As some of you might know, I post some of the preliminary studies in my little "atelier" where I analyze Forex pairs, indices, stocks, ETFs - Here is the link for your review (I do not really take request, and I don't do much of a job answering questions, since I consider that space a "basement-level of activity" - Still, there is some jargon and some might find the process of analysis interesting, who knows: https://www.tradingview.com/chat/#5eHLst6YxeVqGlaO )
Just released on Twitter/LinkedIn is this post:
$NZDCAD still forecast path; Ends oscillation; Eyes 0.85118 per Geo's Off-Set Rule:
$NZD $CAD #RBNZ #BOC #forex
Following are the sequential charts, as I prepared this trade:
Here is where we are now:
FOREGROUND PREDICTIVE/FORECASTING MODEL:
The "Model" expressed the following Quant/Qual-Targets:
1 - TG-1 = 0.85450 - 01 SEP 2015
2 - TG-Hi = 0.86032 - 01 SEP 2015
3 - TG-Hix = 0.86408 - 01 SEP 2015
BACKGROUND GEO STRATEGY:
In the background, the Geo expressed its rarest Point-5 ectopia as price adversely excursed off of the 1-3 Line and validated a 2-4 Line projection originating from Point-1 ( geometric rule defining 5-second, or 5'' as the rarest event. In contrast, 5' is the most common occurrence and results from the 2-4 Line projection originating from Point-3.
The Geo's 1-2 Line requirement is met as a reciprocal ab = cd symmetry, the 2-3 Line is usually an complex , such as a double-ZZ or triple-ZZ, or in this case, the internal construct of a impulse, justifying the force the adverse excursion and definition of the 5''. The 2-4 Leg is usually a simple ZZ or simpler construct than the 2-3 Leg, whereas the 4-5 is often a mere ZZ.
GEO's OFFSET RULE:
In contrast to the pattern which declines any geometric reliance , the Geo has above set of requirements, as it serves to determine highest-probability targets. These targets are the result of geometric compensations when price moves off of the Geo's core 1-3 Line and 2-4 Line constructs, such that:
1 - Price reversing from Point-5 aims for the 1-4 Line as its highest probability target ( rule);
2 - Price reversing from Point-5' aims for price level corresponding to Point-4 as its highest probability target;
3 - Price reversing from Point-5'' aims for price level corresponding to Point-3 as its highest probability target.
The frequency of these event occurring is as follows:
Point-5' > Point-5 > Point-5''.
In the case of this chart, we are dealing with the rarest of the occurrence, and the Geo's Off-Set Rule aims for the price level corresponding to Point-3 as its highest probability target.
However, above target is based on the background geometry. In contrast, the foreground is held by the Predictive/Forecasting Model, which stands as an independent factor, and remains valid as far as the quantitative and qualitative targets defined above.
Predictive Analysis & Forecasting
Durango, Colorado - USA
As of this hour, all overhead targets have been reached, including the lesser-probability Watch Line ("WL") level. This typically calls for a greater-than-retracement (i.e.: a reversal to a Fibonacci level greater than 0.618) - I have moved the chart from a M15 level to a DAILY, so as to visually better encompass the entire trade, which has been quite tedious, considering that the timeframe that was initially offered was the M15 - Note that the Predictive/Forecasting Model is calibrated to serve best on the H4 level, and any level lesser than H4 would tend to decrease in precision - Nonetheless, here are all targets hit, all the way to WL, so consider possibility of a deep reversal, as shown in the DAILY chart:
Note: I am not too sure how much of an interest there is in this thread or the TradingView community at-large in Elliott Wave analysis. As I am always quick to say, there are much better expert on this subject than I will ever be. However, I will start to add a few clues, pearls and lessons here and there, with the caveat that http://www.ElliottWave.com remains the sole and only site from which everyone else learns (see free lessons, great weekly insights and newsletter, all of which is a must-have for any serious, professional traders, or simply the audience I will always assume to address to).
Following is a chart highlighting two degrees of enumeration, wherein the squared-in numbers represent a larger move, encompassing the smaller ones - The right symbols would tend to "undress" the numbers, typically from a circle/square to parentheses (i.e.: broken down jackets, if you like the vestimentary allusion), all the way to naked (i.e.: no "cloths" on, or no encircling lines). I like to jump from squared-in to smaller Roman numericals, but this is actually breaking away with convention - I do this as a visual trader, where the stark difference keep my mind's eyes on task and in tune with the greater whole.
I will post the chart in a follow-through thread.
Basically, the levels designated as "v" and "squared-in 5" represent a HIGH-PROBABILITY level of attainment from which the lesser degree impulse is likely to complete. This first completion would thus correspond to a Wave-1 of the larger degree, with a controlled retracement shown in the illustration, such that both the UP-side and the DOWN-side are bracketed in this probable pathway.
As I always mention, I am not interested in being right, but simply to follow the right rules. For instance, you will notice that larger moves will tend to reverse to the 4th wave termination level of the one-lesser degree. I can also tell you that three degrees are likely to complete and reverse to the level of termination of Wave-2 of the highest degree from which the move occurs ... Perhaps I wil have the chance to reveal this as we go along in this or other threads, so long as this remains an interesting subject to you (I tend to judge whether the topic is deadly boring or intereting via tumbs-up, so please do let me know in comments or the like).
So, let's keep an eye on this development and see whether these assumptions hold consistently.
By now, you know that I rely a lot on probabilities, not so numerical, but based on empirical experience and also based on the "Model". I have absolutely no opinion, no desire and no interest in the underlying asset, other than following what the Predictive/Forecasting Model tells me to do. So, there is no argument to be had, no excuse for me to fabricate, as I rely 100% on the "Model" as long as the targets are clearly stated as being defined by the "Model". In other occasions, I would produce Fibonacci-based targets, Geo or Wolfe Wave based targets, but I would refer to these as "background" analysis, as the "Model" will for ever remain the foreground generator of predictions and forecasts.
Hope this clear things up a bit.
At this point, here is what the other charts suggest:
$EURUSD - Remains bearish with support in the 1.099/1.095 area - This is NET-BULL for $USD
$NZDUSD - Last chart I posted, price simply steamed rolled through all expected supports. If you have any knowledge of Elliott Wave, I would look for wave counts and see whether it can be reduced to this week. I have not looked at it closely through the Predictive/Forecasting Model, but there appears to be a support forming (see PURPLE Line in the M15 chart) at 0.62536. If price carves a new structural low, I would thus not rely on this pair until the daily/weekly chart is done pummeling it (likely institutional players reacting to the Chinese significant downturn) - A peek at the $USDCNH and/or $USDCNY might give an alternate view into the $NZD strength, but I am not convinced that there are reliable proxies. Note that the Global Dairy trade came out at a +12.1% this SEP 01st in the pricing of Whole milk Powder (WMP), whereas OCT 2015 contracts currently stand at a whoping 42.4% in terms of WMP Price Index change relative to this SEP 01 ... This is in contrast to 9.9% for NOV 15, 14.8% DEC 15, 13.7% JAN 16, 11.4% FEB 16 and a sad 6.8% MAR 16 contract ... This should tell you that a 42.4% will require some discounting into the price (the exact % is not as important as the fact that this is a multiple of the baseline changes, and that sentiment for WMP Price Index is more than a mere directional bias shift ... I'd say that there is true consensus in this turn around, and the force of that consensus will likely show in the chart BEFORE OCT 15 prints.
So, let's assume that the $NZDUSD is NET-BULL in favor of $NZD, or simply bearish on the $USD n this particular pair ... But that's on fundamentals, mainly, which really is what this commodity-based pair is known to rely upon, as a main export economy of agricultural products towards China and the broader Asian theater.
$USDCAD - The chart has remains tethered to the 3-5' Line, and continues to vacillate about the 1.414-FE level. $CAD is also reliant upon pricing in gold (as a major extractor, refiner and exporter), oil (largest reserves) and the US economy (its consumptive buffer). Still, on a pure technical consideration, I expect this pair to decline ... I'd wait for a BACA < 1.31156 for this confirmation of a bearish down-turn, although the aforementioned commodities are worth tracking as well.
Nonetheless, this is a NET-BEAR in terms of $USD strength.
EURUSD = USD BULL
NZDUSD = USD BEAR
USDCAD = USD BEAR
This +2 vs. -1 may reflect the level of consolidation that are forming in the chart. So, sticking to basic entry rules, such as the ones I have highlighted while standing on the sideline might not be an unreasonable stance for the time being. I expect that these directional bias will convert slowly to a grand-net USD bear.