Is it possible to provide an indication that pre-empts the classic "death cross"?
Traders use different systems to judge the market outlook on patterns, as well as an important indication for them.
It is perfectly normal that someone can be wrong, and someone will be lucky to read the market correctly.
This post is about anticipatory indication and prejudice. If you open the articles on moving averages,
you can read that the exponential Moving averages (EMAs) are preferable on low timeframes up to a minute chart,
but they are not but it's recommended for the weekly chart.
Whereas it is recommended to use SMAs on longer timeframes.
OK, I thought. But why? Who has checked it? A price is a price, in itself it only says that someone has offered an asset
at a certain price, and someone bought at that price. But the market trend requires more confirmation of transactions through volumes.
The price alone cannot tell you what the market has decided. And that is why I made this comparison. MA 50/200 (white and blue line)
versus EMA 50/200 (orange and purple) + VFI LF (volume flow indicator).
Hypothesis:
EMAs are valid for 1 week timeframe, the exponent is not suitable for this timeframe is a preconception.
MA lags in indicating the signal, but you need to know the trend of the volume, for which you need an indicator like VFI LF.
In the case of unidirectional signals EMA 50/200 and VFI LF you can make a deal without waiting for the signal MA 50/200.
Assertion:
Bitcoin is in a bear market and no reversal has occurred.
The bounce at the beginning of the year was intended to test crossed possible area of the weekly SMA moving averages.
But because of death cross on EMAs already on the 9th of January, it also puts selling pressure.
And here the Volume Flow Indication is an important aid.
See, the VFI has two pale lines besides the volume flow line itself,
it's a fast and slow MA of volume (but it's MA of volume, not of price!),
and on these lines you can also see golden and death crosses.
Look closely, in the history of Bitstamp trading (the longest trading history of Bitcoin)
there have been exactly 3 such crosses by volume indication on weekly chart.
Two bearish and one bullish.
The last bearish cross on the MA of volume flow occurred about a month before the cross at EMA 50/200 price.
December 12...
As a result:
Two bearish pre-emptive signals versus one classic "textbook" one.
My bet is that there will not be a upbounce.
There will be an 85% retracement level from the peak and a consolidation at the bottom.
Waiting for a reality check in this race.
My bet is that we are in a bear market.
Traders use different systems to judge the market outlook on patterns, as well as an important indication for them.
It is perfectly normal that someone can be wrong, and someone will be lucky to read the market correctly.
This post is about anticipatory indication and prejudice. If you open the articles on moving averages,
you can read that the exponential Moving averages (EMAs) are preferable on low timeframes up to a minute chart,
but they are not but it's recommended for the weekly chart.
Whereas it is recommended to use SMAs on longer timeframes.
OK, I thought. But why? Who has checked it? A price is a price, in itself it only says that someone has offered an asset
at a certain price, and someone bought at that price. But the market trend requires more confirmation of transactions through volumes.
The price alone cannot tell you what the market has decided. And that is why I made this comparison. MA 50/200 (white and blue line)
versus EMA 50/200 (orange and purple) + VFI LF (volume flow indicator).
Hypothesis:
EMAs are valid for 1 week timeframe, the exponent is not suitable for this timeframe is a preconception.
MA lags in indicating the signal, but you need to know the trend of the volume, for which you need an indicator like VFI LF.
In the case of unidirectional signals EMA 50/200 and VFI LF you can make a deal without waiting for the signal MA 50/200.
Assertion:
Bitcoin is in a bear market and no reversal has occurred.
The bounce at the beginning of the year was intended to test crossed possible area of the weekly SMA moving averages.
But because of death cross on EMAs already on the 9th of January, it also puts selling pressure.
And here the Volume Flow Indication is an important aid.
See, the VFI has two pale lines besides the volume flow line itself,
it's a fast and slow MA of volume (but it's MA of volume, not of price!),
and on these lines you can also see golden and death crosses.
Look closely, in the history of Bitstamp trading (the longest trading history of Bitcoin)
there have been exactly 3 such crosses by volume indication on weekly chart.
Two bearish and one bullish.
The last bearish cross on the MA of volume flow occurred about a month before the cross at EMA 50/200 price.
December 12...
As a result:
Two bearish pre-emptive signals versus one classic "textbook" one.
My bet is that there will not be a upbounce.
There will be an 85% retracement level from the peak and a consolidation at the bottom.
Waiting for a reality check in this race.
My bet is that we are in a bear market.
Comment:
So we have a solid contradiction.
So we have a solid contradiction.
Comment:
I am beginning to think that the manipulators put in 100% and achieved that golden cross on the MA.
Look at how long price did not want to fall, accumulating and accumulating divergences.
And that MA cross turns out to be right on the eve of an entirely different cross on the weekly chart.
Also, I don't have any proof, but I frankly suspect a number of traders with a huge number of subscribers that they are agents of manipulators. They point out some arguments and fail to point out others. I will not name names all of them in plain sight.
The reason is simple. Simple-minded buyers know several signals, and the most famous is the golden cross. They have given them this cross. On falling volumes...
Look at how long price did not want to fall, accumulating and accumulating divergences.
And that MA cross turns out to be right on the eve of an entirely different cross on the weekly chart.
Also, I don't have any proof, but I frankly suspect a number of traders with a huge number of subscribers that they are agents of manipulators. They point out some arguments and fail to point out others. I will not name names all of them in plain sight.
The reason is simple. Simple-minded buyers know several signals, and the most famous is the golden cross. They have given them this cross. On falling volumes...
Comment:
This trader has done even more carefully. Conflicting RSI and MFI on the weekly frame? Are we definitely heading up?
Comment:
An associated idea. The picture is clickable.
Comment:
So the EMA 50/200 was able to act as
a pre-emptive signal for the MA 50/200 signal.
The prejudice is disproved.
a pre-emptive signal for the MA 50/200 signal.
The prejudice is disproved.
Comment:
I would say that one of the «eschatological» questions about Bitcoin is whether it will gain visible independence of pricing behaviour from the main stock market?
I would be persuaded by a timeframe of two financial quarters. For example a SPX/NASDAQ downtrend and at the same time Bitcoin's upward flight.
But that is not happening.
Why not?
Because most private hands across the globe are unable to create the volume that would hold the price against the major markets.
And so-called institutional investors still view cryptocurrencies as a high-risk asset, often allocated only a share of their portfolio, and buying or selling such assets may be dictated by some more influential conditions. These are quite evident in the SPX chart as a reflection of the health of the largest economy.
In order for private BTC buying to overwhelm financial market sentiment, hundreds of millions of people must start buying and selling cryptocurrency on a monthly basis, creating with their money this other liquidity approaching the volume of institutional money. When that balance is tipped in favour of regular people, probably the sentiment of regular people will become more influential on Bitcoin than SPX if we are talking about a timeframe of at least ke
I would be persuaded by a timeframe of two financial quarters. For example a SPX/NASDAQ downtrend and at the same time Bitcoin's upward flight.
But that is not happening.
Why not?
Because most private hands across the globe are unable to create the volume that would hold the price against the major markets.
And so-called institutional investors still view cryptocurrencies as a high-risk asset, often allocated only a share of their portfolio, and buying or selling such assets may be dictated by some more influential conditions. These are quite evident in the SPX chart as a reflection of the health of the largest economy.
In order for private BTC buying to overwhelm financial market sentiment, hundreds of millions of people must start buying and selling cryptocurrency on a monthly basis, creating with their money this other liquidity approaching the volume of institutional money. When that balance is tipped in favour of regular people, probably the sentiment of regular people will become more influential on Bitcoin than SPX if we are talking about a timeframe of at least ke
The curious thing is this, this picture only happened on the Bitstamp chart but has yet to happen on Binance. This is explained by the difference in trading history.
However, I believe Bitstamp as a legislator can play a role simply by the fact that this pattern can be observed there.