Like always, Armstrong doesn't tell you whether stocks will be higher or lower. The first sentence is HINDSIGHT on 2018. So that's meaningless. As far as I can tell, Armstrong is saying stocks will retest low in 2019, and "possibly" going higher towards 2023. Because Armstrong likes to use all these terms to place bets on both sides, you canNOT say for sure whether it will be higher or lower.
"Volatility" will rise from 2021 into 2023. Usually volatility means breaking low, but we all know that it also means breaking high. Given that he said that it's a commodity "cycle", you would think that it's going higher, BUT cycle doesn't mean going higher by itself.
Then Directional Change in 2020. That again usually for most English speakers, that should literally mean changing in direction, BUT NOT for Armstrong. Because his cycles CAN have inversion, and he NEVER tells you whether the cycle is inverting until closer to the END of the cycle. Well, duh, by that time, I can see that TOO.
And since 2021 is a PANIC cycle, one of his favorite word that place bets on BOTH sides, it does NOT tell you whether it's panic UP, or panic DOWN. Supposedly, it's an OUTSIDE year, breaking both high/low. Again, usually PANIC is to the down side, but that is NOT always the case. But since 2020 was a DIRECTION CHANGE, I would think that after PANIC, it "should be" going up, especially given what Armstrong said at the very end "breakout appears to be aligned with ECM".
I have read Armstrong for almost 2 decades now, and that is just typical of Armstrong. First, he "reviews" on the part that he seemed to get it right (dismissing all of the missed calls). Then, everything from him will be kind of clear, kind of cryptic, kind of okay, but really, if things don't go according to him, his "forecast" will continue to morph, according to recently broken supports or resistances, and then he morphs on whatever he has said. BUT by the time, you or I would have forgot about what he said exactly way back then. Since he always will track the market trends, you will always feel that yes, he is kind of right, while in the meantime, you forget about everything that he didn't get it correct.
You know, stocks already went up almost 18% from the recent low, and I don't need ANYONE to tell me that stocks won't go straight up forever. Of course, it's going to pull back in whatever fashion. But see what Armstrong is doing. He just puts words on the pullback kind of continuously. If it's not this week, it's next week, and then next week, etc. Until he gets it right. Essentially, just bet on the higher probability event continuously (whether it's earthquake, or stock corrections). Then eventually, you will get it right. HOW ABOUT call out the lowest/highest week or day for year 2019 RIGHT NOW?? Well, guess what, Armstrong will NEVER do that, BUT he is the FORECASTER with super AI-computer.
The problem is that actual trades are entirely different from words. If stocks go up by another 5% before it pulls back by 10%, your shorts could have been stopped out with 5% loss, while you could have gained 5% instead. But in terms of words, oh yeah, I can tell you now that Armstrong will "get it right" again and again.
So the only way to test whether Armstrong reports have any monetary values is to systematically track and phantom trade his calls on paper using a systematic method converting his words to trades. If there are profits, it's good. If there are no profits, then it's bad. However, based on my personal experiences, at the time of highest volatility, at the low/high, Armstrong tends to come out and say that "see I told you so, and I was right". And then you will tend to think "Darn, I have mis-interpreted his arrays & words, and darn, he is right." Then you sell/buy in the panic. And the next thing you know is that you just sold right at the bottom, or bought right at the peak. And Armstrong was actually just "swimming (in words) along with the market" and blogs sensationally for more readership.
I think you hit the nail on the head. MA's market commentary is very difficult to trade off of. I do like his general macro calls though and I use them as a reference when I'm looking at the charts that I'm butchering up.
I'll try to post a $DIA chart here which I think shows a great example of why we are currently in "no man's land" right now. I don't know if we'll break down are charge up at this point. All you can do is wait and watch what the prices do. (I'm sounding like Marty, aren't I?) Anyway, I agree with you regarding all of his terminology with obtuse meanings.
Show Posts
