CryptoWaves - Elliott Wave Analysis Blog

[CryptoWaves]

I finished the first post at my new Elliott Wave analysis blog for cryptocurrencies. The first post covers the daily chart for Bitcoin.

If you are interested in Bitcoin Elliott Wave counts, then please check out my post. Let me know what you think.

http://www.cryptowaves.com/bitcoin-usd-april-2nd-2014/

Follow @CryptoWaves on Twitter. I will tweet when I make a new post.


Visit CryptoWaves for new posts!

[freedomno1]

I finished the first post at my new Elliott Wave analysis blog for cryptocurrencies. The first post covers the daily chart for Bitcoin.

If you are interested in Bitcoin Elliott Wave counts, then please check out my post. Let me know what you think.

http://www.cryptowaves.com/bitcoin-usd-april-2nd-2014/

Follow @CryptoWaves on Twitter. I will tweet when I make a new post.

Kind of neat was reading it not from an Elliott Wave View but I can see the argument
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jessecolombo/2013/12/19/bitcoin-may-be-following-this-classic-bubble-stages-chart/

[eboard10]

But shouldn't wave C be at least as big as wave A? That would mean we could see prices going down to $100!

Wave 4 cannot correct lower than 100% of Wave 3, i.e. $63. While it's true that Wave 4 shouldn't overlap Wave 1, that rule is only valid for non-leveraged cash markets. I'm not sure if that applies to Bitcoin though... 

[CryptoWaves]

But shouldn't wave C be at least as big as wave A? That would mean we could see prices going down to $100!

Wave 4 cannot correct lower than 100% of Wave 3, i.e. $63. While it's true that Wave 4 shouldn't overlap Wave 1, that rule is only valid for non-leveraged cash markets. I'm not sure if that applies to Bitcoin though... 

Wave 4 cannot overlap with Wave 1 unless there is a leading diagonal or ending diagonal pattern, which are rare occurrences. This rule cannot be broken. If there is a Wave 4 into Wave 1 violation with a drop below $260 then my count needs to be adjusted.

Wave C being equal to wave A is a guideline, rather than a strict rule.

[eboard10]

But shouldn't wave C be at least as big as wave A? That would mean we could see prices going down to $100!

Wave 4 cannot correct lower than 100% of Wave 3, i.e. $63. While it's true that Wave 4 shouldn't overlap Wave 1, that rule is only valid for non-leveraged cash markets. I'm not sure if that applies to Bitcoin though...  

Wave 4 cannot overlap with Wave 1 unless there is a leading diagonal or ending diagonal pattern, which are rare occurrences. This rule cannot be broken. If there is a Wave 4 into Wave 1 violation with a drop below $260 then my count needs to be adjusted.

Wave C being equal to wave A is a guideline, rather than a strict rule.

Ok makes sense. In that case we should probably be looking at the 78.6% retracement of Wave 3 first which coincides with the $300 mark on Bitstamp.

[CryptoWaves]

New post made providing details on the Bitcoin Hourly chart. Happy trading, everyone! 

http://www.cryptowaves.com/bitcoin-usd-hourly-april-2014/

[HeliKopterBen]

You should consider using a log scale to see the waves and your labeling a bit better. 

Also, have you taken price action before the beginning of your chart into account?

[CryptoWaves]

You should consider using a log scale to see the waves and your labeling a bit better.  

Also, have you taken price action before the beginning of your chart into account?

The price data that I have on TradeView goes back to August 18th, 2011. I took everything going back to there into account (measured the waves and fib ratios all the way back there as well). Is this when BitStamp opened? If you know of any chart data that precedes this date, let me know.

At Bitcoin's current price level, the hourly chart is the most important. I have that mapped pretty well. Providing a log scale chart would be useful at some point. I'll work on that after studying the log chart section in my EWave book.

[HeliKopterBen]

The price data that I have on TradeView goes back to August 18th, 2011. I took everything going back to there into account. Is this when BitStamp opened? If you know of any chart data that precedes this date, let me know.

Yes bitstamp data goes back to near that time.  Mt gox data goes back further, showing a couple of earlier bubbles and the 2011 crash.  Im not sure how you could combine the data but this chart may help for reference:

http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg2920ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zl

[RyNinDaCleM]

You should consider using a log scale to see the waves and your labeling a bit better.  

Also, have you taken price action before the beginning of your chart into account?

The price data that I have on TradeView goes back to August 18th, 2011. I took everything going back to there into account (measured the waves and fib ratios all the way back there as well). Is this when BitStamp opened? If you know of any chart data that precedes this date, let me know.

At Bitcoin's current price level, the hourly chart is the most important. I have that mapped pretty well. Providing a log scale chart would be useful at some point. I'll work on that after studying the log chart section in my EWave book.

How do you figure that $260 was wave-1?


Maybe (more likely, imo) $260 was the 3 of the $1163's III

[CryptoWaves]

How do you figure that $260 was wave-1?


Maybe (more likely, imo) $260 was the 3 of the $1163's III

It was my initial read on the chart. The large drop after the $260 top looks like a Wave 2 due to the deep retracement, though it does seem short in time to be a P2 wave. We both agree that the $1163 top is a large degree wave 3 top. I may make adjustments based on the Gox data from 2010, though I don't feel that it changes the current count on the double zig zag W-X-Y retracement.

[RyNinDaCleM]

How do you figure that $260 was wave-1?


Maybe (more likely, imo) $260 was the 3 of the $1163's III

It was my initial read on the chart. The large drop after the $260 top looks like a Wave 2 due to the deep retracement, though it does seem short in time to be a P2 wave. We both agree that the $1163 top is a large degree wave 3 top. I may make adjustments based on the Gox data from 2010, though I don't feel that it changes the current count on the double zig zag W-X-Y retracement.

The main reason I was pointing that out was because a retrace below $260 doesn't really invalidate the larger count (although, it will be perceived as very bearish by many, since the previous ATH...blablabla) And as long as this is not the super cycle [II], your shorter term count is as plausible as one of mine where it's an ABC and we are in iv of 5 of C right now.

[keystroke]

Analysis holding up nicely. Let's see how low we go.

[BuildTheFuture]

CW, on your hourly count the (5) target is shown as 382.86. But we just hit 382.70 on stamp! You're going to have to do better 

[Queeq]

Please criticize:

[CryptoWaves]

I don't have time for a chart update right now, but I'll throw a quick update here.

Wave (4)-C-[Y] ended at $465. This puts new targets for the end of (5)-C-[Y] between $360 and $295. Price already hit $339.79, so that could be the end of wave (5). Full confirmation that price is in an uptrend (based on this wave count) will not happen until we rise above $465, the wave (4) high.

Caution is advised to the long side until price rises above $465, but downside risk is limited to around $300 at the same time. Could stay in the $465 - $300 range for the short term.

Analysis holding up nicely. Let's see how low we go.

CW, on your hourly count the (5) target is shown as 382.86. But we just hit 382.70 on stamp! You're going to have to do better  

Thanks, hope everyone has found the initial posts useful.  


Queeq, would love to consider other E-Wave counts. It is always good to be aware of other wave count possibilities in case the primary wave count fails. There's too many labels on that one chart to read it clearly and I don't have the time at the moment, though. Hopefully will get to it this weekend.

[chessnut]

Please criticize:

Very nice chart Queeq - the last wave was a beautiful buy opportunity.

[Queeq]

I'm sure I missed something. I guess the last big A-B-C count is incorrect considering B felt far beyond previous wave 5. Looks like it's motive wave.

[chessnut]

I'm sure I missed something. I guess the last big A-B-C count is incorrect considering B felt far beyond previous wave 5. Looks like it's motive wave.

I think that what is important is that we were offered a terminating five wave at lows subject to rapid reversal, and a clear mind to take the opportunity.

Funny how the reversal is attributed to news, when it was common knowledge that china never wanted to 'ban' bitcoin. It is just that news moves the market only when speculators are vulnerable (shorts/longs to squeeze). Until that point of panic, speculators had been moaning about how the good news never moves the market, but the bad news always crashes the market..... well that's because speculators were by majority long, and more importantly, subject to panic.

I like your chart. I dont think you need to be critical of the forecast, because I don't think that is what EW really does. we are just looking for junctures.

[RyNinDaCleM]

I like your chart. I dont think you need to be critical of the forecast, because I don't think that is what EW really does. we are just looking for junctures.

Actually, to an extent, that is exactly what EW does. EW shows what is possible to happen next (granted you can have many differing alternatives, though). If there are 5 clear, non-overlapping waves down, then up is the next likely direction in either a five wave 1 or A, OR a 3 wave ABC. The fibo relationship to the previous move can give clues as to which one it is.

As movements happen, you get a few different counts. Then you start checking for invalidation and readjusting your counts until the picture becomes clearer. Counts are rarely perfect on the first try!