SPX Wave d5/D1/W5/M3 Now a Possible Extreme Wave – New ATH is confirmation

With the sideways consolidation and the breaking of the D-4-51MLU, it is likely that this has so far been an extreme d5, hence it will down grade the area shown later by one wave scale. A break below last weeks low will rule this option out.

There is currently no way of confirming either way other than these two confirmations

Normally I dont post this detailed charts but this is an unusual event.

So as I have not done D1 report in the new format I will be using this one instead to monitor d5 and once D1 is confirmed on the deci scale will do wave D2 report.

Daily Trend Channel

The bold upper red line is the W234MLU where prices bounced off.

SPX  H DTC

MAP FORKS

D-4-51

Assuming D1 complete

SPX D-4-51

The reason for the possible extreme wave scenario which was pointed out in the W5 repost is this break and its wave formation which is detailed below on c012 fork!

SPX D-4-51 reason Extreme Wave

 

d234

SPX d123

deci 5 Channel

Here you can see the possible waves that a new ATH will upgrade to extreme waves.

SPX d5 channel

MAP FORKS

c345  / c012

SPX Options for extreme waves

As shown on the chart the criteria for confirmation of D1 as is is a break of 2030.44 before a new ATH, leaving D2 ideal wave target as shown on D-401 fork above, and a new ATH means 2030.44 is c2.

 

Afraid I have no method of telling the difference as prices are at the apex of a triangle! Today's action should clarify!

 

Please use this report for D1 wave discussion until I have time to do that.

 

 

 

 

74 Responses to SPX Wave d5/D1/W5/M3 Now a Possible Extreme Wave – New ATH is confirmation

  1. Marc says:

    PURE MAP WAVE COUNT ignoring fork cycle anaysis.

    It is pretty simple with rules and probabilities – as this is the biggest correction so far a new high confirms this is a bigger wave scale than what we have had to date – (means others may be one smaller than I thought) , and a lower low confirms this is -1 and -2 of a bigger correction! 80% probabilities so easy to do risk reward.
    That is how simple it is if you have wave counting rules and for trading it really does not matter what the wave scale! That is purely academic but only important to one scale bigger than you are trading!

    Sorry going to meet my daughter but will add as I get 5 minutes here and there!
    Hopefully back on track by mid next week!

    • Bill C says:

      Agree, that was point my earlier post was trying to make.
      Shift waves down one scale and that gives d1/d2 at recent high/low (2076/2050).
      But why not D1/D2 instead? Not sure how we would decide whether D1 is extending or complete at recent high.

  2. Bill C says:

    Another possible count adjustment would to shift d scale out in time such that d2 = 2001 and d4 =2050.
    This gives d234 ML currently around 2071/72 and rising with a slope about 3-4 points per day.
    Provides a more sustainable slope for slow grind higher.

    • Bill C says:

      Interesting this count seems to be containing price action so far, with d234 ML as resistance and d234 MLL as support.
      c1 = 2076, c2 = 2063, c3 = 2077
      Maybe c4 will retest MLL followed by c4 retest of ML to finish off d5 and complete D1.
      Just a guess =)

  3. Bill C says:

    Seems like D1 count could be revised to shift internal waves one scale down; d => c and c => m.
    That gives d1 = 2076 and d2 = 2050, with d3 in process and the new d012 MLL providing good support for rally out of yesterdays low.
    Any thoughts?

  4. Marc says:

    We are in wave m4, low should be no less than 2060, followed by a new ATH around 2080.
    A break of 2056.75 confirms the top is most likely in with milli 5 wave failure of 20%, and with c confirmation at 2040.37.

    Mum in-law still some liquid in lungs and low O2 saturation, but we were very naughty yesterday and took her for an ice cream on the river for a few hours!
    Builder let us down so started downstairs bathroom which hopefully we will get finished within a week as her mobility is restricted with the long bed stay 🙁 so she is going to have to move in downstairs until she gets fit again!

    • Bill C says:

      26 point pullback to 2050 trumps size of prior waves in up trend; larger than d2, d4, c2 and c4 waves.
      Seems like this is either beginning of D2 or need to restructure count to make this a d4 wave.

  5. Nikki says:

    thank you so much for the update Marc… take care & have a great trip!

  6. Bill C says:

    Thanks Marc, didn’t expect you to post on this due to travel/family issues, but the gap down noise is subjective issue for me.
    Was counting that one (2040.49) slightly higher than c4 and decent size for m2. Not sure why its noise, other than maybe 60min close didn’t confirm it.
    A similar noise spike was counted previously (m4 of c2) so that is inconsistent between the two. Although I had problem with that one as well, my data shows m4c2 (2034.46) on your chart, traded slightly below m2c2 which seems to be rule violation.
    Agree though, if tentative m2 at 2056.75 until break up or down, then can’t be sure if D1 is in, or an extension is looming.
    Similar to OEW, which is currently projecting 2 more small waves to complete, but can also see possible completed alternate count at 2071 (if include 8 pointer that crossed 34 EMA)
    Looks like MAP and OEW are counting D1 rally nearly the same, but each are having issues filtering the noise.

  7. Marc says:

    UPDATE 24/11
    Was going to post a centi update…. but that would be getting rather ridiculous! Almost as ridiculous as the reason I am posting an update anyway!!!! Apparently there is a slight 2 hour difference between a departure time of 20:50 and 22:50!!!!! Rather early than late!!!
    so we are in the final throws of D1. It was an extreme wave without a doubt and has been working through the various MLU’s and challenged the Weekly Break Out ML!
    So below you can see the 4 centi waves and we are in the wave m3 as shown….. noise before you ask! Possbly….. hey I am affraid MWA is not even that good to tell you on such a small wave scale if it is noise so you need to watch the breaks – new high confirm current high as m1, and a break of m2 (2056.75) confirms it is not noise and D1 is in!
    Currently it is a matter of the market telling us which of these 2 options it is……. so this is a crap time for short term options! Loosing time value rapidly! My worst loss was committed in this same scenario because I was too slow to recognise it – the bloody banksters saw it before me and took all our money! But hopefully with the current improvements I shall be a step ahead again!

    • Nikki says:

      Hi Marc,
      One thing I was going to ask, is that the count of m1,2,3,4/c3 doesn’t obey your rules(m3<m1, m4<m2, I think Bill mentioned that too). Based on your rules, I can count 3 waves in that c3. I wonder if we could count as this:
      http://stockcharts.com/c-sc/sc?s=$SPX&p=10&b=2&g=0&id=p78109837032&a=377931738&r=1416957019928
      I kept your original c234 fork on my chart but your m fork was broken today- speaking of which, what starting pivot did you use to draw that m fork? It doesn't seem to be the usual x012 you do (e.g., starting from c4). I did duplicate it on my chart, but had to adjust the pivot from time to time to fit as the waves unfolded (not sure if you'd do the same)- that's what I meant by "subjective"- there is no rules on exactly what pivots to use so everyone can draw them differently based on their own experiences.

      • Bill C says:

        Hi Nikki.
        With Marc out of commission, we’ll have to do our best to keep this going.
        Agree about the m2/m4 of c3 count rule violation. Sorry for confusion as I misstated in my post as part of c2 (got confused with the short cut labeling only showing the lows)
        Anyway if you narrow the scale down to 10 min chart, then either m2 is one of the “failures” (i.e. missing 2-wave) or can see possible m2 = 2031 about 4 bars after c2 low.
        Similar issue for m2 of c5, which Marc labeled as noise, but could be m2 = 2040 and m4 = 2057 with possible top at 2074.
        Agree that mo12 fork looks distorted as drawn and given the uncertainty about the noise, think it might be best to just keep track of c234 fork which is still in tack
        Seem like if that holds, then uptrend has more juice for further extension. I got MLL around 2065 and rising. 2065 was also the low of the day.
        If OEW and MAP are going to line up, then possible m2 = 2057 and m4 will be 2065 or somewhat lower on next pullback. Then rally to another high to complete the pattern.
        However to get that, probably need to breach the c235 MLL.
        Just my thoughts, but could be wrong.

        • Nikki says:

          Hi Bill, you are right we’re on our own;-)
          Regarding the violation- since Marc defines everything in 5 waves he has no choice but to open to exceptions/violations:-) I see OEW & MAP counts line up very well currently, if my count is correct, either top is in (2074) or that was m1 of c5 & we still have m3/5 to go with limited upside.

          • Bill C says:

            Agree with your counts Nikki.
            Lets keep a close eye on it, next few squiggles should decide it.
            Sorry about typo at end of my last message, meant breach of c234 MLL.

            • Nikki says:

              just read Marc’s quick note & I think his current count is as follow (still 3 of 3 of 5 & a few 4&5’s to go):
              http://stockcharts.com/c-sc/sc?s=$SPX&p=10&b=2&g=0&id=p97259161825&a=377931738&r=1417028886533&w=1565

              • Bill C says:

                Yes read it too, agree.
                Notice that c234 MLL rising to about 2070 and possible m5 wave testing that support right now.
                If it holds and then one more final high as Marc suggested, then 2065 may have been m4.
                c234 ML is pointing to about 2080 by EOD and rising about 5 points/day. (Don’t have exact way to plot it, just eye ball estimate)
                These fork lines seem to work really well! Just following the basics, c234 fork channel.
                By the way, having trouble viewing all the links. Wondering if there’s a way to post chart directly here. Tried it once and got the link instead.

                • Nikki says:

                  http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$SPX&p=10&b=2&g=0&id=p17490926922&a=377931738

                  does any of these work for you?
                  The good thing about link- you can refresh it & get it updated realtime even if you aren’t a member of stock charts.com.( not sure why you couldn’t see the previous link as it works for me).

                  • Bill C says:

                    Thanks Nikki, nice chart! The embedded one looks great.
                    I can now access the linked one, but unfortunately your annotations don’t show up, just the raw stock chart price data.
                    Your embedded chart show perfectly what I was seeing in my eye ball estimate…..
                    Rising MLL tested against sideways wave action around 2070. Price bounced right off and continued higher.
                    Fork resistance worked like a charm =)
                    Wondering now if 2065 gets upgraded to m4 and toss out u2 and n2.
                    Or even go back and count the noise spike as m2 and upgrade 2057 to m4.
                    Either way, think MLL touch at 2070 implies m5 in process.

                    • Nikki says:

                      Hi Bill, yes this c234 so far has worked like a charm, I hoped you’d watch it realtime, try freeStockCharts.com if you can.
                      I initially counted 2057 as c4 (attached below) so that it’d have 5 waves & also, c3 would look better(c1=45,c3=41) while in the above count c3 is obviously the shortest. The problem with this count is that I can’t seem to find an Andrew’s fork for the c5 channel that would work as well as you can see on the chart (the modified Schiff fork may work but it’s not available on StockChaarts.com or freeStockCharts.com). The fact that the c5 reacts to c234 so nicely may have proved it’s the right count & the reason why Marc stays with it?

                    • Nikki says:

                      I meant “so that c3 would have 5 waves & also look better (size-wise)…”
                      By the way, the MLU is around 2088-90 Friday & could be the target for m5/c5 (or D1).

                    • Bill C says:

                      Thanks Nikki, see the ML now pointing little higher from what I was targeting in my ball park projection.
                      Agree on subjectivity of identifying waves as price unfolds.
                      Don’t have a big problem with non-impulsive structure. The waves rules are simple so just try to follow and see where it leads.
                      Consider these rules deviation/subset of EW and I’m ok with that for now.
                      The big issues for me are the missing 2-waves (i.e. Marc calls these failures), the apparent subjectivity interpreting noise (some count and some do not), and even the possibility of wave rule violation as we both pointed out for m2/4 of c3.
                      Also at what point does wave size dictate to scale up or down, 50% change or something else?
                      Somehow Marc is able to see through these subjective decisions and pick out the right one.
                      Need to find decoder ring for that =)

                    • Nikki says:

                      HI Bill, this link should work (please let me know if not).
                      http://stockcharts.com/c-sc/sc?s=$SPX&p=10&b=2&g=0&id=p52139331635&a=377931738&r=1417114962544
                      You are right there are a lot of subjective decisions on filtering the noises & picking out the right ones, but same can be said about OEW/EW.
                      BTW, the wave violation was not only in m2&4/c3, but also m1&3/c3.

                • Nikki says:

                  ok I give up- if the previous links didn’t work then this one probably is the same; I tested them after logging out my stockCharts.com account to make sure they worked so I’m clueless why they don’t for you, not sure if others have the same issue.

                  • Bill C says:

                    Thanks for effort Nikki. But the last link was same as first one. Get nothing, just text message saying “to see chart visit stockcharts.com”.
                    Not sure what you mean by rule violation for m1/3 of c3. To me, these meet the wave rules but selectively filters out the “noise gap down” so that the first possible 2-wave in the sequence is ignored.

                    • Nikki says:

                      the rule says m3>=m1, but what we have here is m3<m1 (& m4<m2).
                      2057 needs to be taken out for c4 confirmation.

                    • Nikki says:

                      oops in Marc’s count 2057 should be m2 confirmation, or c5 is likely in.

                    • Bill C says:

                      Oh sorry Nikki, I misstated it yet again!
                      MAP terminology is very difficult to keep straight and I confused m1/3 of c3 with m1/m3 of c5. Was referring to the later.
                      To me, the previous wave rule violation was the same occurrence, whether its referred to as m1/m3 failed or m2/m4 exceeded. That particular set of m-waves did not adhere to strict definition of wave rules on both ends!
                      Agree with your original point though, m3 did not achieve high enough level to meet the rules.
                      Sorry for the confusion.

                  • Bill C says:

                    Interesting price action for MAP today.
                    Clear break of c234 MLL support and retest of prior internal low point (2065), so maybe those are u2 & u4, IF they hold.
                    Then retest back to MLL as resistance to complete u5 of c5 of d5 of D1.
                    Would fit exactly with OEW Minute-iv (touched 34 EMA) then another high to complete 5-wave sequence.
                    Nikki, can you post a notional MAP count for this with c234 fork shown, or whatever you think is correct?

                    • Nikki says:

                      Hi Bill, you’re right c234 was broken & the LOD(2065) would be µ4 based on Marc’s count, which means we’ll see µ5 first thing on Monday followed by a pullback (=m4/c5) then a final push up to finish m5 of c5/d5/D1:-) I expect µ5 first thing next session because it’s sitting very close to m2 (2064.75) & if m2 is taken out then it means c5 is done- unless it’s further subdividing & the new low becomes m2 with current m-waves downgraded to µ-s;-) & the next conformation would be taking 2056.75 out, & so on… here is the closest pitchfork I could make- don’t ask me why;-) but both today’s high & low smacked right on the ML & MLL & reversed.

                    • Nikki says:

                      oops, I meant “very close to µ2 (2064.75) & if µ2 is taken out then it means m5/c5 is done”, e.g., µ2 could be upgraded to m4 I suppose… confusing isn’t it;-)

                    • Nikki says:

                      now here is my count & I’m watching the parallel channel made from the resistance line connecting c1 & c3, & the LOD hit right on the support line & bounced, not sure if it holds next week. My count is slightly more bearish, it has one more push up to finish m5/c5/d5/D1.

                    • Nikki says:

                      SPX has tried 3 times to break this resistance line & failed so far… can’t wait to see what Marc’s is going to say when he is back here.

                    • Bill C says:

                      Thanks for nice charts Nikki!
                      Interesting perspective on some of these.
                      Looks like a c014 fork that contains price action? Not familiar with that one.
                      Agree with basic scenario though, and now expecting c234 MLL to be resistance for final rally up to complete D1.
                      Look forward to Marc’s assessment as well, sure we’re missing a whole bunch of stuff =)

                    • Nikki says:

                      D1 is probably in? trading below 2056 in futures.

  8. Bill C says:

    Thanks Marc. Wish your family all the best and speedy recovery for mother-in-law.

  9. Marc says:

    Unfortunately I will not have the time to keep updating this week as I have been doing over the last 2 or 3 weeks.
    My wifes mother was taken ill and she flew back to UK 3 weeks ago.
    She needs my emotional support so instead of my usual blog catch up week I am going to her tonight and am happy to give her what energy I can to help her over the next 4 or 5 weeks.

    I should be back in Thailand next week end and will try catch up there.

    Suffice to say a bit more wave subdivision and a test of 2100 by end of next week from Weekly chart.
    From Daily Chart looks like todays high of 2080 will complete 5 waves, failure to reach 2080 with no break of 2036.89 will indicate further wave subdivsion – Remember the triangles guys!

    The reverse for a downside move of at least 23.45.
    If you remember your triangles then that will tell you closer break points.

    My feeling ( as I have so far not done all the projections – 2080 today – thats D1, but because of the wave formation do not expect a drop to D-401ML! Sideways building subwaves for the breakout next yesr!

    Hopefully can get more posted at airport!

  10. Marc says:

    Sorry guys been on plane and tied up yesterday!
    On updates now and will the answer outstanding questions

  11. Nikki says:

    I just tried to draw a MAP Fork W234 (using Andrew’s) like Marc did (see his SPX weekly link) & it hit right on the MLU today, not sure if it’s going to stop there though:
    https://www.tradingview.com/x/Q9mA9xH3/

  12. Bill C says:

    Agree, kudos to MAP!
    Once d5 extended with subdivisions, weekly MLU was still in play around 2070 level and rising to meet the extra waves as they developed.
    Right around the next OEW pivot as well!
    Think MAP see’s 5 small waves now (c1-5), but OEW needs a couple more to line up.
    Assuming no more d5 extensions, then the real question to me, is this D1 or W5?
    MAP seems to assume an extension is coming, while OEW most likely count does not.
    No way to know until market decides which one it picks.

    • Nikki says:

      Bill, that is the real question to me also(D1 vs W5) Marc said MAP can have an answer way before 1820 gets re-visited.

      • Bill C says:

        Nikki, think the weekly MLL would be final say on that.
        Believe it’s sitting around 1850 and rising about 6 points/week (just a ball park estimate, don’t have exact chart)
        Suppose there could be some other early warning signals along the way.
        Maybe even draw 345 fork and see how ML support holds up on the way down while counting MAP waves?
        If that breaks, would think it’s going lower still.
        Just some thoughts, will have to see what Marc says.

        • Nikki says:

          Hi Bill, Marc answered that in one of the email conversations we had within OEW group:
          Me:
          1 – what level will invalidate your current count of D1/W5/M3, I know 1820 will do (D2<D1) but with your added timing/channel tools I suspect it doesn't have to go that low to give you the confirmation, and once that happens, I assume it means the end of W5 or starting of M4, right?

          Marc:
          1 – The lower purple parallel on the last chart – WC 17Nov 1890 and rising 109 per week.on the weekly fractal. I have not yet done daily, but that will raise it and each fractal down will raise it further.

          • Bill C says:

            Thanks Nikki. Can’t find that chart any more, but sounds similar to dotted (PURPLE) drawn on first chart above in this thread.
            Do you know how he drew it and where it is now?
            The one above looks like notional channel defined by connecting successive highs in D1 run (d1-d3 or d3-d5)?
            Seems to represent D2 target zone, not a clear signal W5 is in.
            Don’t remember reading about developing/using these in the Theory or Terminology sections 🙁

            • Nikki says:

              Hi Bill, I have no clue how he draws all the forks. I tried modified schiff or Andrew’s pitchforks as he mentioned with no luck (can’t seem to get the exact same results). As he stated, the key is how to choose the right pivots which I think it’s totally subjective as it depends on the chartists’ skills & experiences. He is masterful of the forks but there isn’t much of details out there so I assume it’s proprietary. One thing I see him doing, is to use 0(starting point) & wave 1 & 2 to draw the fork (whether Andrew’s or modified schiff) to project wave 3 peak, and once wave 3 & 4 are done he’d then draw it from wave 2,3,4 to project wave 5.

              • Marc says:

                Unfortunately OBJECTIVE Nikki – It is a system and like with recent subwave formation it quickly tells you what options are still available with quick confirmation points – with the exception of noise which clears one fractal bigger.
                The difference between Andrews and MWA is MWA uses specific pivot, combining subjective EW which is a behavioural system with Andrews which is a physics system. These two were light years ahead in their time and with our technology would have been able to clean up the bankster robbers and manipulators! That is what I am trying to develop this for – to stop the daylight robbery of naive (albeit greedy) investors by those who have already learned many tools of the trade!

                This is one reason I want to keep at least down to Weekly, if not Daily freely available to the public. You can clearly see the areas to sell puts and calls – outside of the parallels – guaranteed money!

      • Marc says:

        Yip he does indeed………
        Later.

  13. Nikki says:

    what amazes me is not just the target but also timing- he nailed 2070@9:30am 21/11/2014 on one of the charts above!!!

  14. Carlos says:

    WOW
    2070´ish.Nice!
    I got out to early…but
    I am eager now for the pullback…2000…in a week?

  15. Nikki says:

    I had a good ride this morning based on your chart (btd when it went back inside the channel) , thank you Marc!
    I’m out long & flip to short (for day trade), but I think your 2070 still possible by tomorrow.

  16. Nikki says:

    looks your 2070 target still good, I guess you’d need to adjust the channel…

  17. Marc says:

    IS D1 IN?

    It looks like the top is in and the c channel has been broken. Watch d channel and c2 D1 confirmation. Not a time to let longs ride!
    There is 20% prob of wave failure which I suspect we have!
    On the chart you can see many confirmation signals….. starting at c level of which 2 have been broken c4 and c channel. Nect is c4, followed by d channel.
    If the market is not doing what you expect it will do the opposite in a big way! So down we go to 2000 retest!

  18. Nikki says:

    d5 channel/MLL broken, what’s next?

  19. Nikki says:

    no sarcastic intended here, they are truly pleasant to my eyes although I appreciate the content even more.
    BTW, I was wondering if you have time to update your gold charts, anyway I’d appreciate your thoughts on where we are now after your previous targets have been reached.
    Again, thanks for all you do Marc & have a great day.

    • Marc says:

      One more retest of 1200 to complete d-4 before next move down to make d-5/D-3/W-3/M-5 testing 1100 next month.
      But yes
      Was really waiting for feed back on first and most actually trade SPX rather than Gold and Silver which is more of a passion!

  20. Nikki says:

    thanks Marc for sharing your work, though I’m still learning, I want to let you know that you create the most beautiful charts I’ve ever seen:-)

  21. Marc says:

    High Tomorrow at close testing 2070.

    Yesterdays open appears to have been noise! and that was pivot m4, not m2 as shown!
    This was confirmed by the size of todays correction, giving us the target D1 tomorrow.
    I have left in all forks so just follow the c scale (green ML’s)

  22. Carlos says:

    What happens at 2070´s then?
    Should we expect a small pullback or a breakout for a xmas rally – “extreme wave”?

    Sorry if I am lost on your counts…

  23. Marc says:

    ROAD MAP TO FINISH D1

  24. Bill C says:

    “There is a possibility of the last low beeing c2 and C1 an extreme wave.”
    Guess that means d5 of D1 extension?
    Would also line up better with OEW 5 wave count, i.e. Minor 5th underway.
    Testing new highs for those scenarios now.

    • Marc says:

      Correct.
      We had a viable technical high but because c2 did not confirm the deci scale – this is one reason I have included multiple possible trend channels so that alarm bells are rung earlier to that possibility!

  25. Mitesh says:

    Can you please elaborate this statement?
    The reason for the possible extreme wave scenario which was pointed out in the W5 repost is this break and its wave formation which is detailed below on c012 fork!

    • Marc says:

      There are 2 green forks – one up and one down and yesterday prices stopped in the apex of the triangle.
      So technically the market could do either.

      for that option to be possible (the summation of sine waves any wave can be upto double it normal size (extreme wave)) and hence a lower high than the ATH would not have confirmed that possibility. It needed a new ATH, or break of what we now know is c2/d5

Leave a Reply