BTC is starting to look really bad again. If people don't start buying very soon, we will see this WXYX2Z pattern complete, that I pointed out as an alternate for the first time already in January 2018:
Some of you may remember this pic... It was very unrealistic at the time I created it.
Not so anymore. My target zone for wave Z (if it completes this pattern) is 3,800$ - 2,800$ BTC. 2,800$ also equals the 86% fib retracement target.
But unless there is a new low below 7300, this is still my primary count:
.png)
If you think this to be useful information:
Feel free to use and share my charts, but please mention me, @ew-and-patterns as the author. Otherwise it is considered plagiarism and I will flag you and advise my friends to do the same.
MUST READ!
DISCLAIMER: This post / analysis serves general information purposes only. I am not, and never will be a financial adviser. The material in this post does not constitute any trading advice whatsoever. This is just the way I see the charts and what my trading ideas (from my personal experiences) are. I use chart pattern and Elliott Wave analysis for my trading ideas.
For full disclosure: The author of this post is holding positions in this market at the time of this post. Please conduct your own due diligence, if you plan to copy anyones investment decisions!
If you make any trades or investments after reading this post, it is completely in your own responsibility. I am not responsible for any of your losses. By reading this post you acknowledge and accept to never hold me accountable for any of your losses.
Please consider leaving a comment, like or resteem, if this post entertained you or helped you see things differently...
Have a nice day :-)
lets all hope youre wrong and this doesnt happen!!
It is a bad year for BTC. I am waiting that for Q3 it can to get a good value again.! Thank you for to share this information!
I agree with you guys, in a few days btc not yet stable sometimes go up sometimes down, and become important information for everyone, thank you, success for you, i upvote and resteem
I feel like Smeigle with my bitcoins right now, I don't ever want to part ways :)
excellent post...thanks for sharing...
Great update post.
Thanks for sharing..
Thanks for sharing
information is very useful and my friend can see it from the graph that you like @ew-and-patterns
Or it could also fail, just like the priorly discerned iSHS royally failed, despite the great volumes confirmation and so on!
The first week of April will bring all the answers we've been waiting for. Maybe a news or event will arrive to justify the forecast. Till then, that's a no trade for me.
https://steemit.com/btc/@albeezeelee/morning-update-3-23-18-look-at-that-timing-of-calling-the-tops-and-bottoms
I agree with these predictions and should always keep an open mind to everything. Please check out my latest post with a more present view of whats going on now with BTC.
I agree if momentum can't be sustained, let see if the buyers at 8400 can take out the sellers at 8600, 9000 and 9200 first. If price drops again, 6000 looks like a great buy.
Hi. I have a different wave count. It looks like X wave is in the making, but not in the same degree with yours. Base on this count, I believe it won't break the bottom at 5900. X and Z waves are optional, so there is a chance for up move from here as well.
Here is my multi-timeframe BTCUSD analysis, if you like to see.
https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@waveanalysis/btcusd-multi-timeframe-analysis
Good to see you back after a brief respite! I've got a similar H&S pattern on my daily chart, however, mine measures all the way down beneath 1000. I was also thinking that perhaps 90% might be a maximum wipeout crash from the all-time high, which might put a maximum base near the 2000k level.
I was also wondering about your W, Y, Z pattern. I was always under the impression that W, Y, Z labels were used for a wide variety of double and triple-three corrections.
The sequence below is how I always understood them to work. The example is a non-typical sideways correction, however, the basic counting premise is there.
The premise, as I understand it is that the "X" waves are intervening moves against the current double or triple three corrections...
Is this how you're getting your W, Y, Z pattern or are you using some other means by which to determine these labels? Thanks, brother!
Have you ever seen such a sideways correction like in this pic? I guess not. I haven't.
But I have seen some downward triple corrections like this. It is rare though. And there wasn't one in BTC yet.
I label it like this, because a german elliottican that I respect a lot, does it the same way.
In the end it does not matter much, because my wave Y could easily be labeled as a ZigZag for wave A and thus make this whole correction ABC.
But unless there is a new low below 7300, this is still my primary count:
Yes, as I alluded too, the impossible never-ending sideways affair is for "illustration purposes" only. The various "a, b, c" moves within each intervening "x" wave can take on that of "flats," zig-zags," and even 5-wave triangles.
I hear you on the larger bearish A, B, C structure getting a similar job done, and that you're using a proprietary W, Y, X, Z count from a trusted source outside the "classic" realm of EW.
My preferred count is similar to yours in that if there is a breach beneath the recent print low of 7325.37, then my alternate (still bullish so long as the 5920 low holds) count kicks in. Comforting to know we are generally on the same page though. Thanks, man.
As an aside, perhaps you may know the answer to this - but I was scouring my old books as well as the net to see how to handle failed or truncated 5ths i.e. can they still mark a first wave at one larger degree like your preferred count shows? Logic would say yes, after all, even though it truncated/failed, it's still a fifth nonetheless. I was just hoping to find a qualified answer on that, but I couldn't. All the failed 5th examples I found were all ending moves at larger degrees of trend vs. begining moves at smaller degrees of trend. Anyway, if you can cite a source or provide an opinion I'd be grateful - because I simply don't know the answer. Thanks again, brother!
I don't know the answer for sure. But I don't see any EW rule violated. If you find a source with a definite answer let me know.
Will do, - likewise...