Thursday, February 25, 2016

KLCI FEB 2016

25-2-2016










24-2-2016










23-2-2016









22-2-2016







18-2-2016







17-2-2016









15-2-2016







11-2-2016

wave A = 1667.80 - 1631.11 = 36.69
wave B = 1631.11 - 1670.93 = 39.82

possible wave C = 
wave A = C = 1634.24

or

Wave C =
minor a = 1670.93 - 1645.49 = 25.44
minor b = 1645.49 - 1652.54 = 7.05 0.277F

minor c = 0.618 of minor a = 1636.81
minor c = minor a = 1627.1





Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Saturday, February 20, 2016

GOLD




Gold H1


Gold Daily









Dows vs Gold


Thursday, February 18, 2016

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

In a contracting triangle, can the e-leg be larger in price than the d-leg?

ANSWER:

The rules that make up a contracting Triangle are as follows...

1. Wave-a must be the longest in price of waves-a, c & e
2. Wave-e must be the shortest in price of waves-a, c & e
3. Wave-d must alternate in multiple ways to wave-b (price or time or complexity or structure)
4. Wave-d must trade at least part of the time in the same price range as wave-b

If the above rules are met, even if wave-e is longer than wave-d, then a contracting Triangle may be forming.

Monday, February 15, 2016

Friday, February 12, 2016

Wednesday, February 10, 2016

Your book does not mention "leading diagonals" (i.e., a Terminal in the position of wave-1 or wave-a). Many Elliott Wave analysts recognize such patterns; do you think they exist?

ANSWER:

No, they don't exist. Such assumptions are caused by the absence of a rigid, logical rule set in the original theory relating to post-pattern behavior requirements. Under NEoWave, every Wave pattern must follow an extensive list of rules for its labeling to be possible. Afterward, and most importantly, post-pattern price action must confirm the analyst's assumptions by producing specific, defined behavior. The rigidity NEoWave brings to market analysis does not exist in orthodox Elliott Wave. That lack of rigidity is the cause of many inaccurate forecasts and false structural assumptions, such as "leading diagonals" and W-X-Y pattern groupings. In the second example (W-X-Y), I don't even know why that was created because it is completely unnecessary and can cause foundational, orthodox Elliott Wave rules to be broken.

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

KLCI Jan 2016


3-2-2016






1-2-2016







28-1-2016






















22-1-2016






21-1-2016

Minor C from 1675.37
i = 1675.37 - 1648.66 = 26.71  
ii = 1648.66 - 1661.88 = 13.22 0.49F
iii = 1661.88 - 1608.81 = 53.07 1.98F
iv = 1608.81 - 1632.60 = 23.79 0.49F

V likely to be done at
wI=wV=1605.89 (broke today )
1.618wI = 1589.38










20-1-2016





















18-1-2016

Wave 1 = 1503.68 - 1727.33
fibo support 
0.382 - 1638.67 
0.50 - 1615.51 
0.618 - 1589.11 

Possible Wave E 
wA = 1705.94 - 1653.37 = 52.57
wB = 1653.37 - 1675.37= 22  

possible wave C 
0.618wA=1642.88 (broke) 
0.764wA = 1635.20 
wA=wC = 1622.80 
1.382wA= 1602.71 

1.618wC= 1590.31








16-1-2016
















13-1-2016







11-1-2016









10-1-2016










6-1-2016




4-1-2016