Martin Armstrong Discussion

[MA_talk]

Outright lying, once again:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/interest-rates/fannie-freddie-to-go-public-in-2020/

The ECB moved to negative interest rates but that did not lower private interest rates.

Really? Does Armstrong even bother to look at the data, like European lending rates and European mortgage rates? They are at record lows.

Thanks for the interest rate chart.  Don't you think that bond yields are extremely important to the markets in general?

And if you believe in the butterfly effects in the nonlinear systems, what do you think is the chance that Martin Armstrong can get everything else correct, when he cannot get an important piece of information correct?

If you ask me, the chance is ZERO to have everything else correct, but just one thing wrong.  For the complete nonlinear modelling of economics, every pieces of puzzles MUST all fit together.  If one piece of the puzzle is not fitting, everything else canNOT fit.

[1713878174]

1713878174

[1713878174]

1713878174

[1713878174]

1713878174

[1713878174]

1713878174

[MA_talk]

1. GMW useless for trading
6. WECs are overpriced and are a repeat of his blog posts
9. No individual on this forum can prove consistent profitability using Socrates
10. Socrates pro level is expensive and to add several individual equities is costly.
11. Recent and past private blog posts have been outright wrong with regard to timing calling temp tops/ bottoms, etc...
12. Socrates missed the up move from Jan to April - how? That was a massive move.
The list goes on....But I'll stop there for now. I have more questions than answers.

1. GMW useless for trading.  
Not really supposed to be. The name is appropriate. Global Market Watch..  It is helpful when looked at daily and in full.

6. WECs are overpriced and are a repeat of his blog posts
Partly they are networking events for professionals. you get all kinds there. The ones holding really important positions are never going to tell you what they do. They don't want anyone to know they are going because often they have PR to worry about and a guy who was in jail does not sound good to those who don't know any better.

9. No individual on this forum can prove consistent profitability using Socrates
I can absolutely but really do I have to. I don't want to dig all that shit up and rehash my analysis for people on the web. No offense, but you are asking for a lot of work. I will do this. Next time something comes up that I feel is all Socrates I will post the trade before and after and tell you the percentage of return. You can really lever with options. They hate sudden moves.

10. Socrates pro level is expensive and to add several individual equities is costly.
Yes but less costly than other stuff I have seen. What makes it expensive is that it is hard as hell to learn it. Armstrong is no help with his horrible writing skills. I have never even seen him make a correction on a typo. You just have to figure it out. No spell check either.  And Socrates....well think about it this way. HE wrote it. He taught it how to write and it shows.

11. Recent and past private blog posts have been outright wrong with regard to timing calling temp tops/ bottoms, etc...
Show me one. Just one. The move always has to qualify itself at every step.

12. Socrates missed the up move from Jan to April - how? That was a massive move.
Yes but is caught the first one when Trump won and took office. I made multiples AND he called the High accurately. That first one was not consolidation. The ones after that were and still are consolidation. Look at a weekly and monthly for the DOW. It is hard to miss. That first move was the big shift in the market.

https://www.tradingview.com/chart/0qqJQP2O/

What's a lot of work?  Just post your trade going forward.  No one ask you to dig your personal trading history, since everyone can make perfect trades with hindsight looking back.

Don't you do at least one or two trades per month?

Please don't post a trade on some extremely volatile stock that goes everywhere up & down.  A good trade has small draw down, and a good profit.  On a volatile stock or especially stock options, you can easily lose 80% before gaining 400%.  That's just playing with math by leveraging.  That is not real trading.  That only takes 1 losing trade to wipe yourself out.

[psp777]

Was referring to the nasdaq- the user Alex did not give the number, stating it was exclusive to subscribers. But he did say it was elected and did so on Friday, so it was a good forecast thus far.

I see, I don't have access to  the NASDAQ numbers, but it has led on the way up maybe showing it is the leader on the way down too? Cycle analysts Dr C Nenner has the Nasdaq showing a short term cycle bottom over the next couple of weeks. We will see. As he is calling a market top this summer then a huge sell off...where as Armstrong - in a sense - is calling the opposite.

[trc4949]

Gee, maybe Marty will post a private blog post this time BEFOFRE the markets start crashing again instead of half way through them happening....

[s29]

Gee, maybe Marty will post a private blog post this time BEFOFRE the markets start crashing again instead of half way through them happening....

Yeah Armstrong has a history of doing that 
usually more downside follows, but then quickly a big rebound, so usually you can't make any money on it.

[rosousa]

https://i.imgur.com/nwNXegi.png Also, a classic signature 'perfect setup' today. Fade the move on extremes: /ES and QQQ both hit support at the same time on LoD inflection points while volatility hits resistance, all on previously untested points. It isn't a 100% winrate- but it's close enough.

pls explain further your approach. You use NQ, YM, ES intraday futures data + VIX. How you see the alignment for a sweet spot entry counter-trend?

[psp777]

DOW: Possible weakness into June and summer

[psp777]

50 period EMA and 200 period EMA on the weekly...intersting

[etoimene]

I wonder what the definition of turning point is.
I understood that turning point is actual high or low, but you don't know in advance what should it be.
Actual high was definitely April.
If May is turning point, I would conclude that May would be low.
However, if we continue lower into June, May will not be actual low.
Any clarification?

[etoimene]

We have already shown how turning points are inaccurate

... or how we don't know how to read them ...

[psp777]

Okay so bearish weekly both elected by a far margin...1.58% on the closest one

1% rule indicates: "When a reversal is elected by a close greater than 1.0% away from the actual number, the market will retrace to the Reversal Point to that price level. The greater the percentage move away from the reversal, the greater the time period to retest."

We will see:

[psp777]

Okay so bearish weekly both elected by a far margin...1.58% on the closest one

1% rule indicates: "When a reversal is elected by a close greater than 1.0% away from the actual number, the market will retrace to the Reversal Point to that price level. The greater the percentage move away from the reversal, the greater the time period to retest."

We will see:

Was this for the Dow? Mind giving the elected bearish and the next bearish? And are they both Majors?

Both Minor. See my chart a few posts above

[footlong24seven]

Hey all, just want to let you know that I lurk this board frequently and have been super busy with other things and haven't been able to post or comment on anything really.

It seems like there is some agreement on how to interpret Socrates and I believe we can hammer out what works and what doesn't. The reversals seem pretty legit. Is it worth the $ just for the reversals? I feel like we're missing the critical TIME element which is supposed to make Socrates stand above the others. We're either interpreting the forecast arrays and GMW incorrectly, or they're just random noise that gets it right once in a blue moon. Like the rest of you I am suspicious of the claim that they monitor "global capital flows" unless what he really means is bond volume since it makes up the lion's share of transactions as he mentions frequently.

That being said, the May "turning point" basically came to fruition the moment Trump made the May 5 tweet. There is something to be said about the alignment of that since he could easily claim in a blog post that his computer picked the turning point and wouldn't have any clue about tariff increases so therefore Socrates is magic. However I do still see that as a strange coincidence (which we have all seen often) and the testable part is now July. Both were "turning points" that doesn't mean May was the low and July the high. It would very well be that May is when it "turns" down and July is when it "turns" back up. In that sense it doesn't necessarily mean an absolute low or high - only when the trend is due to change. Again the INTERPRETATION is what may be wrong and not Socrates, but I don't even have a sub *shame* I get the info vicariously through this forum. 

There is also common agreement here that he likes to highlight when he's right and not when he's wrong, or missed a call like the massive rally from December-Apr. It's like you're always on the fence because sometimes you say to yourself "whoa he nailed it" and other times you say to yourself "he's exaggerating". Maybe it's a bit of both. That's fine for a PERSON. The same standard doesn't apply to a SERVICE with subscription $. Again he may be actually giving you Socrates but the missing piece here is how to interpret the TIME targets.

As far as my trades I saw his regular blog post with the downtrend lines for DB so I got Jan 2020 $5 puts @ $0.24. Now trading $0.31. Got a bunch won't reveal the number. My YINN $26 calls 10/2019 expiry that I bought in March cratered 90% and as far as I can see it's a total loss and I still have 4 months and 3 weeks to at least recover the losses before the Theta kills it for good.

Bike your strategy seems solid by the way. How can we talk outside this board and chat trades? (also I'm in agreement that Strike is the MAn himself =)

[etoimene]

Both were "turning points" that doesn't mean May was the low and July the high. It would very well be that May is when it "turns" down and July is when it "turns" back up. In that sense it doesn't necessarily mean an absolute low or high - only when the trend is due to change.

We do. Armstrong says that it is based on Composite highs are where highs or lows are formed on intraday or closing highs.

Seems that sometimes it is one and sometimes the other.

[psp777]

Revisting the recent ECM turning point. I have plotted out the ECM turning points using the red bullseye. That alone was close to the recent top. Thos that are calling BS on Armstrong, i think the longer term forecasts are better than the near term. Yes, some errors in commentary and with the arrays but this is helpful nonetheless. Also, add in the declining energy recently and failure to elect bullish reversals near the high was a clear sign to short. I did not take the trade as I am waiting for a low to form as early as June or maybe July. The next ECM turning point is in Jan 2020 at which point I believe gold will bottom and US equities will break out to new highs. Curious how others see the arrays and ECM turning points at this point in time?
Thanks

[MA_talk]

On Armstrong's reversal system, I believe one MUST examine the RELATIVE merits of that method against the most basics in technical analysis of support/resistance.

In a strong upward trending market, or a strong downward trending market like the current one, what you find is that every support gets broken, and then when you "plug in" the reversal system, you will find, WOW, it is RIGHT every time when the reversal level gets breached.

Imagine someone else who comes up with another system, but has 20 random reversal levels between the recent peak and current price, instead of Armstrong's reversal numbers, let's say only 10 levels.  So is that other guy going to be right for 20 times, instead of 10 times for Armstrong, and then his system is better?

Therefore, regardless of whichever system that is, it should be compared side-by-side on various kinds of stock market trends.  The methodology canNOT be just working for a strong downward or upward trending market, and doesn't work in a side-way market.

The reason is simple.  If I ALREADY know what kind of market I'm facing, then I already know how to trade it, even without being told about any support/resistance price levels.  The methodology must work for ALL market conditions.  By "knowing" what kind of market that I'm in, that is already using a hindsight that was NOT available when I try to trade.

Thus, I propose that Armstrong's reversal system should be tested on various different kinds of market condition, before we all grant its merit, and if possible, compared it to a standard support/resistance trading method to see if it's better on a relative basis.

[MA_talk]

I suggest that we put Armstrong's reversal system to "predict" when either QQQ/DIA/SPY turns back up.

Bikefront can probably formulate this best, but I'm guessing that it should entail when
1. stock market fails to break bearish reversal level on the downside, and then
2. stock market succeed in breaking thru the bullish reversal level on the upside.

But then obviously, the forum needs to be given the reversal levels by Armstrong, which I'm assuming are not changing every day or every week.

And if we want to compare to another standard support/resistance method, we can do that too.  We could all eye-ball together here, or I can code something up to objectively get the price levels, and make the source and executables available for everyone here.

[psp777]

Can someone explain to me the charts Armstrong has shown in the past with buy sell arrows or more specifically long and short signals. I believe this were generated off of reversals?

I think most wanted to follow Socrates as if was to be a thoughtless way to trade...simply follow the reversals and the arrays. Obviously we are all more confused than ever.

[Nellayar]

On Armstrong's reversal system, I believe one MUST examine the RELATIVE merits of that method against the most basics in technical analysis of support/resistance.

In a strong upward trending market, or a strong downward trending market like the current one, what you find is that every support gets broken, and then when you "plug in" the reversal system, you will find, WOW, it is RIGHT every time when the reversal level gets breached.

Imagine someone else who comes up with another system, but has 20 random reversal levels between the recent peak and current price, instead of Armstrong's reversal numbers, let's say only 10 levels.  So is that other guy going to be right for 20 times, instead of 10 times for Armstrong, and then his system is better?

Therefore, regardless of whichever system that is, it should be compared side-by-side on various kinds of stock market trends.  The methodology canNOT be just working for a strong downward or upward trending market, and doesn't work in a side-way market.

The reason is simple.  If I ALREADY know what kind of market I'm facing, then I already know how to trade it, even without being told about any support/resistance price levels.  The methodology must work for ALL market conditions.  By "knowing" what kind of market that I'm in, that is already using a hindsight that was NOT available when I try to trade.

Thus, I propose that Armstrong's reversal system should be tested on various different kinds of market condition, before we all grant its merit, and if possible, compared it to a standard support/resistance trading method to see if it's better on a relative basis.

Armstrong's reversal system is really helpful to determine what might happen in the market. As of now, the trend is going upward but eventually, it will go on reversal way. I believe that if we will study this kind of strategy, we can find a way on how to fight unusual downfall or we can easily hold the moment of bull run market.

[s29]

Hey all, just want to let you know that I lurk this board frequently and have been super busy with other things and haven't been able to post or comment on anything really.

That being said, the May "turning point" basically came to fruition the moment Trump made the May 5 tweet. There is something to be said about the alignment of that since he could easily claim in a blog post that his computer picked the turning point and wouldn't have any clue about tariff increases so therefore Socrates is magic. However I do still see that as a strange coincidence (which we have all seen often) and the testable part is now July. Both were "turning points" that doesn't mean May was the low and July the high. It would very well be that May is when it "turns" down and July is when it "turns" back up. In that sense it doesn't necessarily mean an absolute low or high - only when the trend is due to change. Again the INTERPRETATION is what may be wrong and not Socrates, but I don't even have a sub *shame* I get the info vicariously through this forum.  

There is also common agreement here that he likes to highlight when he's right and not when he's wrong, or missed a call like the massive rally from December-Apr. It's like you're always on the fence because sometimes you say to yourself "whoa he nailed it" and other times you say to yourself "he's exaggerating". Maybe it's a bit of both. That's fine for a PERSON. The same standard doesn't apply to a SERVICE with subscription $. Again he may be actually giving you Socrates but the missing piece here is how to interpret the TIME targets.

Armstrong seemed right on his May call, although he kept mentioning as the main reason the EU-elections, which didn't seem to effect the markets at all (maybe even a net positive). On the other hand; markets didn't do something really special, it didn't even retraced 38.2% from the recent historic Dec-April rally (markets usually correct 4 to 10% after a 25% up move). Still would like to see a 38.2% to 50% retrace before getting back in long.

Revisting the recent ECM turning point. I have plotted out the ECM turning points using the red bullseye. That alone was close to the recent top. Thos that are calling BS on Armstrong, i think the longer term forecasts are better than the near term. Yes, some errors in commentary and with the arrays but this is helpful nonetheless. Also, add in the declining energy recently and failure to elect bullish reversals near the high was a clear sign to short. I did not take the trade as I am waiting for a low to form as early as June or maybe July. The next ECM turning point is in Jan 2020 at which point I believe gold will bottom and US equities will break out to new highs. Curious how others see the arrays and ECM turning points at this point in time?
Thanks

Only the last time it worked with the stock market so far