Topic: CryptoWaves - Elliott Wave Analysis Blog - page 5. (Read 29175 times)

Like very big flat? Either extended or running?

This count is for the situation where the $339 low was the end of a large ABC making a larger A and we are in a big B now. If this were to come to fruition, the B could technically make new ATH's before revisiting $339 and possibly below.

What is this count? I don't know about it.

Yes, it's still may be corrective and could be treated as corrective up to 750.

#1 I do see what you count there and I'll just answer with this
While it can be counted as an impulse (red) I chose to count it corrective (yellow) because the price fell below the red dotted line, thereby invalidating an impulsive count there.


#2 I'm not sure which iii of 5... 5 of B?

The labellings are slightly different so I could have the extra degree labels.

#3 I'm guessing you are referring to points in the first chart still?

thanks,
and in your opinion, or anyone else, how does this shape up to the 266 low alternative?
I think 266 is a highly sentimental number, never will be touched. and more significantly, to forecast any further lows is dismissing some serious divergance.

I like your counts. First one the most as it has clear subwave patterns. However, there are some inconsistencies.
1: wave B subdivided into an impulse with deep 2nd wave and flat 4th. Everything else fits perfectly, especially subcount of wave c and their sub-subcounts. If we go up from now it's confirmed.
2: Wave iii of 5 is not an impulse, but rather a diagonal, and as we know they don't appear in 3rd waves. I guess this one is invalidated.
3: Wave 2, again, looks more like an impulse. I think last price action invalidated this one as well.

Also, could you please include volume in your graphs in the future?

Thanks for sharing your work.

Yea, and if this count is correct (big flat after ATH), then we are at the beginning of new rally. So all we need to know now is if we are inside 2nd or b wave. I guess it would become clear around 600-700.

Absolutely! Triangles are always 3-3-3-3-3. But because they are comprised of all 3 wave structures, they can be counted as the 3 (B) in the case of 3-3-5 (flats) or 5-3-5 (zig-zags).

As far as my forecasts, I have 2 scenarios as my most likely counts, and one of those have a slight alternative.
Bullish shorter term (days-weeks). It's an ABC where the C is under way. Target between $550 (flat) and $605 (zig-zag). If 605 is broken then I would consider the nested 1-2's as a likely candidate rather than ABC. Use indicators to determine how far it will go as it unfolds.


One more wave down before the C


Bearish count of Doom.
This count retests the $339 low and either double bottoms for the potential end of the bear market or breaks through and continues as low as $100. $100 is not likely, but as a potential wave 2, it is possible. I have no definite targets here, yet, because we'll have to see how things are going IF we go there.


Where we are right now (22:20UTC) could be that 4 top before the final push down for B in my alt bull count. It also corresponds to the iv of 1 of C (or the 2 of C in the case of a leading diagonal). This small pull back was expected and I will expand my position if we see $435 before heading higher. If not, then I look at it as the iv of 1 of C option and I wait until the 2 to get in more.

I hope that is clear for everyone who frontruns it

Edit
This is why you don't use EW alone
There are too many variables to it and it can burn you. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS use other indicators to back up your trade.

sure, but the point of the thread is discuss, and maybe reach consensus. In an EW thread I'd give preference to your count, although I would only use it if it inspired me to. 

I'm not saying to follow my counts. You have the ability to count, so you should count it and re count it and when you think you have it, count it again. Weigh your options, gauge risk, then count again. You can come up with many counts for the same group of waves so don't be overly biased in one direction or the other. One more piece of advice would be to always start with a significant low or high. I know you stated somewhere that you start at the ATH, well good! Do that every time and you will continue to be successful with EW.

well if thats the hard EW rules, ok. I just fell like its the same either way - consolidation. contracting liquidty, contracting range. The c wave was rudely interrupted by news, so possibly it was a failed c wave, but I'll give your analysis benefit of the doubt.

there are many species of triangles no?
wedges describe the case where wave c fails to exceed the extreme of wave a. this is not a 'triangle'.

To be a triangle, it needs to have 5 distinct waves and each wave needs 3 subwaves.
If the first rise after your a=x then the final rise to make your b needs to be at least x*.618 in length to be a valid C. It is not, so I wouldn't count your triangle as it's own abc either.

RyNinDaCleM, can you comment on my B wave wedge intrpretation? It seems to stand out to me as the most obvious interpretation, considering that this bear run is weaker than the previous bull run - while I think your primary count is very clever.

- im talking aout this one.