none of them point to 266
![Tongue](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
really?
![Grin](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/grin.gif)
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tradingview.com%2Fx%2F2SFPDnjE%2F&t=663&c=waGAVPJZhhjm_A)
OK, so if it is ending diagonal, appearing in wave C...
Subdivides into five waves - yes;
Appears as wave 5 or C - yes;
All waves subdivide into zigzags -
no;
Wave 2 does not go beyond the start of wave 1 - yes;
Wave 3 overlaps wave 1 - yes;
Wave 4 does not go beyond the start of wave 2 - yes;
Wave 4 ends within the price territory of wave 1 - yes;
We have contracting variety of diagonal, so:
Wave 3 shorter than wave 1 - yes;
Wave 4 shorter than wave 2 - yes in absolute value, no in percentage;
Wave 5 to be shorter than wave 3 - to be seen.
If it is leading diagonal, then:
Wave 5 to end beyond end of wave 3 - to be seen.
Instead of all waves being zigzags for ending diagonal, for leading only 2 and 4 must be zigzags.
So it's most likely a leading if we can interpret last rise (11-16th of April) as a zigzag.
Oops.