Look for this high-probability 1-4 Line validation as this Wave/Geo completes, combined with a Fibonacci contraction levels one might consider using as supportive target definition:
Predictive Analysis & Forecasting
Durango, Colorado - USA
Alias: 4xForecaster (Twitter, LinkedIn, StockTwits)
Signal Service or Private Course - Contact: MarketPredictiveAnalysis@gmail.com
All updates on https://twitter.com/4xForecaster
Look for that MOST conservative entry, as price converts the 2-4 Line from a "support-turned-resistance" element - Partial entry at GREEN and complementary entry at ORANGE is one method to secure added profits, but that's one of many methods for YOU to consider:
As I demonstrated yesterday, the BARS relative to the 1-3 Line of the 2-4 Line will offer the earliest signal of submission of transgression (here, relative to the 2-4 Line).
Price remains subdued by the 2-4 Line.
Predictive/Forecasting Model, which I have best calibrated for H4-level frames, is used her to offer qualitative (or "Qual-Target", i.e.: high/low, as well as extreme-high/extreme-low, described as TG-Hi/Lo and TG-Hix/Lox, respectively) targets. These targets are less probable than the quantitative targets (or "Quant-Target", i.e.: TG-1, TG-2, ... etc).
In this case, there are only TWO Quant-Targets, namely:
1 - TG-Lo = 210.13 - 29 AUG 2015
2 - TG-Lox = 206.84 - 29 AUG 2015
Whereas the Watch Line ("WL") refers to that last tolerance level, which if transgressed, would demand that the Predictive Model be bumped by a factor of 4 in terms of timeframe levels, such that if transgressed here, then it would call our attention to M15 x 4 = H1, or if H1, then H1 x 4 = H4, and on up to H4 x 4 = Daily, and Daily x 4 = Weekl, and finally Weekly x 4 = Monthly timeframes - This is simply how the Predictive/Forecasting Model has been developed.
Looking at the chart, we obtain the following illustrated targets:
TG-1 > TG-2 > ... TG-n > TG-Lo or TG-Hi > TG-Lox or TG-Hix > WL
Note the significant differential (over hours) between RSI's trendline breach and price's own break-out - We are simply using the same trendline that was used earlier to signal price's submission to a bearish trend when there whas yet NO defined channel but the RSI has three peaks to define its own resistance:
The longer term forecast, as posted July 07th, is as follows (click on chart for analyses):
What I post is simply the result of a method I developed. It's never my opinion, just the method's outcome.
I had a good short from 230 that I dropped, right now waiting to see if we head to 210 to get bearish confirmation, then i can find a short entry.
The market remains in a controlled decline.
1 - Modules I and II fell by the same percentage, before reacting to a rally, yet carving a lower high;
2 - Module III fell at 75% of Modules I & II - This may represent a deceleration in the rate of decline, but it remains that it is carving a net bearish lower high relative to prior structures;
3 - Price remains tethered in the 233/223 sideways corridor
The moves remain net negative against a decelerating rate of decline. A pattern may emerge, such as a nascent Gartley, origination from Point-5 of the Geo in the chart, but only a Butterfly might give it flight, as it would express a different mood that the current overhead 233 interdiction.
Price reached its probable forecast range, dwelled there for fourteen M-15 candles. Bulls could wage another advance, but this remains a predominant bearish territory - Look for a Gartley-to-Butterfly transformation if such attempt were to materialize.
However, I am not so sure at the level where it might matter the most, which is the level I would consider to be at the H4 timeframe.
What I have posted thus far was an attempt at correlating the Geo/WW with the prospect of a bearish move. However, the bears have lost their handle on this particular M15 level, which is a very difficult level to use in any longer-term prospect (most retail-level traders live at the M5/M15/H1 level, some at the H4, but from H4 to daily/weekly levels, only the heavier players control these higher frames).
Rule is, if a M5 level fails to move in the anticipated direction, then expect higher-level players (i.e.: institutional-level players , typically well-funded enough to move price against retail traders).
Obviously, the mere use of market patterns, such as patterns, even the Geo, are not always consistent to measure these moves. Even the Predictive/Forecasting Model I use is really best calibrated at the H4 level.
If price moves any higher, I would recommend the BTC trader to consider what is happening at the higher frames, not just at the H1, but more particularly at the H4 and higher levels. The prior chart I have posted remains bearish, which is the measure I keep in my directional bias. Right now, a push to the upside would still not make this a bullish chart if considering these H4 and above timeframes. So, be careful about considering any significant rallying for the time being.
If price were to push any higher in a sustained, coordinated manner, look for real impulses, and only enter at the break of a new high.
Here is what the H4 chart looks like at this time, which is predominantly bearish:
In that chart, even a move up to 295 would still not make it a bull at the institutional level. Institutions, not retailers, control price in this or any other chart. So beware.
At this M15 level, failure to rally above this bearish entrenchment (pink arrow-down) would maintain validation of original target - Lots of bull/bear fighting going on at these levels, so price consolidation and time-consumptive geometries are expected in this environment - The larger timeframe is what I rely upon to base the bull/bear bias, as the Predictive/Forecasting Model is calibrated for H4 level. This "Model" remains bearish for the time being:
Remember that IF we are dealing with a Geo, then there are certain internal geometric requirements that have to be met, one of which is a complex 3-4 Leg construction, such that two swings are TYPICALLY connected by an intermediate ZZ - See chart:
This would thus force the replacement of Point-5 into Point-3, and Point-5 would rest further up there, near the Bearish entrenchment that was pre-defined - This is one of the contingencies we have discussed in a recent chart ($SEK or $NOK, I believe).