Increased Length of Corrective Waves to be more in-line with the overall scale of the primary wave so far, Targets adjusted to suit, and Wave C targets adjusted to be within the range of its previous relative wave 4.
Made some modifications to the subv waves based on recurring 61.8% retracements apparent in this corrective wave so far (Dec-June)
Rachel_T
⋅
Here is the monthly with the previous waves sub waves removed for clarity of the primary wave
(You can actually clearly see the red/green seperation of the primary waves using Heikin Ashi)
And as per comments, i've revised the precise candle location of the earlier waves (not that it really affects the overall forecast)
(Just as taking a wrong street on a car journey but correcting the error later by taking a different road to get back on track doesn't ruin your trip)
magbrr
⋅
your A-B-C wave at wave II violates Elliott wave established rules though. You show a truncated wave C where in fact there are more cases of wave C never ending as a truncated wave in a correction than there. That might make a lot of difference to this analysis.
Rachel_T
⋅
@magbrr, Any suggestions? I personally dont believe elliot wave is 100% perfect in crypto, its not like traditional stocks and shares and is massively leveraged.
Rachel_T
⋅
@Rachel_T, There's certainly no doubt (however you choose to draw it, that that down section is the corrective wave regardless.
magbrr
⋅
@Rachel_T, Elliott wave is 100% perfect all the time if you follow the rules strictly with no corners. The whole of your wave A, if you measure again you might find minor a-b-c subdivisions to complete a larger a-b-c correction as wave II. What I'm saying is your wave II location is a bit higher than it needs to be. What you have labeled as Wave A is actually II. How do we know the satisfaction of a corrective wave? There are strict fibonacci ratios that corrections follow with start of measuring zones varying between start and end of the extreme points used for measurement. This is all a mouthful I know but the whole of what you have identified as Wave A of II is actually wave II of itself. You might want to look at the details again.
Rachel_T
⋅
@magbrr, When you get to my age, you realise nothing is perfect, absolutely nothing in this world. You just believe it is, a bit like religion, is a belief.
But then maybe im wrong, maybe your right, in which case please show me the correct count according to you.
magbrr
⋅
@Rachel_T, I'll be careful about the age thing but not that it matters here because it is irrelevant. My reference to perfection was relative to your wave count. I am well aware that perfection is an illusion depending on how one looks at it. If you see perfection as never making a mistake then it is an illusion but if you see perfection as realizing when a mistake is about to be made or when one has been done, then believe it or not it is a very concrete reality
magbrr
⋅
@Rachel_T, My suggested wave count will be where you have got wave A, will be a wave II and then your wave III will shift to where your wave V urrently is in anticipation for the completion of wave IV before the final wave V which could be a truncation or another propulsion upwards. In other words, your 5-wave count appears to have completed to soon and the mistake might come in the future when shorting at your wave (B) due to the apearance of an actual powerful bearish candle, with a stop loss just above wave B and then the Market reverses and takes out the stop and continues upwards probably proving that the strong bearish candel may have been a wave 2 of the final wave V