search elliott

  • Google

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


  • Where From?
    free counters
Related Posts with Thumbnails

« A Cluster of Historic Firsts Presage a Final Stock Surge | Main | Venture Capitalists Giddy Again? »

Monday, June 01, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Im confused here about Neely's forecast

His deflationary scenario was based on his forecast of Gold declining. Now he has forecasted gold to continue to rise and even break new highs.

However, his deflationary scenario is still in effect. Dont these two things seem to not coincide?


this is the most ridiculously easy market to trade..why do people make it so hard?

if there is a dip, buy like crazy

no dip, buy it anyway

it will NEVER go down


I am confused by this post.

For illustrative purposes, let's assume that the A wave of this move carries us to 950 - 960 for the SPX.

If B goes back "almost to the start", what level is that for the SPX?

I am calling for a turn in the market on or about Wednesday, June 3 and a bottom on or about Tuesday, June 16th. It strikes me that if there were to be a pullback in this time frame, that shorting could turn out to be worthwhile.

I don't believe that the market is going straight up from here through mid-July.

I am considering this breakout to be a "false breakout."


Rob, the X wave triangle ended on May28 at SP888. Wave A up has broken as three waves so far, and appears to be in a fourth wave correction - so it might continue to drop on Tuesday to complete wave iv. (And waves 4 often meander, so it could correct for several days.) Then it goes up in a wave v to a higher point than the intraday high today (SP948). Not sure how much higher it will go; that will become clearer after wave iv ends. Then wave B corrects off that, and could go down as far as SP888 but likely will go down 61.8%. Say it goes to SP960, or up 72 SP points. Then it comes back to around SP915.



you must be in long pretty heavy to be trying to pump the market like this

Forkoholic Serge of Elliott Wave Forkology

STU tonight now accepts us as having been in a triangle that just ended
..I recommend you buy the STU service

That makes sense! :)

Mike McQuaid

RTH (retailer index) from the July '07 top showed 5 wave decline as a C wave of a flat correction stretching back to the ETF's inception. The decline features a double bottom and got its final labels March 6 '09. This decline featured two expanding triangle corrections spanning January 22 '08- September 9 '08 and January 15 '09- February 6 '09. These triangles spent a lot of corrective energy suggesting the March 6 '09 label is a reversal not a 3 wave label.
The subsequent rally has congested across the 38% line of the entire July '07 to March '09 wave suggesting a continued bullish bias, given that it's trading north of that line.
This chart diminishes the probability of March 6 '09 being simply a bounce point for a complex 4 wave off the autumn '07 top.

Not an Acolyte Yet

The problem is the STU service has no credibility when it comes to actually making money. I can appreciate that Prechter was looking for an enormous bull market in the late 70s and got it... and a huge bear market to follow (and might get it) but I can't tell you how lousy their advice has been when you're actually trying to make money.

Prechter hides behind his "advice" to stay in cash but that's a bs excuse because the lousy services he sells are about trading and trying to make real bucks.

If there are waves they are too fuzzy to trade on.

i want to believe. That's why I check this site! But, though I've looked and hoped someone would have an edge, no one does. Everybody's record is just spotty spotty spotty. Prechter's is just awful imho.

Michael Lomker

NAAY, I agree with your opinion of STU. They are great at explaining a chart of what already happened. I find Prechter's Socionomics to be interesting at times as well.

Trading Neely has been quite profitable. I trade half of my funds on NEoWave.


mttoolkit hell yeaha i'm long, its just funny that people doing all this calls were up 80% today, and there is NO risk because Bernanke and Obama will continue to drive the market higher

if there is any down move, Bernanke will print cash and buy stocks

it is guaranteed

i see the futures are down .1, i think i'll add to longs, because when i wake up tomorrow, it WILL be higher..just watch and learn..only an idiot would short this market


Neely has called every major turn since late 2007 in the S&P and before that he called two other major turns in 2006, while he's gotten one major turn wrong since I started following him in 2006.

If he's right here, and I don't know why anyone would doubt it, "anon" will soon be gone and in a few months when Neely is looking for a turn up, there will be a new version of "anon" talking about how much he is making buying puts every day and how we shouldn't overanalyze the market because it's never going to go up again.

vipul garg

lets give it to anon .. he is been buying calls , atleast thats what he says and given how vociferously he says that , he must be ..
anyone who trades options doubles his money position with every 2% move ..

maybe he ll the anon who buys puts on markets way down!

but for sure , betting against neely especially at market turns is a risky strategy, bernanake or no bernanke!

vipul garg

DG, i wasnt implying that the current X ( from october or later) is a 'large X '
what is the time limit for large X .. a small x cannot take more time than the previous pattern.. but large X can or cannot ??neeelys longterm market forecasts like in MEW at the end has a large X which takes considerably more time than previous pattern.. so just wanted to know what are the rules for the same



Nice put down.




OK, I read your post in a different spirit than the intention, then.

While he only addresses price in the chapter on X-waves in MEW, he says this about a large X-wave in one of the Question of the Week answers:

"Applying the NEoWave rule of Similarity and Balance on pages 4-3 through 4-7 of MEW (and considering that wave-X is the same degree as each individual A, B or C of the preceding pattern), an X-wave should NEVER take more time than the entire A-B-C correction before it. If it does, that would indicate wave-X is of a larger degree."

I would have thought that because an X-wave is larger than the preceding corrective pattern, it would be able to be longer in time, but according to that answer, it can't.

Looking back at the long-term forecasts, you are right that it appears the X-waves in those forecasts contradict that rule. I wonder if he would reinterpret the long-term patterns in there as diametric or symmetrical formations followed by a relatively short X-wave instead of ABC formations followed by a very long X-wave?


"If he's right here, and I don't know why anyone would doubt it"

you've got to be kidding..where has he been for the last 140 points??? he caught the first 100 points or so from 700 - 800 and since then has been flat or trying to short, i think he tried a long once and even got stopped out there! sheez if you cant make money long in this market, you should not be trading.

by the way, the futures up nicely now, and due to my POSTED real-time ESM9 purchases from last night , made me MONEY as i was SLEEPING..

so in other words, i make money in my sleep, and Neely cant make money even while selling subscriptions???


Hey, if anon takes his current success and builds a nice nest egg from it, that's great. My guess, given the apparent depth of his conviction that Obama and Bernake will save him, is that he'll buy calls until those guys are no longer in office.

My point is that I have seen many people making those same statements, just substitute puts for calls, on the way down. No trend goes on forever. Period. Since the move from the March lows doesn't follow any of the "Essential Construction Rules" for Impulse waves on page 5-2 of "Mastering Elliott Wave", I am highly skeptical of any count that says we hit a long-term bottom, or a even a bottom that won't be re-tested with a deep retracement of the initial move off of it.

If someone wants to argue that the "Essential Construction Rules" are wrong, that's fine, but I think you would at least need to explain why they are wrong and what rules would be better to use to identify "real" impulse moves. Eyeballing a chart and saying "I think I see five waves" is not the kind of statement that should be used to make trading decisions, if a trader is using proper risk management techniques.


you've got to be kidding..where has he been for the last 140 points???

Waiting for an opportunity to catch a 400 point move to the downside. Also, since it's already been said here, he was always saying that we could reach 950-1000. Where are we now? Right near 950. Just because he is not trying to catch every single quarter point move doesn't mean he hasn't been correct. Anyone who wanted to trade long based on his forecast could have. I myself have been hedged almost the entire way up.

sheez if you cant make money long in this market, you should not be trading.

Anyone who went long on May 7th was basically underwater until yesterday.

Please, have the courage of your convictions and keep doubling down on calls until Obama and Bernanke aren't on the scene any more. Then we will see which is more accurate, "Obamananke Wave" or "NeoWave".

vipul garg

DG, that X wave in MEW takes more time than pattern before and after it togther .. and thats the central theme of his analysis ..115 year + long running correction !!
it cant be an error for sure so, there must be conditions which allow for it



What you say makes sense.


Vipul garg,

I had the same question about the time limits of large X waves, so i sent Neely a question and this was his reply:

"Hello, i've noticed in your longterm supercycle count that you count the move from 1860-1929 as an x wave.I understand the reasons for doing so, however that doesn't change the fact that this count runs contrary (as far as i can see) to one of the conditions necessary for the appearance of an x wave; namely that it must be shorter in time than the preceding correction.So based on this, i was wondering wether there has been any further change in your thinking regarding the conditions necessary for the appearence of an x wave, beyond what you mention in this Q&A section?

When the x-wave is smaller than the previous correction, then it should take less time than the previous pattern. When it is larger in price (following a Flat) than the previous pattern, then it is possible (though not common) for wave-x to take more time than the previous Flat.

Glenn Neely "

"my calls were up 80% today"??


which strike prices did you buy?

options buyers LOSE time value unless you have in-the-money options. ITM options are not cheap.

S&P is a liquid market, and you do not get 80% up. Lie?

"my calls were up 80% today"??

Mike McQuaid

"Mastering Elliott Wave" pages surrounding 5-18 and 10-6 apply to the current market for stocks.

Mike McQuaid

EEM (emerging markets) shows similarities to S&P500: Oct '07 high, lows in nov '08 and march '09. The % retracement of the spring '09 rally from the '07 high and onward gives pause for thought as to how much higher the S&P500 can rise from here, to catch up to the strength of EEM. Admittedly the EEM is not the S&P500, yet a comphehensive approach will be well served by including this reflection of appetite for stocks.


I've posted on this topic before, but there are now two "bad ticks" in the intraday SPY chart. One of them reaches down to 87.83. As I've posted, it is almost a "never fail" proposition that these will get hit soon. The last time one of this magnitude "printed" was February 5th. Go to Yahoo Finance and look up the historical prices of the SPY and you will see a low for the day of 77.73, even though we didn't come anywhere near that in actual trading. Within a couple of days, we had topped and within a couple of weeks we were under that "bad tick".

We then, of course, continued another ~14% beyond that point to ~67 SPY. I did the calculations and a similar move here would have us near 76 SPY (~760 SPX) within a couple of weeks.

vipul garg

Lupani, thanks .
i sent a similar qs to him !!havent rceived a reply as yet .. but obviously will be on similar lines.
we get small x waves very frequently in real time .. even large X waves are frequent .. i ll keep my eye on for a large x wave that does take more time and price than previous flat pattern. if somebody sees one bring it to notice please.

B. O.


Is that you? Sasha? Malia? What did I say about blogging with Daddy's computer?

Glenn Loser Neely.


This blog is not different from a Venezuelan, Cuban or Chinese blog!!
where the ideas are banned and deleted!

There is no freedom of speech in this blog. I have no posted insults or bad words. I have only made funny of what I consider the worst service out there.


Yelnick does not want you to read bad comments about the Loser!

Please be aware that any post that makes fun of Glenny the Loser will be deleted. Yelnick wants to keep the free subscription that he probably gets from the NEO GARBAGE insitute, so he has to follow orders!!

I will do my best to get as many IP adresses to keep posting my urgent updates!
Yelnick should sign as Hugo Chavez jr...

Glenn Loser Neely

Michael kall


GLN is funny!
Let him post his ideas....



Thanks for the piece of information and calculation.
Do you have any idea where those "bad ticks" come from? As it appears it's not actual transactions, why would it be of any significance and why would we actually go there? I don't understand where the poor data come from...



One of the problems is that Neely has asked that blogs stop posting proprietary information. As a subscriber, free or otherwise, I am guessing that Yelnick saw that message. Plus, unless you think none of us can find out information on trading services, you can't possibly deny that Neely is always near the top in the market timer tracking ratings. It is actually more true to say that almost every other service is worse than Neely's.

I asked Neely if he would set up an area for subscribers on his website to post messages and have discussions, but he says that is not part of his plan for his website. I would do it myself, but since there is no way to prove who is and isn't a subscriber, I don't know if I could make it truly NeoWave subscribers-only. Plus, I'm not affiliated with Neely in any way, so I don't know if he'd allow someone to use the NeoWave name in creating a secure blog. It would be nice to have a place where we could discuss Neely's counts openly without worrying about "giving away" proprietary information, which is actually illegal, anyway.


Michael, I haven't deleted any of the recent comments by GLNs (there are more than one). I delete obnoxious or immature stuff, and block posters who flame.

Glad you find him funny. Not sure which GLN you are referring to. And not sure how many others feel that way. Once or twice is funny, over and over becomes tiresome.

Now, if one of the GLNs had said this blog is like the MSM and sticks to a party line, whereas Pravda & the Chinese press are now doing real reporting, that could have been funny. A riff on the recent Pravda article decrying the death of Capitalism in the US, which it says died with a whimper. They want it back! The Russians are now more Capitalistic than the US. Etc.

But alas, more ranting about Neely. I will add, however, that when one of the GLNs takes a real Neely newsletter and changes it, that can be pretty clever for those who read the original. That GLN has a good turn of phrase. More of that is welcome, as long as he doesn't go too far and reveal Neely's real stuff (see DG's comment above). Neely, Prechter, Fibonaccian, Russo, McHugh et al. are trying to make a living and we should all respect that.



My best guess, and it's just that, on where those data come from is that it has something to do with program trading (perhaps some message from one program to another to sell or buy up to a certain point?), that accidentally gets put onto the wrong network. I asked about this phenomenon on a blog that caters to a pretty savvy trading crowd (Zero Hedge) and was told "Don't mention those in public!" and "Take those bad ticks as 'hints'", FWIW, so I'm not the only one who's noticed the attraction they seem to have on price when they show up. Now, I've also seen them "disappear", in which case all bets are off.

Anyway, just one of the stranger things I've seen in trading and watching almost every tick over the many years and one that seems to work.



Thanks again for your update.

As those bad data appear to be streamed all over the world by every major providers, they may indeed come from the exchange itself, not from one of them.
Using them as "hints" for future direction sounds like a fantasy to me. Exactly as the one we have here in France when retail broker forum chatters notice a 1 share at-the-market transaction in the small cap company they monitor daily. It's what they call a "code 1" and sometimes (over)interpet it as a signal sent between big players that could be translated as "I'm gonna BUY HUGE!".
What I see, on the contrary, is a financial firm testing a market data/stream or bridge platform for technical validation.

However, this "bad data" situation is a bit different because it clearly is enclosed in the stream and may remain in historical prices data if not corrected (time will tell).
I just don't want to see it as a psychologically-biased upcoming confirmation for being short ;)

FWIW, I've subscribed to Neely's 2 weeks trial offer following your advice. Sounds like a perfect situation to try it!


Question: Assuming we are in a C wave from 10/07 and we're in wave 2, and that the corrections could be short in time and/or shallow -i.e. the Prechter view - does the current outlook of being in a final surge of wave 2 make sense proportionally when you view the longer term chart, say 30 years? Won't it appear to be a straight shot and not a 3-wave move? I think a top within June, July, or even August must only be the end of A.

Glenn Loser Neely.


At major turns, a market will do anything to keep the majority from being IN (on the right side) when the casino opens....sorry... when the trend starts.

To accomplish that, one of the most common tactics a market will take is creating the appearance of "A Top" over and over, creating the need to gamble…upss… I mean to enter multiple times. There will be a 3rd (and maybe even a 4th and 5th) attempt to Short before "The Top" has taken place.

After 25 years of following markets, I have NEVER found a way to avoid this process because I am addicted to gamble… I am a GAMBLER!!

I have never understand that is better to wait for confirmation instead of picking up a top or a bottom. A few years ago I made fun of Prechter because he was trying to call a top on the 2003-2007 bear market rally.
Guess what gamblers?

I am doing exactly the same stuff now!!. Trying to catch a falling knife!!
If we need to call for a top for 100 times, we will do so. As long as I have 1 subscriber left that pays for my gambling problem I will keep sending Emergency Updates.

As I said, after 25 years of following the market I am still a GAMBLER.
By the way, have you noticed how I never say how many points I loss on my bad trades?. I only mention the points I made when I win. (Usually liars and gamblers use the same technique when they arrive to their house, they only mention the “good” bets of the casino)

If you tire of this process (which you probably will) and you stop taking the trades recommended (which you will be tempted to do), then get rid of my service and you will SAVE a few thousand dollars.

This is simply the "way it is" IF you want to be a professional LOSER like I am. Remember, that. even a broken watch gives the correct hour 2 times per day!

Finally please visit my Neo Garbage page and notice that I just raised the price for my gambler to gambler course. I increased the price to 9,000 because I need more money to keep gambling.

Any questions? Please write to Yelnick, my public relations manager.

Glenny the “Loser” Neely
NEoGarbage (Toilet Incorporated)


Also, I think it will take a pullback and more rally over a longer time to get the level of bullishness and consensus that the authorities have saved the day which will create the top of wave 2.



You did not deny GLN's statement: "Yelnick wants to keep the free subscription"

What is the free subscription for?

Glenn Loser Neely.


Goodbye!.... you will be bamned for good from this blog!
You broke rule number 1 from this socialist blog:

you do not mess with Yelnick!

Write me to: [email protected] and I will show you how to keep posting here
with different IP adresses!



Ya know I was always aware that the govt (some times known as the plunge protection team) could come in with toms of money and you REALLY wanted to be LONG. But now I am not so sure. I believe we are seeing the biggest robbery in history and so these billion and trillions that are out there, are no longer heading to the market. I think we have shifted to a government that WANTS us to be broke and dependent upon them. I will return to the safety of my aluminum foil-line bedroom now.


Why not sell this market right here? We are coming up on 62 trading days up. I will sell more right here with a buy stop at 1020 ES. Sell in May and go away. Ha, ha, ha, ha. It is time for a sell-off. Then reset for a break-even stop once we get a hefty down day.

God be with you . . .


The way I understand NeoWave, is that we need to enter short when we achieve a bigger and faster selloff than anything selloff we have seen since March 6.

The fastest selloff since March 6 was between April 17 at 3:44pm (S&P=875.72) and April 21 at 9:30am (S&P=825.5). This translates to a 50.22 point selloff in 406 minutes.

Is this the way others understand NeoWave? Is there a better NeoWave strategy that does not involve giving up 50 points?


What was your thinking behind the 1020 stop? Is is just a stop that feels sufficiently high that it will likely not be hit?


It would be interesting to study the ratio of the duration of wave two to wave one in downward C waves of flats, or maybe that ratio in any 5 wave move down. The first two I looked at were charts with very different periods, but by coincidence had declines of 11 periods and wave 2s of 5 periods. Of course, you can find some where 2 is as long as 1. So I took two examples where 2 looked fairly brief since, as Prechter points out, upward corrections in C of a flat should be of short duration. Applying the same ratio to our 17-month decline, you would get a wave 2 duration of 7.7 months, thus an end in October or November. Anyway, there's no way this rally is going to turn on a dime in July or August headed to new lows when it doesn't even look like an a-b-c on the long term chart. It should have a big pull-back, then head up again into at least the 4th quarter. I think the correction will start this month. It won't continue to July.


No, not so fast, Upstart, let me amend what I said. There is a way this rally could turn and head to new lows, and that's if it is a 4th wave, as Forkohlic believes, and maybe Yves still believes. In fact, speaking of EWI's double zigzag, it could be a double-zigzag 4th wave. It would be a bit unusual to be much larger than wave 2. However, it's back at typical resistance for a 4th wave - wave 4 of 3 and an even lesser degree wave 4. Furthermore, it's nearing the .382 retrace of wave 3, which is about 962. Hmm, the plot thickens.



You could also pick a "structural" sell-short signal or a "Fib retracement" signal. This would be a little bit less rigorous than the "fastest, longest" correction sell-short signal, but also conforms to NeoWave logic.

Since it's pretty clear that a move of some significance began Friday afternoon, if we print a price below 904.78 from Friday afternoon's pivot point, we can assume that pattern is over and, with it, potentially the whole move up. We'd have to get there by 1:41 Eastern Time tomorrow, though. Your stop could then be the 61.8% retrace of the move from 904.78 to today's 949.38 high, or 932.34, (assuming today's high holds, obviously, otherwise the whole scenario has to start from scratch from 904.78 to whatever high is reached). If you wanted to have a stop that was even closer, you could use the 38.2% time/price ratio, depending on how long it took. Your risk in this scenario is between 17 and 28 points.

The second option would have you go short at the 61.8% retrace of the move from 904.78 to 949.38, or 921.82, but only if we got back there in less than 61.8% of the time it took to get there, which is unlikely since that would be 339 minutes and we already burned through 298 minutes after today's high through the end of the day. The nice thing about this scenario would be that you could then set your stop at the 61.8% retrace of that move, which would be at 938.85, making your risk about 17 points, or even closer at the 38.2% retrace (really, if we're going into the next phase of the bear, even a 38.2% retrace shouldn't happen for at least a day, i.e. we should get the mirror image of some of these 4% up days to the downside), making your risk a mere 11 points.

As the market moves, just adjust entries and stops accordingly. If we really are near the end of a valid pattern, these methods will let you catch the reversal without "giving up" as much of the gains as you would waiting for a 50-point correction.



As I said, I am just guessing at what it is, but my experience has been that it's almost a given that a price beyond or near where the bad data says we're going is where we go. Just watch the SPY and other high-volume index ETFs for it in the future. Most of the time, when the bad data is relatively close by (say 1% from the current real price) the index will start to move toward it before the end of the cash session. When it is farther away, it might take another session.

I'm going to start a spreadsheet of them on the SPY. I will admit that I've closed trades if I see one of these appear that would lead to a move against my trade. I can't remember ever regretting that decision.



I meant to add, that's very cool that you've taken the Neely trial offer. The timing may very well just be perfect.



Thanks a lot for this advice.

Can I ask you to double check the time calculations in these two options?

In the first option, I see that the 904.78 time was hit at 2:54pm EST on Fri May 29 and the 949.38 price was hit at 10:01am on Tues June 2. This translates to 489 minutes. Adding 489 minutes to 10:01am on June 2 gets me to 11:40am on Wed June 3. Your calculation says 1:41pm (2 hours difference).

The second option mentions that 61.8% of the retrace is 339 minutes – meaning that 100% of the retrace is 549 minutes. As stated above, the retrace is 489 minutes according to my calculations (1 hour difference).

No big deal as I understand the points your are making in these two options. But if in fact you have miscounted then I did not want you to trade based upon this miscount.



Your math is right and mine was off. I looked too quickly at the timestamps on the chart I was using.

You got the concept, though, so, yes, you should be fine. Thanks for the head's up, though.

I actually wanted to add one point to my earlier post, which is that we'd want to be careful to "start the clock" on any move down at the right time. We could be finishing this upward correction off with a pattern that ends below its highest price. According to Neely, this is a very common thing. This would mean that the current wave is longer than the 489 minutes we've calculated it at. If I did the math right this time, so far it's 847 minutes long.

From years of teaching classes and interacting with wave analysts, what common mistakes do most make?
This is an easy one; by far, the most common mistake made by wave analysts (especially of the orthodox variety) is that of starting a trend from the highest or lowest price on a chart. When applying NEoWave technology, it is rare a trend begin at the highest-high or lowest-low of a market. Understanding and incorporating just this one concept into your wave analysis will substantially improve the reliability and longevity of your wave counts over time and your ability to predict future price action.

How do you determine where to begin your analysis? New trends always begin with moves larger and faster than recent moves in the same direction. If you mark a high or low as the start of a new trend, but the move afterward is slower than the previous move in the same direction, you are starting your count from the wrong place.

The comments to this entry are closed.