The Geo has completed its geometric cycle at a ectopic Point-5 level which is its most common occurrence, namely at 5-prime (5').
Based on the Geo's Off-Set Rule, price is expected to decline and find its highest probability target at the price level corresponding to Point-4.
A prior analysis based on the Predictive/Forecasting Model had defined two qualitative targets, namely:
1 - TG-Lo = 1.87545 - 21 APR 2015
2 - TG-Lox = 1.85918 - 21 APR 2015
Net outlook based on the Geo's expectation, as well as Predictive/Forecasting Model's unanswered targets.
Predictive Analysis & Forecasting
Durango, Colorado - USA
As we continue to look at the DAILY chart, the goal here is to find a mechanism by which price would descend down to the level of Point-3 in reference to the large Geo we have been following.
There are some indications within the 4-Hour chart, as well as per the Predictive/Forecasting Model, that price could test 2.25275 as price attempts to complete its Geo cycle (i.e.: First, closing the 5-point geometry, then reaching counter-trend-wise away from the 1-3 Line, just as the Wolfe Wave pattern is know to behave as it seeks validation of its 1-4 Line.
Again, 4-hour chart coming up shortly.
As the Geo completed its geometric cycle, price is not heading to its corresponding Rule #2 level:
Price finally reached the Geo's level of Point-4, adhering to the Geo's Off-Set Rule #2. In addition, the Predictive/Forecasting Model's 1.87545 target, defined nearly a year ago on April 21st, 2015 was also reached yesterday:
At this point, expect the lower qualitative target to get hit (at a lesser probability), and a reversal to occur at these levels.
Price reached the lowest Qual-Target at 1.85918, which was defined last April 21st, 2015:
This lower-probability, higher-reversibility target should prompt trader to look for reversal patterns.
Note that price carved even lower-lows, now reaching a prior target defined on February 12th 2015 (over a year ago). While this target represented a lower probability target (as a Qualitative Target, or "Qual-Target"), the nature of these targets are associated with high-probability reversal power:
Considering the recent discussion on imminent reversal in the $GBP vs. $CAD and imminent hit of the $USoil ($WTI) target, one should consider the possibility of a commodity-wide reversal, not only affecting #oil, but #gold as well ($XAU) ... Worth keeping an eye out for these commodities.
David Alcindor, CMT Affiliate
Alias: 4xForecaster (Twitter, LinkedIn, StockTwits)
Signal Service or Private Course - Contact: MarketPredictiveAnalysis@gmail.com
All updates on https://twitter.com/4xForecaster
In any case, I let the charts suggest their own stories, and tend to keep my own directional bias in suspension, simply because I have never been able to contradict the Predictive/Forecasting Model with my own attempted understanding of inter-market analysis, and that the few times I argued with sound fundamentals in mind, the Model proved me wrong too many times.
In essence, the Predictive/Forecasting Model absorbs the fundamentals and digests it in a visual array that makes the chart a better forecasting tool than I can come up on my own, regardless of the fundamental knowledge I believe I hold against the chart.
Certain things are known in advance, but thinking can sometimes be the very mechanism by which we strengthen the ignorance of things. I used to think, but the Model would do its own things better.
A quick question if I may. On the daily candle we have a new high which closed above the previous high. I suspect this will not change your forecast but I'm still curious if you pay any attention to this new structure high, as generally ( correct me if I'm mistaken ) this is bullish and a further rally is probable.... Thank you for your time. Kind regards iefan
The gist of the forecast will NOT change, but the extent of this type of adverse excursion will matter greater: If price remains at a 5' level - even if it rallies a bit higher than the signal level (i.e.: BACA from 5'), then the target remains at the price level corresponding to Point-4.
In contrast, if the excursion brings price to a 5'' level, then according to the same implied rule (Geo's Off-Set Rule), then the target contracts up to the price level corresponding to Point-3.
@iefan - Yes, it appears to be placed correctly, as long as the b-point of the ab=cd symmetry corresponds to the lowest point.
I cannot recall whether I had defined a Nodular Core at the level shown in your chart, but if so, this occult geometry would certainly maintain its own resistance against further advance, which it seem is what occurred.
You did not define a Nodular Core for this pair as far as I'm aware, I used one of your previous lessons to try and spot if a Nodular Core was in the vicinity of present price action and found what I though was one and so decided to chart it, I mentioned your name to acknowledge that I derived it from your techniques. It seems to have stomped on the rally in a rather drastic manner.
Please could you have a look at my chart below and let me know if you think this is the most likely path that price will take. Thank you very much. Iefan
A ND is a mid-impulse (not mid-correction, in terms of Elliott Wave morphology) geometric construction defined by a support-then-resistance in the case of a bearish impulse - or by a resistance-then-support, whereby the core of this formed range impacts price by its ability to impose and define a reversal (not retracement) level when price revisits this area, as well as the ability to impose a point of symmetry relative to the impulse wave which constructs it.
If such symmetry were to occur at the level where price initiates an impulse, then you would be dealing with a Euclidean Module (not nodule), which is a whole different beast of its own.
Feel free to post what you perceive to be a ND, so that I can better see what you are referring to.
This is a NODE, not a nodule (i.e.: the node is greater than a nodule by a degree that is measured in Fibonacci levels with 0.386 being the minimum relative to the prior swing - In contrast, a nodule remains less than 0.386, may rally in the lesser Fibonacci order of 0.114 up to 0.214, which are complementary Fibonacci numbers of 0.886 and 0.786, respectively).
Hence, the core of the hidden geometry would be referred to as a nodal core, not a nodular core.
Great pick up!
Remember to avoid the 2-3 Leg trap, which tends to define too simpler a symmetry at first. Hence, what you have defined as a 5-prime could either be true, or simply Point-3.
Another way to verify this using the same geometric properties of the Geo is to look for any internal Geo. One may consider the existence of a smaller Geo whose Point-1 could originate between points 3 and 4 in your plotting, with Point-3 of the smaller Geo at the second validation of the upper dashed line, Point-4 of the smaller Geo the point of departure of the most recent bullish upswing. I have not looked at it closer, but this could make your 5' an actual 5'', thus limiting the current price decline to the upper red dashed line, as per the Geo's Off-Set Rule.
Worth looking into it as a way to "geometrically control" your risks in the larger Geo.
Overall, the original predictive analysis and forecasting will require a change in target, as we are only interested in the HIGHEST probability outcomes. In this case, there has been enough of change in the geometry that the most probable target, adjusted to the recent adverse excursion in price, will now rest at the level of Point-3.
Regarding the most likely price movement, have I charted it correctly on your original analysis?
One last question....is it more likely that price will continue up to Point 5" and then decline to the Level of Point 3, or is the decline more likely to continue from this point? Thank you
This has been one of the most protracted trade. The 3-5' Line has served as a relatively good gauge to decipher any commitment to the downside - So, no BACA = No commitment from bears.
Based on Geo's Off-Set Rule, all prior target become less probable, compared to the one that remains near and at the level of price of Point-4:
However, there is always my crutche: The Predictive/Forecasting Model which had not been used to define a tolerable limit to the upswing. Now that I do this in hindsight, I looked backward (upside, in this case) and applied the Predictive Model by projecting a TG-Hix and obtained 2.183 as an extreme high target (see chart below). However, at this point, it would be most prudent to BACA < the 2.13981 level, as this represents the most recent structural low (i.e.: higher-low along the upswing):