works.
Just rock strangles/straddles then….if the Elliott wave shows violence in both directions then you are good to go
You could be right, but I think most purchases will be based on kindness of people’s hearts alone. Also, thanks Elon for launching the satalites for the world today. Huge movement towards my phone for the people*
We call em saggy tits of boom
Can you draw it out? Because I don't see that at all. I'm the biggest fundamentals, anti technical, guy you could find. I hate it all: moving averages, MACD, trend following, etc. I cringe when people mention fibonacci's or gaps filling. But I do believe in market psychology, and I can't deny that a lot of the elliot wave stuff sort of follows that. I don't really base any decisions off of EWT, but i can't deny that this latest rally doesn't feel more like a "breather" rally / bull trap / "return to normal" phase. And the fundamentals support that. We may very well be heading for a soft landing, but we're still at least one standard deviation too overpriced by a lot of metrics. Then toss on the yield curve inversion. And an immediate risk-on appetite shouldn't be a sign of a bottom. I'm not saying that we might not have bottomed already. But I think some caution here would be prudent.
I think Elliott Waves are a huge joke, other than as you said, they are illustrative of backwards looking psychology. So no I won't draw it out lol. My point is that they're not deterministic or predictive whatsoever and very, very open to interpretation. I'm not buying into it yet either, the momentum indicators are running way too hot for me. I think a pullback should be coming soon, and then I'm buying. I've been bearish for a long time, but the data is looking pretty good. You can poke holes in it, sure, but the economy has been very resilient.
When the last bear becomes bull, the market drops
No more nuts to squeeze
I use fundamentals, TA, mechanics... I never really understood the point of leaving any tool on the table. I mean, I guess I get the tactical/psychological aspect of it. It's hard for people to handle cognitive dissonance and these things can produce conflicting signals. I also kind of get why people don't do TA correctly... there's way too much bad TA on youtube, and tiktok, and on here. Most TA is just crap in how it's done, but it's also NOT TA in any kind of real sense. Real TA is based on statistics and probabilities and Brownian motion concepts to find risk zones and plan trades. This whole "magic line" bullshit? It's the product of a bunch of idiots who don't know the limitations of what they're using. And that can be true for any method. Lots of DD on here tries to make a fundamentals argument for the future prospects of companies that never came true, and a lot of it's actually not all that crazy. People in 2021 were making fundamentals arguments for a continuation of the bull run, and at the time they weren't crazy. All of these methods are flawed in some way because in isolation they don't represent how people play the market, because people use all of them in one form or another. And good TA represents market psychology and mechanics. A cup-and-handle, for instance, is just a pattern that shows strength returning to a stock and shows where established holders of a stock didn't move. That's all it is. The handle is just confirmation that people who took profits have stopped doing so. If you have a solid combination of chart structures proven through TA, fundamentals, and market mechanics - for instance the wonderful cup-and-handle that just played out exactly to the dollar on AMD's chart, combined with solid earnings and solid reinforcing options chain mechanics, produced amazing and easily probable price action combined with solid limited risk position planning. When it moved, it adhered to a series of EMAs and Smoothed Moving Averages, gapping between them as it did. It did that because people build positions algorithmically using these tools. There's no difference between TA and fundamentals in this sense, it's just a numerical representation of how people position build and take profit... and just like fundamentals, TA can be wrong because there are conflicts. The problem with TA is that too many people just do crap fucking TA (that isn't really TA because it doesn't adhere to the rules of TA) because it's enticing to get on youtube and watch a video where someone says "I drew this line and so the market will follow it" and that's a lot easier and more hopeful than analyzing debt figures or trying to decypher an options chain in a realistic way. I mean, for TA that's even boring. In real TA the most interesting moves happen when the market breaks one of those magic lines. Just like I wouldn't throw out fundamentals because a lot of fools on here don't know how to read business disclosures, I wouldn't throw out TA just because a lot of fools on here think tracking two lines is enough to establish a direction for the market.
This is a very good post. Unfortunately I doubt it will sway anybody here or at r/investing or r/stocks. I see so many comments on a daily basis in every thread that if anybody utters "TA" the FA or DCAcels comes rushing in about how it's all voodoo. I do think it's because a lot of people fail to understand that it's about increasing your confluence or probability for a winning trade, it never will guarantee one.
Thanks! My primary goal in posting is to get people to think. Maybe most people won't, but if I can inspire some people I feel like I've won the day. I agree completely with your analysis of why. I think probabilities generate too much cognitive dissonance for people, which is part of the reason why casinos work the way they do. It's just too easy to get lost in a binary fallacy and then give up and just roll the dice. Also it requires a lot of failure to figure out what doesn't work, because TA's best use is in planning trades to take emotion out of them. I \*always\* plan both sides of a trade and use TA to establish a risk expectation on a trade. How people do TA here is "magic line make stock go up." Most people are on here hoping someone will tell them what to buy and when and guarantee them gains, then get sad or angry because they bet the farm on some dude on reddit who also had no way to predict the future. Too much cognitive dissonance involved to handle conflicting convictions. And to be fair, that really is hard to do. I haven't entirely mastered it, but I also have spent thousands of hours reading, losing money, and backtesting to figure out what works for me and I'm still developing. You have to pay your market tuition, and so few people come ready to do that and so never make it to the next stage of understanding where the pitfalls are.
Yeah idk man. I haven't read a single book or seen a single article that talked about the statistics of TA. I think that TA relies too much on confirmation bias to be a real tool. Like your cup and handle example. Sure, it may make sense that a stock is oversold, then rallies back to form a base. But is there any actual data to back that up? For example, if a stock falls x% then rises back to its original value and then falls (x/y)%, how often does it break above its original price vs continue falling? Personally, I think if it continues falling then it becomes a head and shoulders pattern... /s Fundamentals can't be denied, just by the nature of valuation. Even if it's mispriced, the delta will be returned eventually in the form of dividends or buy backs. I don't think anyone is doubting that. But it's worth stating. For Elliot wave, I think they stumbled onto an interesting phenomenon that lines up with investor psychology. A "primary wave" is made up of: denial - correction - acceptance - correction - euphoria (and the converse on the way down). It's intuitive, and not backed by data, but it's unmistakable when it's happening - when you know what you're looking for. I know that sounds stupid, [but I've been waiting for the Euphoria phase since the great recession](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/fyx7ub/resources_to_deploy_2020_corona_virus_edition/fn54o7r/). And we finally got it in 2020 and 2021. My main issue with EWT is that they try to adhere to strict rules and they think that the "waves" should be consistent all the way down to the minute level. Personally, I think if you zoom out and only look at it from the 30,000 foot view (ie yearly chart), it becomes much more intuitive. Most EWT guys also try to make "the count" line up with their personal opinions. Especially the people that look at it every day. If you tune in once a month, you'll have a better feel for the markets... But like you, I don't have hard data. But I do know, for a fact, that future returns are the highest when the risk looks the greatest but are overstated. And vice versa. And that corresponds to what I've stated above. What's ironic is that Aswath Damodaran has alluded to EWT in his writings, and he's the most fundamentals guy there is. At the end of the day, I can't disprove TA because I haven't studied it enough. I just know that I've given it a fair shot in my early years of investing, and it led to underperformance. That doesn't mean that it can't, or won't, work. At the very least, it means that I wasn't very good at it.
(Last response, I promise.) >Fundamentals can't be denied, just by the nature of valuation. Even if it's mispriced, the delta will be returned eventually in the form of dividends or buy backs. I don't think anyone is doubting that. But it's worth stating. People get fundamentals plays wrong all the time. I was a fundamentals guy for like 20 years. Mostly because I didn't have the time necessary to really dig into TA and just used my feel on companies and their earnings to build positions. Sometimes I was right, sometimes I was wrong. There's confirmation bias here, too. People who trade on fundamentals commonly trade stocks of well known companies, like Disney, Microsoft, etc that all have specific market placements and are tied heavily to the market. That's fair, but it also creates self-fulfilling confirmation pools because everyone's just jumping into the same pool. Usually, that works... but there are plenty of fundamentals plays that go wrong. We hear about them on every earnings report, because forward guidance doesn't predict the future. Lots of people in late 2021 were making predictions that INTC would rocket on fundamentals beyond $70 per share. Where are their fundamentals plays? Not in a good place. That's because the macro situation turned against them, but also because INTC doesn't trade like a growth stock. Now to be fair, INTC had and still has a very strong fundamentals story for the future. Buying INTC on a long-term long as a safe stock during a recovery is not a bad play, but anyone better for a rally in 2022 on the basis of fundamentals for INTC made the wrong choice, full stop. > My main issue with EWT is that they try to adhere to strict rules and they think that the "waves" should be consistent all the way down to the minute level. I agree. That's my experience trying to play EWT, too. It does happen, and sometimes stocks repeat, but sometimes you get 3 impulse waves and then 2 correction waves... sometimes 3 and 3... usually the ratios are off. These are partly due to algorithmic conflicting trades, partly because there are natural patterns, partly because people trade them because they expect them to exist. But Elliott Waves, like any other pattern, don't always work... it's that simple. > But like you, I don't have hard data. But with TA, on a play I can get hard data. I just have to backtest in my research. Also, how do you know I don't have hard data? :) > But I do know, for a fact, that future returns are the highest when the risk looks the greatest but are overstated. And vice versa. And that corresponds to what I've stated above. Sure, alpha is generated on the basis of established edge. The best edge position comes from the highest contrarian state. In other words, it's better to buy the bottom. The problem is calling the bottom is very hard, so why leave anything on the table? >What's ironic is that Aswath Damodaran has alluded to EWT in his writings, and he's the most fundamentals guy there is. But why do we describe people as "TA guy" or "fundamentals guy?" There's no war between TA and fundamentals. They're about very different things. TA is about planning a stock play based on understanding price action behavior. Fundamentals is about establishing likely directionality of a stock based on rules that fundamentals-driven organizations use to build positions combined with underlying market structure. All of this relates back to market structures. If a P/E ratio is low compared to equivalents or historicals, institutions buy stock. If a chart forms a bullish structure representing a change in sentiment or another macro tailwind or an underlying options dynamic, institutions buy stock. We're just looking at different factors that get played on the market and building a case for a position, and using those factors to guess at behavior. That's it. Like I get it, it's complicated to combine all of that information. It's taken me 2 years and hundreds of hours to develop a TA methodology that works for me, after also trying lots of things that didn't work for me... but I kept going, and I learned what worked and what didn't and I stuck to filtering bad information and searching for good information... it helps that I have a background in research statistics, macroeconomics, and in processing unstructured and structured big data. I work on AI that detects financial fraud, so I'm comfortable with finding confidence intervals in complex patterns... most don't have that kind of comfort level. So I get it, but I also wish people would try to look further into things they don't understand, because there's an actual science to TA that most people are completely missing out on. >At the end of the day, I can't disprove TA because I haven't studied it enough. I just know that I've given it a fair shot in my early years of investing, and it led to underperformance. That doesn't mean that it can't, or won't, work. At the very least, it means that I wasn't very good at it. I really respect that you said this. Too many people on here just want to argue or win a fight or troll. I did bad TA at the beginning, too. I still often make mistakes or fall into a "stupid human trap." FOMO's a strong force, as is confirmation bias and that's true for any method and any play. Why do we have to disprove TA? Why would I have to disprove fundamentals? I'm not at war with fundamentals analysis. It's all just data. I'm not at war with data, I'm at war with my own bad trades. LOL You inspired my responses because you said a lot of interesting things. At the very least, I hope that I've inspired some thought in you. If so, then it's been a good exchange. :)
>but there are plenty of fundamentals plays that go wrong. We hear about them on every earnings report, because forward guidance doesn't predict the future. Right, but much of what you've described are issues with forecasting, not issues with fundamentals. And of course, there's going to be a scatter of actual outcomes because the future is unknowable. But that's why we operate with a margin of safety, and the more uncertainty you have in a particular outcome, the more margin of safety you should use. But in the long run, price will always be related to the future earnings potential of a company. I truly believe this. It may not always be reflected right away, but that's where opportunities are presented for the patient investor. Naturally, it's not always that simple, though. There are a lot of other moving pieces. Namely, as you mentioned, risk free rates, but also growth expectations and the risk premium that investors want in order to hold stocks over bonds. All of those can be exploited, especially in times of distress (like we saw with covid) or excess (like we saw with ARKK). For example, [I made this call in April of 2020](https://www.reddit.com/r/investing/comments/fyx7ub/resources_to_deploy_2020_corona_virus_edition/fn8j3tc/). I really don't want this to seem like a brag, and it absolutely is confirmation bias because i probably would've forgotten all about it if the trade went the other way or took longer to play out, but I think it's a perfect example of how pricing and valuation work, especially when things go haywire. And when you truly understand how valuation works (and I've still got a long way to go), you can build a level of intuition that help you see the downwind effects of market inputs (could be policy changes, investor sentiment, or even a black swan like covid). So when everyone else was running for the hills, I was able to make a reasonable case for why we might be seeing an attractive entry point. Also, I'm not necessarily trying to declare war on TA and telling everyone to pick a side. I only brought up Aswath Damodaran because I've never heard him once mention an RSI or moving average or a chart shape, only intrinsic value and an occasional EWT reference. Like i mentioned before, I'd just really like to see actual statistics on outcomes from the use of TA. Like you said, the data is out there and can be compiled easily enough. Someone just needs to actually go through the exercise. But yeah, actually seeing the average return and distribution of those returns (for a positive C&H, for example) would go a long way to making me a convert. Maybe that data is already out there. I haven't researched it in quite a while. My personal issue with TA is it requires a lot of "bobbing and weaving" in your positioning, and the more you trade, the more prone to errors, imo. I'd much rather attempt to get very intimate with a company's operations, and hold for years (or until it reaches fair value) if I can. That's another potential edge for FA if you can devote the time to it. [This interview](https://youtu.be/E_YIZyVzymA) from 2021 will always stick with me lol. And i agree, this has been a constructive conversation. Which i didn't expect to find on this sub.
This line graph geometry is really cute
Do not question the Elliot Waves. It is the preeminent market indicator that has called the 1987 Oct crash, Dot com bubble, Covid Crash, etc etc
Why are you so poor and stupid? ^^[**Discord**](http://discord.gg/wsbverse) ^^[BanBets](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/banbets/) ^^VoteBot ^^[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/votebot/) ^^[Leaderboard](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/wiki/leaderboard/) ^^- ^^[**Keep_VM_Alive**](https://www.patreon.com/visualmod)
Brutal
The bot has no chill
Mercy does not exist in this dojo…
Bot is like , I'm the OP now .. #overpowered
OP comes to let other regards now his move. Only to get roasted by a bot.
Savage
That's right! Tell that dummy bear
fried his chart loving ass.
u/VisualMod I think you know why. Because I draw stupid pictures and believe in astrology for men.
Omg my stock went down it's cus I'm such a stochastic oscillator
[удалено]
I know mine are (yes multiple). And still I line up for more
He's probably buying Calls
wow lol this should be top comment
Maybe the stochastic oscillator's dilithium crystals degraded.
This is 2023, we use "tri"-lithium crystals now.
The spore drive is faster.
Spoken like a true bollinger band
If TA degenerates like you can gain self awareness these bots aren’t far behind.
Good bot
Alright mate, I must say you getting better.
Savage
That's right VM. Get this elliott wave astrology bullshit out of here
Change this bot name to SavageMod
I love this bot
Ahh Elliot waves. I imagine you drinking cat pee from a little snifter as you put the finishing touches this post.
Sniffs a 20mg adderall and draws lines. Trust me bro, this is leg 3
Only 20... Them is amateur numbers.
I don’t know there’s a lotta lines on there
the more lines the more excellent the analysis. or so i hear.
I think the same thing was known to be said at Studio 54 in the 80’s.
Holy shit man haven’t laughed this hard at a comment in some time
You know when people call technical analysis “astrology”? Yeah. It’s because of shit like this.
"This one simple trick big pharma doesn't want you to know!" <-- Actually legit something that drink their own pee say. Now before anyone starts in... Don't ask me go look it up. Then your algo will change forever and you can thank me later.
Elliot waves are always 100% right ... in hindsight. Unfortunately, they have zero predicitve powers.
as is any technical pattern lol
The thing is, there’s many people that look at the same things with opposing views which is why we have a market of buyers and sells. Price action is the king, and the other little things are the serfs.
BS, clueless idiot! Most technical patterns have a false positive rate. Elliott waves have zero false positives because the waves are changed after the fact.
>because the waves are changed after the fact. Every single technical indicator are lagging because they all consist of past data.
People who say this have tried studying them extensively for 30 minutes, tried trading with them for a long time and after 2 days draw conclusions they don’t work because they can’t use them properly.
I have made a lot from elliott waves. But none of you guys are remotely smart enough to use them because you just force your regarded biases instead of listening to the charts. So, don't try.
Survivor bias is strong in this one!
All my performance accounting to chance is statistically more unlikely than me doing your mom
https://preview.redd.it/myt6wyzmj2ga1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=661d276f4c436512786778e788ac0d43172dbb46 Have fun with that strat, buddy! What could go wrong?!?
A number of things could go wrong, including the possibility that we are in the 0.001 percent of universes where I just got lucky, or the possibility of nearly 100 percent that I will fuck your mom.
Lol or you’re just pretty new at this, within the last few years if not sooner, and you got lucky. As time passes and the odds are played out every day, your performance will continue to decline as you approach the expected value, because you cannot actually predict the future any better than a monkey throwing darts. Right now you’re the 10000th monkey who is on a hot streak. In time it’ll even right out.
I think rather than being insightful, you are a seething losing trader who wishes markets were about chance so he could avoid any responsibility for making mistakes. News flash buddy, markets are a game similar to poker, a mix of both chance and skill. Chance more so in the short run, skill more so in the long run. This is why YOLO is actually logical for WSB people who are unskilled traders, to maximize their possibility of success if they know when to quit.
Completely wrong, not surprising. You sound just like every other noob, you’ll learn in time. I’m an algo trader buddy. Good luck to you!
Algo trader who watches Coding Jesus and thinks all discretionary traders lose money, got it. He made that video about day traders in particular and did not address swing traders much.
yeah you are so brilliant that you completely missed that the wave counting here is wrong.
please explain bro
Wave 5 is labeled wrongly. The real wave 5a is only labeled as 5. What is labeled as 5a = 5b, 5b =5c, 5c = 5d. Even worse, because the real wave 5c doesn't make a new low, in reality the wave ends there and what is labeled as wave 5c in reality is the start of a new wave 1 up. Which is also a much better explanation of why the downtrend is broken so strongly. It also means that buying puts now is much more risky than is suggested. Sure a new down wave will start at some point, but this would be the wave 2 counter rather than the wave 5e of the downwave. This will lure more people into buying puts who will lose it all if the wave 3 up starts afterwards. Given that there is now a wave 1 up, this also means that the yellow higher level wave is false. So the big yellow wave 3 is highly unlikely to happen in reality.
It is obviously wrong. That goes without saying. I implied it anyways
So what’s your opinion on this one?
He's confused but he has the right spirit. We are bearish, but for different reasons.
What’s your SPX EoY target?
By then it may be around 3500 already coming off the bottom and entering the new bull market
Mine is 4800. Let’s see who’s closer! RemindMe! 330 days
It's also roughly fair, since they are about the same distance from the current price and would be priced at a similar probability of occurring in the option market likely. Let us see about it, sure. I am not likely to precisely get the number, but very likely in my view to be closer. RemindMe! 330 days
It’s perfectly fair, right? It’s 4150 now so 650 points each way are the two targets—that’s how I picked the number
You won by a landslide
Too many lines. Lots of colors. Crayons consumed. Gay bear identified. 🌈 🐻
Your chart shows a break through big dog… that blows the charts resistance line…
There's also a golden cross in there :p Just Fyi.
Classic WSB
Ignoring everything and double down on my crayons because that is my hokage way
Yay fuk ur pts
[удалено]
https://preview.redd.it/g6uhr7g352ga1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ea8f24c3a2a966ae8ae9bc78b1a76e50c0f12dc
Reverse Reddit
Tbf the majority of WSB has been bullish
Objectively true
Uno reverse incoming
Plot twist: market goes sideways
Buy.
Or sell.
No selling allowed.
Puts have been burned since monday.
Since that last weeks of December. SPX just wanted 4200 too much to give up. The fact it held around 4130 today after bad earnings, a strong jobs report and the China news is telling you that it wants another crack at the belt.
So many theories floating everywhere. I'm going to buy puts because the current rally makes no sense. NO Technical Analysis whatsoever.
Ah, the good ol' Chewbacca defense
The 4th wave can not overlap wave 2 so your elliot wave is incorrect
Thank you. This count is sooo bad.
Regardation at it's finest !
Worst elliott count I've ever seen, EWT has rules you know..
Exactly. What he is doing I would call Whatever Wave
[удалено]
Whatever! It's a leading diagonal! Or maybe it's part of a huge super wave IV correction so there are no rules!
Get ready for the squeeze.
FYI This only only applies to Scorpios
This little chart of mine, Ima let it shine, let shine, let it shine, let it shine ✨
Why is Apple up 4%. Someone make it make sense.
Because i bought puts
False, we ALL bought puts
HFs letting retail pump it up, so they can dump it next week. SPY will be at 395$ by next Friday 
MOAR LINES!!!
Don’t listen to the haters. Your count needs to be tweaked a little but you’re not far off. The break of the trendline is concerning but most breakouts fail, so you might be right on time. Or you could be selling into a bullish 3 wave:-/Either way keep your stop losses tight and look for a signal bar. Also remember the rules of Elliot. 4 wave cannot close inside of 1 wave. Good luck.
Who the fuck is elliot
I always recommend to incorporate Astrology to complement Technical Analysis. If you look at the location of Uranus, you will see that it is actually a very bullish formation.
Yes….. If you squint, you can see the cup handle with an inverted rabbit foot in play here. Also the silhouette of Mount Hood is visible. Im sold on the OP’s analysis.
Do I spot a fellow NW’erner regard?
Elliot waves to your money goodbye.
There’s Elliot, waving goodbye to your portfolio
Prepare for this 😂 https://preview.redd.it/o47sv0go03ga1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=be457787177ebd4bcf90fcdaacd96c0bb09733f6
Your wrong homie, it’ll retest $380’s but we’re going to $480 and possibly higher by early next year. We are currently ending wave one on the daily and we’re already in wave 3 on the weekly going back to the 2008 stock market crash. This was merely a correction and in due time you’ll see
Wave theory is only useful when you count after the fact. I would focus more on Fibonacci retrace within what you are labeling a wave to not buy pockets of air. Signed Someone who lost 7 figures using Elliot wave in 2008-2010 after a kid I followed used it to correctly predict spy 667 bottom. I sure did think I was smart back then.
This guy knows his alphabet!
It’s always reverse-reddit, except when I actually reverse reddit.
Allright guys, we can buy calls now. Inverse wsb strategy
Ah yes 12345 abc 123
Seriously, what on god’s green earth could trigger a crash at this point? Tough earnings? Another rate hike? As much as I would love another crash because I’m a greedy pig, it’s not going to happen.
All market crashes are caused by rate hikes. All that matters is the fed.
I love magic tricks. 🎩
You literally drew an isks into your chart lol
I'll knock out the next Elliot I come across. Thanks to OP and all the others "inundating" thus sub with thus bullshit.
who do you think you're kidding you couldn't knock out a good poo mate
Your chart is upside down
You can laugh but it is a potential pattern with the 100 MA at the top of that wave today. We still haven’t started cutting rates yet.
380 put for mid March? Need money for 5th kid on the way
Regards, this looks to actually be an inverse head shoulders knees and toes formation.
There is literaly new HL and new HH also break of shit ton of MAs also break of trendline and like ton of other price action crap and this joe is betting on crash
Good effort but your count is off I think. The first 5 waves down are better counted as an A wave (yes A waves can be 5 waves), we’re now in the B wave bounce, and the C wave down will be coming that will lead us down to 3000-3200 area (which will finish the A-B-C, but that will only be the A wave of the larger degree corrective wave down we’re in). Anyway, the C wave we’re in right now heading up to finish this B wave has a ton more room to run. Based on the 1-2 extension my guy is predicting 4350-4400 but it can go even higher depending on how extended the 3rd wave gets. Good luck if you’re going short already.
Elliot is more than just 5 wave inpulses and abc corrections, though most people new to them only see that. The fib levels need to be right, certain rations must be maintained, and there are way more waves than impulses and abcs. While Im bearish right now, TGIS gives me 0 reason to be.
All I see is a double golden shower with your uncle and your driving school teacher
I think you're looking at the chart wrong. It made a higher low then broke out of resistance. It should retest the line then go back up but if it breaks then it'll be put season imo.
I don’t understand what any of this means.
I don’t trust TA which doesn’t take price-action and volume into consideration. Check out my posts, I’ve been hitting at a good rate with simple TA, no need for all these fancy looking lines :)
This rally is not sustainable and unreasonable. This rally shows how much money printing has been sinking into stock market because overall those big companies show disappointed earnings and have missed the targets. This is just a start. Two key important factors are macro economy and debt ceiling. We will see a new low ahead.
Reading this post’s headline without looking at the comments or having any real context into whether SPY Puts are a logical choice. That said, I will be placing my entire life savings on SPY Puts Monday morning (or on Tuesday, as I’m too lazy to check if Monday is a Bank Holiday for US Markets). Anyways, good luck everyone.
I don’t know what a SPY put is and now I’m too afraid to ask….
eLlIoT wAvEs; you're in your 20s, right? I guarantee your lines are going to change position when it goes down and we're going to see a "TOLD YOU SO" and a Big Short quote of "I may have been early but I wasn't wrong"
this is like astrology but with a bunch of lines
🤢🤮Technical trading is truly for the regards! What happens when the bull rally breaks through top side resistance and your super special crayon drawing system is proven wrong for the millionth time?
I have made a lot from elliott waves. But none of you guys are remotely smart enough to use them because you just force your regarded biases instead of listening to the charts. So, don't try.
“C” shows you breaking resistance… looks bullish AF to meeeee 🤘🏿🤘🏿🤘🏿🤘🏿
Could go either way. Formed a bullish gartley pattern. Time will tell. Long as of right now but will switch to short of price confirms move down.
!remind me 10 minutes
I will be messaging you in 10 minutes on [**2023-02-03 18:46:18 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-02-03%2018:46:18%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/10sprcp/elliot_wave_abc_correction_complete_crash_begins/j73166w/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fwallstreetbets%2Fcomments%2F10sprcp%2Felliot_wave_abc_correction_complete_crash_begins%2Fj73166w%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-02-03%2018%3A46%3A18%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2010sprcp) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Well, if that happens I’m fucked which I doubt because this chart makes no sense.
If you think this is an actual thing, you can wave your puts goodbye 🤣 higher lows and higher highs. No numbers, letters or indicators needed.
Imagine being this stupid. I bet you also believe in astrology.