I have been on Trading View for almost a year now. In that timeframe I have been fortunate enough to have almost 2,600 people who follow my work, shared almost 700 ideas within that community, and founded my website for paying members.
Yesterday, we held a training / education Zoom call and dissected the move up off the October low of 3502. The purpose of this call was to strictly adhere to EWT rules & guidelines as we went through the chart literally day by day. The quick version of the outcome of that call was we have topped in the primary B countertrend rally. This conclusion was reached largely because of 2 major areas of focus from the October 2022 lows. The initial pattern, and the final impulsive portion of the pattern from March until the recent highs. Now I know most people may find this hard to accept. I fully expect the comments section to be lively but the notion of the initial portion of the pattern started off as a leading diagonal, is just plain wrong.
Please allow me to explain.
In preparation for this training, I spent time putting together my deck of slides, with an agenda to refer back to the live chart. As I went through the pattern and spotted what some Elliottitions would consider a leading diagonal off the 3502 bottom, I decided to spend some time researching Leading Diagonals. The reason being the theme of the call was the proper application of EWT rules and guidelines. So I wanted to be sure I was not assuming when I applied rules associated with ending diagonals to leading diagonals.
What I found was eye-opening to me because I never questioned what LD’s were. Like some, I have always applied diagonals (ending or leading) as 3,3,3,3,3’s. For the Elliott Wave uninitiated this would be a series of abc’s but labeled as 1,2,3,4 and 5 with the 4 overlapping the 1.
NOT SO FAST!
My research turned up that although Ending Diagonals are a legitimate Elliott Wave pattern with governing rules, the larger EWT community is not 100% agreed on Leading Diagonals. Here’s an excerpt from AJ Frosts and Robert Prechter’s book, “Elliott Wave Principle”.
Leading Diagonal
It has recently come to light that a diagonal occasionally appears in the wave 1 position of impulses and in the wave A position of zigzags. In the few examples we have, the subdivisions appear to be the same: 3-3-3-3-3, but the jury is out on a strict definition, as 5,3,5,3,5 that overlap are also accepted. These patterns were not originally discovered by R.N. Elliott but have appeared enough times and over a long enough period that the authors are convinced of their validity. The notion of an LD is a relatively new idea that, in truth is accepted among many Elliottitions, but not all due a lack of governing rules.
Well, I now have a quandary with respect to my upcoming zoom call with my membership. The entire basis of the call is the proper application of EWT Rules and or Guidelines. If there are no agreed upon rules, let alone guidelines, what do I do when the call begins and we start to examine the initial pattern off the 3502 bottom?
I had already announced and scheduled the call.
I decided to apply both loosely mentioned counts to this pattern (3,3,3,3,3 and 5,3,5,3,5) …and guess what? None of them apply. Not even close. You can go through the pattern yourself and what anyone is going to come away with when analyzing the initial pattern from 3502 on October 13, 2022 to the high of 4180 on December 22, 2022 is a an abc. If you have any doubts here’s the pattern zoomed in.
www.tradingview.com/...rt/ES1!/E2QzXj6h-pc/
So, based on the initial pattern being an abc...this entire move from start to finish was going to be corrective, or a countertrend advance. Trend being down.
The last portion of the pattern that is impulsive starting in March 13th, 2023 until July 27th, 2023 should be labeled as following:
www.tradingview.com/...t/ES1!/O4t11F1c-pc2/
C waves will normally terminate at the 1.618% fib extension....in which price did.
Therefore, I firmly believe we have topped based on the fact that the leading diagonal may not even be a legitimate Elliott Wave pattern at worst, and at best, if it exists, has loosely based governing rules or guidelines. Lastly the impulsive portion of the pattern from March to July terminated at 1.618% of the initial pattern. I think it's a VERY VERY high probability we topped in July....and more importantly...should lead to a decline that could signify bad times ahead.
Best to all,
Chris
Yesterday, we held a training / education Zoom call and dissected the move up off the October low of 3502. The purpose of this call was to strictly adhere to EWT rules & guidelines as we went through the chart literally day by day. The quick version of the outcome of that call was we have topped in the primary B countertrend rally. This conclusion was reached largely because of 2 major areas of focus from the October 2022 lows. The initial pattern, and the final impulsive portion of the pattern from March until the recent highs. Now I know most people may find this hard to accept. I fully expect the comments section to be lively but the notion of the initial portion of the pattern started off as a leading diagonal, is just plain wrong.
Please allow me to explain.
In preparation for this training, I spent time putting together my deck of slides, with an agenda to refer back to the live chart. As I went through the pattern and spotted what some Elliottitions would consider a leading diagonal off the 3502 bottom, I decided to spend some time researching Leading Diagonals. The reason being the theme of the call was the proper application of EWT rules and guidelines. So I wanted to be sure I was not assuming when I applied rules associated with ending diagonals to leading diagonals.
What I found was eye-opening to me because I never questioned what LD’s were. Like some, I have always applied diagonals (ending or leading) as 3,3,3,3,3’s. For the Elliott Wave uninitiated this would be a series of abc’s but labeled as 1,2,3,4 and 5 with the 4 overlapping the 1.
NOT SO FAST!
My research turned up that although Ending Diagonals are a legitimate Elliott Wave pattern with governing rules, the larger EWT community is not 100% agreed on Leading Diagonals. Here’s an excerpt from AJ Frosts and Robert Prechter’s book, “Elliott Wave Principle”.
Leading Diagonal
It has recently come to light that a diagonal occasionally appears in the wave 1 position of impulses and in the wave A position of zigzags. In the few examples we have, the subdivisions appear to be the same: 3-3-3-3-3, but the jury is out on a strict definition, as 5,3,5,3,5 that overlap are also accepted. These patterns were not originally discovered by R.N. Elliott but have appeared enough times and over a long enough period that the authors are convinced of their validity. The notion of an LD is a relatively new idea that, in truth is accepted among many Elliottitions, but not all due a lack of governing rules.
Well, I now have a quandary with respect to my upcoming zoom call with my membership. The entire basis of the call is the proper application of EWT Rules and or Guidelines. If there are no agreed upon rules, let alone guidelines, what do I do when the call begins and we start to examine the initial pattern off the 3502 bottom?
I had already announced and scheduled the call.
I decided to apply both loosely mentioned counts to this pattern (3,3,3,3,3 and 5,3,5,3,5) …and guess what? None of them apply. Not even close. You can go through the pattern yourself and what anyone is going to come away with when analyzing the initial pattern from 3502 on October 13, 2022 to the high of 4180 on December 22, 2022 is a an abc. If you have any doubts here’s the pattern zoomed in.
www.tradingview.com/...rt/ES1!/E2QzXj6h-pc/
So, based on the initial pattern being an abc...this entire move from start to finish was going to be corrective, or a countertrend advance. Trend being down.
The last portion of the pattern that is impulsive starting in March 13th, 2023 until July 27th, 2023 should be labeled as following:
www.tradingview.com/...t/ES1!/O4t11F1c-pc2/
C waves will normally terminate at the 1.618% fib extension....in which price did.
Therefore, I firmly believe we have topped based on the fact that the leading diagonal may not even be a legitimate Elliott Wave pattern at worst, and at best, if it exists, has loosely based governing rules or guidelines. Lastly the impulsive portion of the pattern from March to July terminated at 1.618% of the initial pattern. I think it's a VERY VERY high probability we topped in July....and more importantly...should lead to a decline that could signify bad times ahead.
Best to all,
Chris
ewtdaily.com Get Intraday Updates on ES & NQ, XLF, BTC, ETH, SOL, ADA, NG (Natural Gas) and Learn Elliott Wave and Become a Professional Trader for Profit. Also, see EVERY trade I open and close in real time. Daily conference calls Q&A at 430pm.