wave C can either be impulsive or ending diagonal,
in case of impulsive i like to see clear break of the trend line which is parallel to the line connecting beginning of wave 1 to the end of wave 2 (chart link below) which is not the case here.
another point i noticed that the whole wave 3 did not make any higher volume on MACD(usually happens with wave 3), so that mean deceasing trading volume so, i preferred the ending diagonal count over the impulsive count (keeping the impulsive as a 2nd scenario).
RN Elliott - Robert Prechter EW.
Thus, a C wave or an Ending Diagonal are always labeled with 1-2-3-4-5 and never
with wxy, especially a 3 of 5 - usually the strongest and longest wave.
So, I guess I'm wondering if you're using a proprietary form of EW ??
I think it is an important distinction for the traders who are new to EW,
thanks for your thoughts !!!!!!!!!
as you know ED sub count is 3-3-3-3-3, the No. 3 here is reference for a correction type of wave not exactly 3 (ABC), but according to the rules we know it is only zigzags as type of correction as mentioned in the "Elliott wave principle - key to market behavior by frost and prechter"
but it could be zigzag family too (DZ or TZ).
I quote from the Visual Guide to Elliott Wave Trading book by Wayne Gorman & Jeffrey Kennedy Foreword by Robert R. Prechter, Jr. the following:
"Within an ending diagonal, subwaves 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 always take corrective-wave form, specifically either a single or multiple zigzag." page 234.
Forgive me for continuing to throw cold water on your idea of an ED,
but, as Jeffrey Kennedy remarks many times in Traders Classroom,
proportionality is just as important as a valid count.
In other words it just does not have "the look" of proper structure.
At least to me ~~~~~~
However, more to your reference to pg 234 of the Visual Guide - Such a great book, huh?
You're showing this inside parallel lines so I assume you are thinking contracting ED
and not expanding ? If is was an expanding ED it would not fit between parallel lines.
Thus this would be invalid since wave 3 with $24.58 in length is longer
than wave 1 with only $23.67 in length. Contracting ED's ("wave 3 is shorter than wave 1")
Expanding ED are ok with longer wave 3's but
as the book says they are so infrequent they don't even continue describing them in the book.
Additionally, it is exceptionally hard for me to see a subdivision of 3 waves in your proposed wave 1.
It looks much more 5 wavish to my eyes ?
So, I'll leave you alone now with a chart that is more to my thinking and the interesting
possibilities for wave 4 - 5
Thanks for the discussion !!!!! And always wishing you a pocket full of pips !!!!!!!
Thanks for the discussion,
my mentor in EW said, Elliotticians may have different look for the counting but still they have the same major direction.
if you can see either my count or yours propose that there is a last down move to finish wave 5, but now we are different on how the total count is and what is the shape of wave 4 will be plus you know we trade what we see not what we think.
for me i see it Expanding ED (i did not mention that in my first comment and the lines are little bit expanded in my original chart but i draw bad :) ),
but still if you notice on the right side i mentioned alternative count could be impulsive but i still prefer the ED count because the wave 1 seems to be three waves not five waves in its internal structure.
considering that the expanding ED is infrequent does not mean it is not there, it is just uncommon to be noticed.
your count is great which is matching my alternative scenario but it is still 2nd count for me.
wish you great time in your holiday ........ have fun and enjoy.