RSI looks like a Bearish Divergence to me. That would suggest a downtrend is getting near. While I have personally found that RSI Divergence is correct nearly every time the timing can be difficult to read. Just take a look at how 2011 worked out with a Bearish Divergence. Nothing says that price cannot go higher from here before the breakdown. Get good price confirmation before entering a Short.
Sometimes, this is actually a bullish divergence, giving room for RSI to power up. That's why I really do not like just following indicators. Price patterns matter much more IMO. We've seen it happen many times when indices hit all time highs and indicators don't confirm - every bear is the world is screaming their head off - and BANG, we go even higher.
I agree price patterns are far more reliable. However, I do consider RSI and CCI as secondary indicators for confirmation.
I used to trade Elliot Waves, but find Harmonics to be better. Figuring out Carney's rule's is a bit tricky -- getting there. The EW background helps in locating the points.
Agree, that Carney does not explain well. Lots of contradictions and poor editing. I understand why some people reject Harmonics, yet they do seem to work pretty well. Not enough data yet, but looks like better than 50/50.
A Bloomberg article said most professional money managers have a 50/50 win/loss ratio and make money through trade and risk management. The best consistent win ratio was 64%.
If you catch a harmonic at the start, you stop is tight and it's easy to manage. That's the key. I'm not sure about Carney contradictions, I just find his layout hard to read and I'm a visual thinker. I reference this site every day http://neoharmonics.com/learning/chapter-2-fibonacci-harmonics/
I used to trade Elliot Waves, but find Harmonics to be better. Figuring out Carney's rule's is a bit tricky -- getting there. The EW background helps in locating the points.
Agree, that Carney does not explain well. Lots of contradictions and poor editing. I understand why some people reject Harmonics, yet they do seem to work pretty well. Not enough data yet, but looks like better than 50/50.
A Bloomberg article said most professional money managers have a 50/50 win/loss ratio and make money through trade and risk management. The best consistent win ratio was 64%.