An early bearish reversal signal is coming out of the bear cave, ... You know that growling sound.
Technically speaking, price has been on a quasi-reversal trend to the upside went it turned around from 555.90 and hit a new pitch at 607.20 (see chart). However, price has dunged into prior depth as it reversed once again near that prior low.
From the current level, a rally to a structural hurdle, such as 576.44 remains a high probability, but a continuation of that decline will remain a threat to bulls if that level remains validated but not transgressed in a way that clearly sends price to higher grounds. So, for cautionary measures, consider 576.44 as a strong bearish entrenchment.
A pattern trader might decipher a Gartley, or perhaps the cocooning of a butterfly, if indeed price were to fall to lower lows, below 555.90, that is.
The predictive model itself posted an early market reversal signal, short of a confirmation. While the targets remain unconfirmed, i will define them now as a mere warning sign, sort of laying out the ground with red flags to signal bear traps on the way down there.
Still, the PINK zone will act as the LAST bullish bastion, before such bearish minefield scenario plays out. The targets are thus defined as:
1 - TG-1 = 557.43 - 11 AUG 2014
2 - TG-2 = 538.42 - 11 AUG 2014
and
3 - TG-Lo = 524.20 - 11 AUG 2014.
As you may recall, the numerical targets (i.e.: TG-1, TG-2, ... ) are levels that define stepwise pauses where price is likely to post a shallower retracement (expect 0.214, 0.382 or 0.500-Fib retracements), as opposed to the qualitative targets (i.e.: TG-Lo or TG-Hi) represent levels that are LESS likely to be visited, but IF and ONCE price does reach these levels, it will likely act as a reversal level, pushing price out and passed all other numerical targets and beyond.
OVERALL:
Predictive/forecasting model has posted a warning signal, suggesting a potential decline to targets defined above. This bearish scenario has a HIGHER potential to being executed IF and ONCE price crosses below the PINK zone, thus opening the floor up to these bearish targets. Of course, there is a potential of a Double-Bottom pattern occurring as a very last level of bear rejection, but this is still an unlikely scenario compared to the possibility of a decline.
For now, the directional sign will remain on "Neutral" until a definitive price action commits to one or the other direction relative to the levels defined.
First things first, pink zone!
Cheers,
David Alcindor Predictive Analysis & Forecasting Denver, Colorado - USA
Interested in finding out what major banks' FX positons are? Get daily medium-term and long-term positions from the big dogs in my TradingView room here: - tradingview.com/chat/
via @TradingView | BTC #bitcoin #litecoin
-----------------------------
BTCUSD/Bitstamp - H4:
Crypto'ers ,
M15 timeframe has been a proving ground for bulls, demonstrating their ability to fight back. In light of recent concerns about institutional heavy-handedness, I would venture to say that the decline was most probably due to long positioning and weak-hand shaking, than a concerted bearish pummeling of the currency.
However, the confirmation is best seen in the synthetic H4 timeframe, which provides a better measure of retail/investors/institutional concerted activity. Therefore, a bullish reversal remains to be seen at this relevant level, even though price has continued to act as per forecast, relative to the lowest-low target.
As you may recall, a TG-Lo target had been defined earlier last week, and price did hit it and reversed healthily. However, such target should have acted as a reversal marker, which it failed to do. Instead, price forced the system to redefine targets based on a less precises DAILY timeframe. While this is not inconsistent with the model's ability to predict direction and trend or forecast targets, it is most unusual that we would ever have to look at a higher target, except in such case when a stronger, better financed player splashes through the price data.
BTCUSD/Bitstamp - DAILY:
I suspected that interference in the form of manipulation may have occurred, and a recent input from an article suggested that bitcoin traders might consider re-reading this ( zerohedge.com/node/488930 ) article, which dates back from last year.
Overall, I want to thank you for your participation and enduring patience. The model I have designed and use in all of my predictive analysis and forecasting across all and any asset has a long history of providing quite relevant and precise directional as well as target values. I have also learned that any inconsistent price action relative to its quantitative (i.e.: TG-1, TG-2, ... TG-n) or qualitative (i.e.: TG-Hi and TG-Lo) targets should be construed as an extraneous event interfering with the model, in which cases, either the timeframe is being made temporarily irrelevant due to heavier player in a higher timeframe (in this case, a daily timeframe was necessary to re-calibrate certain targets), or sheer manipulation within the same H4 timeframe is taking place, which may be less probable in this case.
If indeed price continues to rally, then I would rest assure that the recent heavy-handed should be construed in no other way but as a BULLISH event, as it reveals with no clearer evidence that large players are coming in the pool to splash and play, pushing price up in no shallow waves.
Cheers,
David Alcindor
Predictive Analysis & Forecasting
Denver, Colorado - USA
(PS: Just got back from climbing my first 14,000-foot mountain. So, I will be resting a little and chime in in perhaps less frequency than you might be used to - Thank you for your king readership and reference - David)
abail
⋅
Thanks for the explanation David.
Just to clarify, does this mean that in the short term we will have an ascending trajectory towards the targets definied on the 11th of August (524 till 557)?
Cheers
4xForecaster
⋅
@abail - The targets have been ghosted in grey, simply because they have already been hit. I usually keep them in the field as they remain relevant to the structural trader, expecting price to pause at these levels.
While the M15 timeframe has been a glory field for the bulls, they remain stuck in bloody muck in the H4, as they fight an uphill battle against these bearish entrenchment which are aforementioned ghosted targets.
So, in the short term, it all looks bullish, however, the model I use looks at H4 level, which provides a more composite view of retail vs. large institutional hands. At that particular level (H4), it remains tedious, as bears predominate the chart, although not without some lost ground to bulls. Only time will offer the signaling data to confirm a reversal or affirm further descent in the bears' caves.
David
abail
⋅
Thank you !! Get your deserved rest :)
4xForecaster
⋅
21 AUG 2014 - Update:
From Twitter:
--------------------
BTCUSD needs BACA < 511.00 to start corrective decline to targets:
via @www.tradingview | #bitcoin BTC #litecoin
-------------------
Traders,
The recent candles have been the deepest incursion attempted by BTC/Bitstamp ever since the recent bullish impulse. As indicated in the recent analyses, a corrective decline is (over-) due. While price consolidated by wounding around the recent 523.79 forecast target, the recent testing below the 511.00 structure might herald a temporary bearish strength.
As indicated before, price could very well decline all the way down to the 452.56-to-461.66 "Pink" zone. However, significant hurdles exist ahead of this probable reversal point, or two quantitative targets, namely:
1 - TG-1 = 496.35 - 21 AUG 2014
and
2 - TG-2 = 481.92 - 21 AUG 2014
While these levels are drawn a possible hurdles, only a bullish counter-offensive could sustain price above any of these levels, which would most likely require a heavy-handed constitutional intervention. In my opinion, such intervention is more likely to interfere and upset bulls at this time, as it would merely benefit from a good weak-hand-shaking event, the likes and the depth that would give bulls a chance to smell that pink zone for one last time (at risk of being too optimistic and voicing a rare humane voice over that of my predictive/forecasting model).
Cheers,
David Alcindor
minbari
⋅
> smell that pink zone
IvanLabrie
⋅
:D
4xForecaster
⋅
@IvanLabrie - Looking at your target, they seem to correspond to the significant Fib values of 0.382, 0.500 and 0.618 - Is this what you are sharing in your chart?
The issue I have had in the past using price-based targeting, even with the sensible use of Fibonacci levels, is that price would rarely hit it right at that level.
If I overlay these 0.382, 0.500 and 0.618 levels with the ones defined by the model (which are defined outside of the price field), then they would perfection alternate and miss each by the widest available margin, in the sense where there would be almost the same equal space achieved as TG-1 falls right between 0..382 and 0.500, and TG-2 falls right between 0.500 and 0.618.
Banks and institutional traders know exactly where all and any trader post their traders, Stop-Losses and Take-Profit orders, and most of these are based on Fib. Algos also work at these mathematical levels, therefore, it might be best to "front" any trade with a system that takes consideration of spread plus a small margin of error.
For instance, I recommend to use 0.618 + spread (per trader's institutional pricing) + a safety margin (say, 2-3 additional pips) in order to get in or out of a trade.
The model itself has built a different set of conditions, in order to define the reversal levels, S/R the best it can, knowing that it is constantly being "looked at" by algos and much smarter trading boxes.
Anyway, I appreciate your posting your chart. Please, do so anytime. I hope the comment I made here pertained to what you meant to share.
David Alcindor
- David
IvanLabrie
⋅
Thanks for the reply, I agree.
My targets are areas, not specific prices.
I use a combined approach taking into account volume and price, and time spent at prices. Fib is just a complement, and it tends to match the model.
It's interesting that my analysis matches yours in this case. Maybe I'm doing a few things right. Seeing price at 493 at BTC-E is reassuring.
4xForecaster
⋅
20 AUG 2014 - Update:
From Twitter:
----------------------
BTCUSD hit M15 target @ 523.79 dead-on; Holding for forecast reversal; Will it?
So far, forecast target got hit right in the eye. Expecting a potential brad sweep to the downside. This should allow institutional players to scoop the poop from scared-out weak-hands and turn it into a fertilizing fuel for their bulls.
From Twitter:
-----------------------------
BTCUSD revisits all prior targets on its way UP:
-
via @TradingView | BTC USD #bitcoin #litecoin
----------------------------
BTCUSD/Bitstamp - M15:
AND:
----------------------------
BTCUSD consolidates; Bears dominate; Bulls fight back; Reversal soon?
via @TradingView | BTC #bitcoin #litecoin
-----------------------------
BTCUSD/Bitstamp - H4:
Crypto'ers ,
M15 timeframe has been a proving ground for bulls, demonstrating their ability to fight back. In light of recent concerns about institutional heavy-handedness, I would venture to say that the decline was most probably due to long positioning and weak-hand shaking, than a concerted bearish pummeling of the currency.
However, the confirmation is best seen in the synthetic H4 timeframe, which provides a better measure of retail/investors/institutional concerted activity. Therefore, a bullish reversal remains to be seen at this relevant level, even though price has continued to act as per forecast, relative to the lowest-low target.
As you may recall, a TG-Lo target had been defined earlier last week, and price did hit it and reversed healthily. However, such target should have acted as a reversal marker, which it failed to do. Instead, price forced the system to redefine targets based on a less precises DAILY timeframe. While this is not inconsistent with the model's ability to predict direction and trend or forecast targets, it is most unusual that we would ever have to look at a higher target, except in such case when a stronger, better financed player splashes through the price data.
BTCUSD/Bitstamp - DAILY:
I suspected that interference in the form of manipulation may have occurred, and a recent input from an article suggested that bitcoin traders might consider re-reading this ( zerohedge.com/node/488930 ) article, which dates back from last year.
More recently, @PaulAnthony posted this 3-day old article, which offers a very relevant information about manipulations and interference activities from well-funded (i.e.: bank and other such) large institutions - Here is the article for your review: reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/2dohjg/im_josh_rossi_from_bitfinex_here_to_talk_about/
Overall, I want to thank you for your participation and enduring patience. The model I have designed and use in all of my predictive analysis and forecasting across all and any asset has a long history of providing quite relevant and precise directional as well as target values. I have also learned that any inconsistent price action relative to its quantitative (i.e.: TG-1, TG-2, ... TG-n) or qualitative (i.e.: TG-Hi and TG-Lo) targets should be construed as an extraneous event interfering with the model, in which cases, either the timeframe is being made temporarily irrelevant due to heavier player in a higher timeframe (in this case, a daily timeframe was necessary to re-calibrate certain targets), or sheer manipulation within the same H4 timeframe is taking place, which may be less probable in this case.
If indeed price continues to rally, then I would rest assure that the recent heavy-handed should be construed in no other way but as a BULLISH event, as it reveals with no clearer evidence that large players are coming in the pool to splash and play, pushing price up in no shallow waves.
Cheers,
David Alcindor
Predictive Analysis & Forecasting
Denver, Colorado - USA
(PS: Just got back from climbing my first 14,000-foot mountain. So, I will be resting a little and chime in in perhaps less frequency than you might be used to - Thank you for your king readership and reference - David)