2022 Elliott Wave

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

ATH in 2023?
https://i.imgur.com/lNzxBl8.png

PRIMARY degree bull markets in Bitcoin have so far topped in December or thereabouts, so expecting the current bull market to do the same, but just guesswork...

Code:

PRIMARY[1] bull market: 30-NOV-2013
PRIMARY[3] bull market: 17-DEC-2017
PRIMARY[5] bull market: XX-DEC-2022 ..?

Code:

PRIMARY[2] bear market: 14-JAN-2015
PRIMARY[4] bear market: 15-DEC-2018

Both bull & bear markets of PRIMARY degree tend to start & end around December.

[1714255104]

1714255104

[1714255104]

1714255104

[1714255104]

1714255104

[josegines]

ATH in 2023?
https://i.imgur.com/lNzxBl8.png

PRIMARY degree bull markets in Bitcoin have so far topped in December or thereabouts, so expecting the current bull market to do the same, but just guesswork...

Code:

PRIMARY[1] bull market: 30-NOV-2013
PRIMARY[3] bull market: 17-DEC-2017
PRIMARY[5] bull market: XX-DEC-2022 ..?

Code:

PRIMARY[2] bear market: 14-JAN-2015
PRIMARY[4] bear market: 15-DEC-2018

Both bull & bear markets of PRIMARY degree tend to start & end around December.

yes, but the rallies usually last about two months,
that means, that if we are already in a rally, we could have a new ATH for May-June, and end of the rise.

We won't really know until it happens, however, the steeper the climb, the more likely it will be the last climb, and chances are it will end in May-June.

Correct, in 2013 it was 2 months, but in 2017 it was more. Who knows how it will be now, if we break maximums.

Simply in May-June a cycle appears (281 days), which can be maximum or minimum. But cycles change.

[bill gator]

One of our users did a great write-up that has gone largely unnoticed on the subject.

The thread can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5274213.0 , by Husires, in case anybody would like a little overview/education on the concept.

I find that these predictive models always breakdown at a certain point, but more power to you if you're able to successfully predict the markets using it.

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

yes, but the rallies usually last about two months,
that means, that if we are already in a rally, we could have a new ATH for May-June, and end of the rise.

We won't really know until it happens, however, the steeper the climb, the more likely it will be the last climb, and chances are it will end in May-June.

Correct, in 2013 it was 2 months, but in 2017 it was more. Who knows how it will be now, if we break maximums.

Simply in May-June a cycle appears (281 days), which can be maximum or minimum. But cycles change.

The PRIMARY degree bull markets in regard to time have been as follows:

Code:

PRIMARY[1]: The 1st bull market wave   2010-2013 (1148 days)
PRIMARY[3]: The 2nd bull market wave   2015-2018 (1064 days)
PRIMARY[5]: The 3rd bull market wave   2019-202X (1240 days so far)

PRIMARY[5] is already the longest bull market in the cycle in regard to time, and if it completes by 31-DEC-2022, it will have elapsed 1482 days.

[tygeade]

the rallies usually last about two months,
that means, that if we are already in a rally, we could have a new ATH for May-June, and end of the rise.

We won't really know until it happens, however, the steeper the climb, the more likely it will be the last climb, and chances are it will end in May-June.

Correct, in 2013 it was 2 months, but in 2017 it was more. Who knows how it will be now, if we break maximums.

Simply in May-June a cycle appears (281 days), which can be maximum or minimum. But cycles change.

The crashes happen in a few days though, they stay for months but they happen quickly. It is usually like 100 bucks to 200 bucks in 2 months, then back to 100 bucks in 2 days, stay at 100 bucks for the other 58 days, then again to 200 bucks in 2 months. So, when the crash happens it happens very quickly and then it stays there because people are afraid to buy back.

This means that either we are going to go high for 2 more months and reach maybe even a new ATH who knows? Or maybe we could drop to a lower and lower level and be a lot worse than we should, maybe even under 35k levels again. I am not sure which one will happen, but that is usually the path we take.

[SoniBTC]

the authors of these charts note waves and cycles, as if a person has the same length of arms and legs, think about it

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

[SoniBTC]

https://12345abcdewxyz.files.wordpress.com/2022/04/20220419-bncblx-1.png

https://12345abcdewxyz.files.wordpress.com/2022/04/20220419-btcusd.png

https://i.imgur.com/tf3uBCl.png

u have completely wrong corrective wave

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

https://i.imgur.com/tf3uBCl.png][img]https://i.imgur.com/tf3uBCl.png

u have completely wrong corrective wave

Counting the Flat correction from MAR-2021 to JAN-2022 as a Double Three, which may be labelled as W-X-Y waves: https://i.ibb.co/LC67MPw/wxy.png

[SoniBTC]

https://i.imgur.com/tf3uBCl.png][img]https://i.imgur.com/tf3uBCl.png

u have completely wrong corrective wave

Counting the Flat correction from MAR-2021 to JAN-2022 as a Double Three, which may be labelled as W-X-Y waves: https://i.ibb.co/LC67MPw/wxy.png

you are moving away from the classic version to an innovation, your corrective waves are all wrong, the 2nd wave is more than 4, the 1st and 3rd waves are almost the same, which is also wrong, everything you noted is similar to an innovation, and far from the classic version, initially you need follow the standard option, only then switch to another if it does not work

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

https://i.imgur.com/tf3uBCl.png][img]https://i.imgur.com/tf3uBCl.png

u have completely wrong corrective wave

Counting the Flat correction from MAR-2021 to JAN-2022 as a Double Three, which may be labelled as W-X-Y waves: https://i.ibb.co/LC67MPw/wxy.png

you are moving away from the classic version to an innovation, your corrective waves are all wrong, the 2nd wave is more than 4, the 1st and 3rd waves are almost the same, which is also wrong, everything you noted is similar to an innovation, and far from the classic version, initially you need follow the standard option, only then switch to another if it does not work

No "classic" or "innovation" interpretations have been used; all Elliott Wave analysis has been based on the following book...

    Elliott Wave Principle - Key to Market Behavior by Robert R Prechter Jr and A.J. Frost
    https://cupdf.com/document/elliott-wave-principle-key-to-market-behavior-by-frost-and-prechter.html

    —Page 53 illustrates the Double Three W-X-Y structure

The current bull market which started at the low of 2019 has had two corrections so far: Wave-2 pullback was a 3-3-5 Zig Zag and Wave-4 pullback a 3-3-3 Running Flat. This portrays the "rule of alternation" and both corrections have been almost equal in time: https://i.ibb.co/174CNWn/20220422-BTCUSD.png
 

[sparkl3t]

Certainly the labelling is not appropriate
MINOR A of INTERMEDIATE(4), then labelled as W:

[c] can't be into an (a) (b) (c)

Still possible to make a W for that wave, but not like that.

BTW, what do you think about this hypothesis?

https://ibb.co/F02XdLL

Consider that a running flat (for what I observed in BTC) has usually a fast "restart", 3 months from the end of Jan, same as your wave Y, seems too long to me.
I know this is not a written in stone rule for the standard theory, but I would still take it into consideration.

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

Certainly the labelling is not appropriate
MINOR A of INTERMEDIATE(4), then labelled as W:

[c] can't be into an (a) (b) (c)

Still possible to make a W for that wave, but not like that.

BTW, what do you think about this hypothesis?

https://ibb.co/F02XdLL

Consider that a running flat (for what I observed in BTC) has usually a fast "restart", 3 months from the end of Jan, same as your wave Y, seems too long to me.
I know this is not a written in stone rule for the standard theory, but I would still take it into consideration.

As per Page 53 of the following reference...

    Elliott Wave Principle - Key to Market Behavior by Robert R Prechter Jr and A.J. Frost
    https://cupdf.com/document/elliott-wave-principle-key-to-market-behavior-by-frost-and-prechter.html

—A-B-C Flat is a 3-3-5 structure.
—W-X-Y Flat is a 3-3-3 structure.

Technically speaking, in an A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.

A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))

Thus far, it appears the correction from JAN-2021 to MAR-2022 is 3-3-3 structure; and hence can still be considered as an A-B-C —just nomenclature.



Consider the following timescales...

    PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(2) pullback was 261 days.
    PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback was 285 days (if now complete).

    PRIMARY[4] pullback was 364 days.

Would not expect PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback to last longer than PRIMARY[4] pullback, and so ought to complete by mid-April 2022; and hence would not expect an ongoing sideways correction.

[sparkl3t]

As per Page 53 of the following reference...

    Elliott Wave Principle - Key to Market Behavior by Robert R Prechter Jr and A.J. Frost
    https://cupdf.com/document/elliott-wave-principle-key-to-market-behavior-by-frost-and-prechter.html

—A-B-C Flat is a 3-3-5 structure.
—W-X-Y Flat is a 3-3-3 structure.

Ok, you missed W-X-Y could also be a 3-3-5, with Y triangle

Technically speaking, in an A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.

A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))

and hence can still be considered as an A-B-C —just nomenclature.

No mate, not "just nomenclature", this is crucial. A wave C can't be in 3, only Y (as 2nd impulse of a structure) can be in 3, at the same way as 1/3/5 waves can't be in 3.
W/X/Y = a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c OR a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c-d-e OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c-d-e. That's all.
A/B/C = a-b-c/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/w-x-y/1-2-3-4-5. Final 1-2-3-4-5 can be changed with a-b-c-d-e. That's all.

Did you read in the book a C wave can be in a-b-c?

Thus far, it appears the correction from JAN-2021 to MAR-2022 is 3-3-3 structure;

I mean this
https://ibb.co/1ZzG3M4

You see this part as a 3-3-3, waves here can be named only w-x-y (double three). Unless you can find a way of counting a 3-3-5, than it would be ok for an a-b-c (also w-x-y, if y triangle).
Assuming this part is a 3-3-3=w-x-y (= A only, not W), after a following B we need a 5 wave pattern. But the second impulse 20 Oct '21 to 24 Jan '22 is counted in 3. There is something wrong here.

Consider the following timescales...

    PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(2) pullback was 261 days.
    PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback was 285 days (if now complete).

    PRIMARY[4] pullback was 364 days.

Would not expect PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback to last longer than PRIMARY[4] pullback, and so ought to complete by mid-April 2022; and hence would not expect an ongoing sideways correction.

Previously you said:

The Elliott Wave model and projections are indicative of price & structure, not time.

Indeed we don't have fixed laws for the time variable (e.g. "a 3 wave can't be the smallest" is a fixed law), time is quite an "accomodating" concept in the theory. Being 2 an 4 equal in time is not eligible to be a good sign of correct labelling, in my opinion.
See page 230, 217 (II and IV of (III))...

However I think there is something, probably related to the "right look" concept. But that's another story.


Thanks for your efforts and sharing your interpretation  

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

As per Page 53 of the following reference...

    Elliott Wave Principle - Key to Market Behavior by Robert R Prechter Jr and A.J. Frost
    https://cupdf.com/document/elliott-wave-principle-key-to-market-behavior-by-frost-and-prechter.html

—A-B-C Flat is a 3-3-5 structure.
—W-X-Y Flat is a 3-3-3 structure.

Ok, you missed W-X-Y could also be a 3-3-5, with Y triangle

Technically speaking, in an A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.

A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))

and hence can still be considered as an A-B-C —just nomenclature.

No mate, not "just nomenclature", this is crucial. A wave C can't be in 3, only Y (as 2nd impulse of a structure) can be in 3, at the same way as 1/3/5 waves can't be in 3.
W/X/Y = a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c OR a-b-c/a-b-c/a-b-c-d-e OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c OR a-b-c/w-x-y/a-b-c-d-e. That's all.
A/B/C = a-b-c/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/a-b-c/1-2-3-4-5 OR w-x-y/w-x-y/1-2-3-4-5. Final 1-2-3-4-5 can be changed with a-b-c-d-e. That's all.

Did you read in the book a C wave can be in a-b-c?

Thus far, it appears the correction from JAN-2021 to MAR-2022 is 3-3-3 structure;

I mean this
https://ibb.co/1ZzG3M4

You see this part as a 3-3-3, waves here can be named only w-x-y (double three). Unless you can find a way of counting a 3-3-5, than it would be ok for an a-b-c (also w-x-y, if y triangle).
Assuming this part is a 3-3-3=w-x-y (= A only, not W), after a following B we need a 5 wave pattern. But the second impulse 20 Oct '21 to 24 Jan '22 is counted in 3. There is something wrong here.

Consider the following timescales...

    PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(2) pullback was 261 days.
    PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback was 285 days (if now complete).

    PRIMARY[4] pullback was 364 days.

Would not expect PRIMARY[5]→INTERMEDIATE(4) pullback to last longer than PRIMARY[4] pullback, and so ought to complete by mid-April 2022; and hence would not expect an ongoing sideways correction.

Previously you said:

The Elliott Wave model and projections are indicative of price & structure, not time.

Indeed we don't have fixed laws for the time variable (e.g. "a 3 wave can't be the smallest" is a fixed law), time is quite an "accomodating" concept in the theory. Being 2 an 4 equal in time is not eligible to be a good sign of correct labelling, in my opinion.
See page 230, 217 (II and IV of (III))...

However I think there is something, probably related to the "right look" concept. But that's another story.


Thanks for your efforts and sharing your interpretation  

See sections 5.2 and 5.3 of the following: https://phantran.net/elliott-wave-theory-ewt/

The sideways move from APR-2021 to JAN-2022 is simply considered as a W-X-Y (a 3-3-3 Flat structure), called a Double. It does not require to be followed by another combinatory structure (i.e. making it a Triple), or be followed by a Triangle.

In regard to a A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.

A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))

If the latter option of C unfolds, then the structure may be considered as W-X-Y instead. This is commonly unknown, and usually occurs in commodity and forex markets. Can't recall where this was exactly discussed, but following reference may assist...

    R.N. Elliott's Masterworks: The Definitive Collection
    https://www.elliottwave.com/Book/RN-Elliotts-Masterworks

In regard to your illustration (i.e. https://ibb.co/1ZzG3M4): The entire structure; i.e. a short wave-A, an irregular wave-B, and long wave-C, is known as an Elongated Flat (see https://blog.hycmlab.com/elliott-waves-other-flat-patterns/). In regard to metrics, the relationship is a perfect (C = A * 2.618) Fibonacci extension: https://i.ibb.co/LPXXBzy/elongatedflat.png

In regard to the projections provided and speculated upon, indeed the illustrations portray structure and not time. Would not expect a lower degree correction to elapse longer in time than a higher degree correction. Hence would expect the sideways Flat correction from APR-2021 to JAN-2022 to have already completed, unless of course another scenario is underway.
  

[sparkl3t]

See sections 5.2 and 5.3 of the following: https://phantran.net/elliott-wave-theory-ewt/

The sideways move from APR-2021 to JAN-2022 is simply considered as a W-X-Y (a 3-3-3 Flat structure), called a Double. It does not require to be followed by another combinatory structure (i.e. making it a Triple), or be followed by a Triangle.

Got it, W until June 2021.
A W is an a-b-c structure.

In regard to a A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.

A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))

If the latter option of C unfolds, then the structure may be considered as W-X-Y instead. This is commonly unknown, and usually occurs in commodity and forex markets. Can't recall where this was exactly discussed, but following reference may assist...

Wrong, there are no hybrid structures like ABY or WXC. W and Y are complexes, A and C are not.
Wave C is only impulse (5 waves) or diagonal, unless in a triangle but this is not the case. It's clearly written in the book, please check page 89.
Counting a C in 3 is going against the rules.
You count that W as a flat, so C should have 5 waves and no other options are allowed.

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

See sections 5.2 and 5.3 of the following: https://phantran.net/elliott-wave-theory-ewt/

The sideways move from APR-2021 to JAN-2022 is simply considered as a W-X-Y (a 3-3-3 Flat structure), called a Double. It does not require to be followed by another combinatory structure (i.e. making it a Triple), or be followed by a Triangle.

Got it, W until June 2021.
A W is an a-b-c structure.

In regard to a A-B-C structure, only the final fifth within the wave-C is required to be five waves; i.e.

A(a-b-c)
B(a-b-c)
C(1-2-3-4-5) OR C(a-b-c(1-2-3-4-5))

If the latter option of C unfolds, then the structure may be considered as W-X-Y instead. This is commonly unknown, and usually occurs in commodity and forex markets. Can't recall where this was exactly discussed, but following reference may assist...

Wrong, there are no hybrid structures like ABY or WXC. W and Y are complexes, A and C are not.
Wave C is only impulse (5 waves) or diagonal, unless in a triangle but this is not the case. It's clearly written in the book, please check page 89.
Counting a C in 3 is going against the rules.
You count that W as a flat, so C should have 5 waves and no other options are allowed.

The rules which are in discussion here are based on the Elliott Wave principle as interpreted by Robert Prechter and A.J. Frost.

However, in the original writings of Ralph Nelson Elliott, here are examples of commonly unknown observations and nuances...

—Parts of a wave-4 can actually overlap a wave-1, but the final leg of the wave-4 (i.e. wave-c in a Flat/Zigzag or wave-E in a Triangle) must not.
—Commonly in commodity and forex markets (perhaps crypto markets too?), a wave-4 wick can overlap a wave-1 wick, but candle bodies must not.
—In a Leading Diagonal or Ending Diagonal, wave-3 can actually be the shortest.
—In a Leading Diagonal or Ending Diagonal, wave-4 isn't required to overlap wave-1.
—In a Flat/ZigZag the final wave-C can actually be a three wave structure, but in this case, the final wave in wave-C must be five waves, and the overall structure labelled as a W-X-Y or A-B-C.

The above are such examples which are considered as blasphemy rule-breakers and are not discussed in the interpretations of Robert Prechter and A.J. Frost. However, are discussed in the early works and original writings of Ralph Nelson Elliott, and often observed in 24hr markets like forex and commodities, and by extension perhaps crypto markets too.

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

[ImThour]

What's the point of changing the chart everyday? Last post says Uptrend starts from $42k and now this post says the price to come to 0.618 i.e. $25k.
This ain't Elliot if you changing it every month lol.

[xxxx123abcxxxx]

What's the point of changing the chart everyday? Last post says Uptrend starts from $42k and now this post says the price to come to 0.618 i.e. $25k.
This ain't Elliot if you changing it every month lol.

Impossible to predict the future entirely. If one could, then there would be no free will..!

No forecast is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. As new data arrives and events unfold, the situation is required to be reassessed and revised.

Elliott Wave provides potentialities based on current and historical metrics. And based on those metrics, the most probable scenarios are anticipated within a theory of rules. A roadmap is devised, but the route and journey can take many twists & turns, be delayed or hurried. And of course, one's interpretation of the theory of rules could be flawed.

The current long-term anticipation is expecting the bull market to resume imminently, unfold in five waves, and perhaps conclude by 2023, with a price target of either $136K, $220K or $380K. As and when the waves develop, either extend or truncate, revisions are required.

The current short-term anticipation is expecting the market to have already bottomed around $30K, or decline further to $28K or $25K zones —all based on Fibonacci derivations as illustrated on the second chart. Sub $25K starts to require a reassessment of the entire long-term roadmap.