Analysis

[RyNinDaCleM]

Are you still long because of the Bitstamp thing luc?

Does his post looks like he is long, lol.

He said he chose to go long a while ago because of the risk of using Bitstamp. I'm sure he would have traded otherwise. I was wondering if he is prepared to use another exchange because I'm in a similar position and don't really trust any of them. I'm pondering which one with decent liquidity is the least risky.

Went out mostly long due to bitstamp incident

Isn't this the opposite of what people usually do?

I'd prefer to wait for current levels for long, but yes, risk with bitstamp was high.

Last I knew, he trades on BTC-e, but the spill-over effect from the BS hack is probably what he was waiting for.
He may have moved to BS, but Not afaik. Now, with the price well below the Weekly BB and the Weekly MACD hooking down, is not the time to be long. So I doubt he's long more than a small percentage.

Considering the price just shot up by $20 it was a good time to be long last night. How come it went up with the Weekly BB and the Weekly MACD hooking down?

Besides what seleme said, Weekly indicators take a lot of time to move. There will be many fluctuations until it moves back into bullish territory. I just know that luc trades more on the longer term (according to this thread anyway) rather than intraday swings, so this rise would not have even registered on the weekly indicators. Of course if he was a scalper, he would have seen the bull flag which has a target of around 240-250 and traded it, but that isn't his (public?) style.

So put that cork back in the bottle of Dom, because we are still below the spike off the bottom.

[1713446309]

1713446309

[1713446309]

1713446309

[1713446309]

1713446309

[1713446309]

1713446309

[1713446309]

1713446309

[ElectricMucus]

Normally I don't do EW, but this seems blatantly obvious to me.

Or can somebody invalidate that count?

[RyNinDaCleM]

Normally I don't do EW, but this seems blatantly obvious to me.

Or can somebody invalidate that count?

Nope! It is completely valid

[molecular]

Nicely done Swiss CB.

They just completely fucked over their export business. Whatever reason they had, it must be a good one. They next few weeks should be interesting to say the least.

Probably they got tired of buying billions of euros to enforce the cap. The current account surplus is too high and needs to balance itself.

via Imgflip Meme Maker

[WaaatiB]

Normally I don't do EW, but this seems blatantly obvious to me.

Or can somebody invalidate that count?
https://i.imgur.com/2Od0fn9.png

Nope! It is completely valid

Does that mean that we should expect at least 1~2years of bear-market ? That doesn't seem right to me. 

[RyNinDaCleM]

Normally I don't do EW, but this seems blatantly obvious to me.

Or can somebody invalidate that count?

Nope! It is completely valid

Does that mean that we should expect at least 1~2years of bear-market ? That doesn't seem right to me. 

Validity != correctness

It is a possible scenario, but not necessarily THE scenario and it's definitely not the only possible scenario. The correction could be done in a few weeks. See that A on the right side of EM's pic? To build that A, there is an ABC within it, so that can be the extent of the whole correction.

[Tzupy]

Today's price action resembles the one of November 4th to 7th 2014, but looks artificial - could be because the market moves about 5 - 6 times faster.
To confirm this scenario we should see a double bottom in price and maybe in market indicators, followed by at least another round of pumps.
And 30min MACD should stay positive. Also, 30min PSAR should flip back to bullish.

[ronald98]

Today's price action resembles the one of November 4th to 7th 2014, but looks artificial - could be because the market moves about 5 - 6 times faster.
To confirm this scenario we should see a double bottom in price and maybe in market indicators, followed by at least another round of pumps.
And 30min MACD should stay positive. Also, 30min PSAR should flip back to bullish.

Do you mean a double bottom at ~150 or a different double bottom?

[Tzupy]

Today's price action resembles the one of November 4th to 7th 2014, but looks artificial - could be because the market moves about 5 - 6 times faster.
To confirm this scenario we should see a double bottom in price and maybe in market indicators, followed by at least another round of pumps.
And 30min MACD should stay positive. Also, 30min PSAR should flip back to bullish.

Do you mean a double bottom at ~150 or a different double bottom?

30 min MACD wouldn't stay positive with a large drop to 150$. I mean a double bottom in this price range. Problem is, I don't know the time scale for it.

[Tzupy]

Today's price action resembles the one of November 4th to 7th 2014, but looks artificial - could be because the market moves about 5 - 6 times faster.
To confirm this scenario we should see a double bottom in price and maybe in market indicators, followed by at least another round of pumps.
And 30min MACD should stay positive. Also, 30min PSAR should flip back to bullish.

So far, 30 min MACD divergence flipped to green and 30 min PSAR flipped to bullish, the pumps might follow soon, but I'm too tired, good night.

[Tzupy]

No pumps as expected, they are still possible if the market recovers, but the 30 min MACD looks bearish now.
I am staying in fiat and waiting for the signs of a new pump, maybe this time I'll catch it.

[hdbuck]

No pumps as expected, they are still possible if the market recovers, but the 30 min MACD looks bearish now.
I am staying in fiat and waiting for the signs of a new pump, maybe this time I'll catch it.

i sit in fiat as well, put orders in the 160-120 range. how's that as a strategy? safe? ^^

[stonerider]

^^^^^^
Safe but not safe enough. If price collapses all the way down to $120, it will COLLAPSE even further, like to $60 and below for certain.

[itod]

^^^^^^
Safe but not safe enough. If price collapses all the way down to $120, it will COLLAPSE even further, like to $60 and below for certain.

Agree that $120 is possible, but don't see why would it lead to $60. That's a gigantic collapse, why would that be inevitable?

[oda.krell]

All good things must come to an end. And all bad things as well. Big, fat bullish divergence on weekly VWMACD (= MACD based on volume-weighted close).





Doesn't mean we're at the end of the bear market for sure. For one, weekly (green) candle not closed yet, so the latest divergence isn't locked in yet. Also, on such a big time scale (weekly), there's plenty of room for smaller moves down (daily, hourly, etc). Finally, while divergences are useful tools, they're just a way to lay bare signs of trend exhaustion, but they're not always accurate in predicting a reversal.

All that said, the above is an indication that the correction is losing steam, in the form of weakening downside momentum/volume, while price plows ahead to new lows. Which could be a sign that we're getting nearer to the end of the (2013)-2014-(2015) bear market.

Comments?

[Odalv]

Comments?

voodooo :-)
no one knows

[RyNinDaCleM]

All good things must come to an end. And all bad things as well. Big, fat bullish divergence on weekly VWMACD (= MACD based on volume-weighted close).





Doesn't mean we're at the end of the bear market for sure. For one, weekly (green) candle not closed yet, so the latest divergence isn't locked in yet. Also, on such a big time scale (weekly), there's plenty of room for smaller moves down (daily, hourly, etc). Finally, while divergences are useful tools, they're just a way to lay bare signs of trend exhaustion, but they're not always accurate in predicting a reversal.

All that said, the above is an indication that the correction is losing steam, in the form of weakening downside momentum/volume, while price plows ahead to new lows. Which could be a sign that we're getting nearer to the end of the (2013)-2014-(2015) bear market.

Comments?

What does the actual MACD and signal lines look like? Personally, I've never really liked histogram divergence. It can work but it produces a lot of false signals.
I do agree it is very close, but I do not think the bull is upon us, yet. I have been watching the standard MACD on the Daily chart since October, and while we do have divergence locked in right now (narrowly), I am looking for one more larger divergence before we are done. This gives the lower time frames a chance to finish their respective cycles, producing their own divergences. Then it's off we go.

Of course, as with the first rally off the $1.994 bottom, this will start off a little slow (after the initial bounce). There will be a lot of indecision and uncertainty about what is next. People will think it's just another pull-back and will sell. This is normal and expected. We will eventually power through the selling and pull away in the new trend toward ATH's. All that is needed now is a little patience. We will get there. It will come, and it will be glorious.

[oda.krell]

All good things must come to an end. And all bad things as well. Big, fat bullish divergence on weekly VWMACD (= MACD based on volume-weighted close).





Doesn't mean we're at the end of the bear market for sure. For one, weekly (green) candle not closed yet, so the latest divergence isn't locked in yet. Also, on such a big time scale (weekly), there's plenty of room for smaller moves down (daily, hourly, etc). Finally, while divergences are useful tools, they're just a way to lay bare signs of trend exhaustion, but they're not always accurate in predicting a reversal.

All that said, the above is an indication that the correction is losing steam, in the form of weakening downside momentum/volume, while price plows ahead to new lows. Which could be a sign that we're getting nearer to the end of the (2013)-2014-(2015) bear market.

Comments?

What does the actual MACD and signal lines look like? Personally, I've never really liked histogram divergence. It can work but it produces a lot of false signals.
I do agree it is very close, but I do not think the bull is upon us, yet. I have been watching the standard MACD on the Daily chart since October, and while we do have divergence locked in right now (narrowly), I am looking for one more larger divergence before we are done. This gives the lower time frames a chance to finish their respective cycles, producing their own divergences. Then it's off we go.

Of course, as with the first rally off the $1.994 bottom, this will start off a little slow (after the initial bounce). There will be a lot of indecision and uncertainty about what is next. People will think it's just another pull-back and will sell. This is normal and expected. We will eventually power through the selling and pull away in the new trend toward ATH's. All that is needed now is a little patience. We will get there. It will come, and it will be glorious.

Jup, absolutely valid objection: MACD hist/bar graph divergences seem less reliable (in my limited experience) than divergences on MACD proper. Probably because the bar graph is an estimate of the second derivative, so the divergence being picked up might be a bit too subtle to have much influence.  Anyway, to answer your question: no comparable divergence on MACD itself.

About the rest: no disagreement there. Didn't want to imply I expect a big bull run anytime soon. Just that the divergence above is one way that there's evidence that selling pressure is waning, even though price action is still extremely bearish - hence, a divergence, and often/sometimes/occasionally an early warning that the existing trend is about to come to an end.

[Altcoin Agent]

It seemed lke we were going to break out but... today there was a little breakdown, seems like the resistance held. Downtrend resuming ?

[JustAnotherSheep]

It seemed lke we were going to break out but... today there was a little breakdown, seems like the resistance held. Downtrend resuming ?

Well by my counts we have approximately hit the target for an abc since 190 level and I think should be going down at least for now. Although my a could be interpreted as a i, and c as an either underextended or (more likely) unfinished iii (invalidated at breach of 222 and 218 respectively), which could mean we're in C of a larger ABC since bottom levels with a possible target of >260. Also c itself could be unfinished, meaning we have one more small wave up to go (again invalidated at 218 cross).

Bearish divergence between 234 and 239 peaks on 1h MACD (and 222-239 on lower timescales) seems to indicate the uptrend is losing strength, though it is slight so there could be room for yet more up with stacking divs, or they could be invalidated completely. Chessnut at least seems to believe the rise is impulsive altogether and we have reached final bottom, however personally I'm doubtful and think it's wishful thinking heh.

But I am just a noobish sheep, so you'll have to ask someone more well-versed in EW if these counts/interpretations are even valid to begin with