BTCUSD just had a new week and I wanted to get the data on the close on both the On Balance Volume and combine it with the MACD. I will link just a couple of ideas to supplement this idea so it isn't to repetitive. Each idea covers a different set of indicators and guess what? All bearish. A review of my post history will show I have not vacilated between bearish and bullish over this time last month. Even when I called for a uptrend I called it a bull trap and that is exactly what it was.
I have been watching the On Balance Volume with EMAS for a couple of weeks now. For some background information, it can be a bit hard to to OBV analysis on crypto because often the supply is constantly increasing and in other cases, supply will be burned. This can confound peak to peak or trough to trough analysis looking for divergences and is one reason why I missed a fair bit of this uptrend. But what doesn't really change is the OBV EMA crosses. If the 10 and 20 OBV EMAs cross that means there has been some change in selling or buying pressure. Not shown is the third EMA which I usually program to 100. There are also times I use a 25-50-75 and that can signal a major change in trend is coming. It is not a signal for people that want to snipe or scalp, but when the 25 OBV EMA crosses the 50 a big move will be incoming, especially on a timeframe like the weekly. You just have to wait for the price action to coil up and then release its tension. I wish I learned this earlier.
I shall not explain the MACD because it is a more understood indicator. And I don't think it means too much that the OBV EMAs and MACD cross didn't happen exactly on the same candle.
Now to discuss the 200 week... Not because it is so esoteric but because of the implications. The 200w has marked the bottom of ever bear market we have the available data for on the BLX chart. This has an implication that most don't want to consider no matter how technical the move is: BTCUSD will have to retest its previous All Time High. Even worse to consider is the 200w fails as support, but that is something to consider in due time.
The all time high of 2013 was retested but the high of 2014 was not. If the high of 2017 is retested we may have a scenario where every other ATH of bitcoin needs to be retested, or some other pattern as may develop.
This does not inform any single trade between here and the 200w. There should be a lot of relief rallies or suckers rallies or bull traps between were and there. But historically it seems clear that after a powerful impulse on the weekly timeframe a bearish MACD cross and a cross of the 10 and 20 OBV signals a bear market.
There is a chance that somehow and some way even though the MACD signals a major change in momentum that the bulls will somehow clutch and the buying will pick up. But I don't see a reason that would happen. If that happens I put this bearish sentiment on hold.
The thing is this is not a blow off top/ Good luck shorting the bottom.
xdavidj
⋅
@CHARTING-CHIMP, not having a blow off top is a sign of a more mature market. You will still see blowoff tops in alts and major alts. Bitcoin is a separate beast. You are not guaranteed to get a blow off top just because it used to happen before. Last time BitCoin had a blowoff top, the market cap was less than Ethereum's currently is.
CHARTING-CHIMP
⋅
@xdavidj, Basically your saying that "it's different this time" which is what the permabulls say when were at the true end.. Its not the same, until it is. Look left, blow off top, then bear market again and again. This is a very short accumulation stage were heading into, then like before more aths. Good luck man.
@CHARTING-CHIMP, And what you're saying is that 'it will be the same this time'.
You cannot predict the future of something just because that's how it happened last time. Nobody will be able to predict the future. Not you, not me, not anyone The people that control the market are the ones that control the supply.
On-chain analytics say that the number of people owning 1000+ bitcoin is declining, not increasing. That's a sign of distribution, not accumulation.