3 hours ago BTCUSD Top/Bottom seeker had a buy signal on 6 HR graph (rather rare signal, only had 3 other buy signals this year)
I'd take a long here with the stop below 3657
Target conservative for now - 4506
Of course, gotta remember that past results is not an indicator of future performance
LONG setup for LTCUSD:
Entry at $54.5, (confluence of 0.618*A = C as well as 0.618 retracement of the whole leading diagonal)
Stop at $47.1 (under last low, would deny the diagonal being wave 1)
Targets = $73 (wave1 = wave3) and $84 (1.618*wave1 = wave3)
Basically, the C wave often is related to A wave in Fibbonacci extension. Just like Wave 3 often is 1.618 (or 2.618 etc) of wave 1, many have heard of it, in the same way wave C is related to wave A. Wave C most often is equal to wave A (A=C, 1 ratio), but that would bring us far into negative price. Wave C also can just end at 0.618 of the wave A extension....
This is BitFinex shorts/longs total amount in BTC at the bottom
Shorts at an all time high, shorts to longs ratio is at an all time high as well, by far.
Maybe just a bit of spook is needed to make the shorters shit their pants I think.
But I think this weak news (the rejected ETFs to be reviewed) are not enough to spook bears. Really, a decent price pump, THEN...
ETHUSD is at a level where it soon can present 2 long opportunities.
1) if we break the downtrend line (green), then the red line will trigger a buy with a stop under recent meaningful support zone
2) if we keep going according to the count and reach 380s-370s, then another long opportunity will arise there with min target of 0.382 retracement
For each scenario...
ETHUSD is most likely preparing for at least a decent ($100+) bounce, due to these reasons -
- We have most likely finished 5 waves down of something bigger,
- We are hovering right above upward trending HnS target (drawn by the channel)
- Right under that channel, we have a log longterm trendline support as well.
Target - 50% retracement of those 5...
2 different long setups. Targets and stops and entries can be seen on the graph. Will split the capital in 2 different trades - 1/3 will follow the long term trade and 2/3 will follow shorter term (but higher winrate) setup.
If we never see a lower leg, it's possible, means my count was wrong. Also, not calling to short from these levels, it's much closer to the...
Not calling a new ATH, but this should be a good support zone to have a high probability for at least a good bounce (and maybe make a new high. With many other coins being at similar strong support zones, expect a bounce.
Bearish and bullish counts. It means a lot what will happen when we exit the triangle. I personally favor the bullish count just a bit (bullish 60% to 40% for bearish). Great trade setups can be made in both directions with high Profit/loss ratios.
ETHUSD made a slight touch of the log trendline that was going from the previous macro triangle. Insane precision...
Right now it made a touch with another trendline. I think it's a great time to short.
We are about to test a long-term log trendline that was a support back in the summer 2017.
Additionally, Elliot Waves dictate that the first wave should have 0.5-0.618 retracement 80% of the time. So far we had only 0.3 retracement, not even reaching 0.382, which makes me believe that the first wave still has not finished. There are bearish scenarios where we...
Summary: targets are at 3.5-3.65 area right now. Very unlikely that we will pass that zone without major retracement. It is also possible not to reach that target and dump from this point on. The wavecount on this last leg from 2.1 to 3.2 is very very ambiguous.
Volume and RSI indicate that clearly this was the 3rd major wave, so we will see another ATH, but...
Click "share" - "make it mine", right click the top red line and add alarm saying "sell btc now". If you have premium membership it will also send an sms and an email (tick in the boxes for those). The absolute highest possible I see BTC going before another good correction is touching that red top line. The top redline is slightly tilted down from the actual...
So I had a bit of trouble with some inconsistencies in the subwave count of wave A, and being a noob, this is the best thing I came up with (I may be very wrong, if so, please correct me).
The good news is that this different count makes sense and that also it still leaves the possibility of the original A_B_C correction as we expected, with C being under...