NASDAQ

I will post NASDAQ setups and discussion here.

Here are some NASDAQ frameworks I have been using that have been pretty useful to me lately. The NDX is a 'standard' ML set, and the Comp is one of my 'adjusted' sets. I didn't show any specific setups here, just the frameworks. Both indices are approaching or at what I consider to be important junctures. Both have the look of abcde Elliot corrections, too. The make or break point should be coming soon.










Charts courtesy of Dynamic Traders Group - www.DynamicTraders.com

Here's a follow up on the NDX chart. Is that something, or what? It goes without saying how critical this area right here is to me. If it gets blown out, that really tells me something.





Chart courtesy of Dynamic Traders Group - www.DynamicTraders.com

Here's some additional follow up. The NDX didn't respect the ML upper // area, and that gave me information. I now watch the next area here where the two lines hit close together. Keep in mind this is just a framework. Until I see the flow change I use this information for managing current positions. I never trade an area without a clear entry trigger. I devoted one entire book just to this topic alone I feel it is so important to my methodology.





Chart courtesy of Dynamic Traders Group - www.DynamicTraders.com

Here's some additional follow up on the NDX. This is a great example of why I wait for entry triggers and why I use trailing stops instead of 'profit targets'. So far none of various setups I had for this big launch up have 'seen' any resistance spots and are just following through. Until that changes I just stay with the current flow. Many things are hitting 1.272 external retracement areas in here, so if this is a big sucker trap (the commercials are net short over 78,000 S&P's, the second highest my data shows behind March 2000) this is a key area for me to watch.





Chart courtesy of Dynamic Traders Group - www.DynamicTraders.com

jim, if you find the time, an update would be great.

and a question:
since price is outside the ML upper wouldn't it be useful to draw a "modified shiff ML" set. just to "catch" price agaian inside a fork?
thanks for you answer
hannes

Hannes,

Let me quote a little bit from today's members update. This shows/explains the sets and lines I am watching. Keep in mind this is just a small part of what I discussed.





"Here's that NDX.X showing how it came off that lower // like a rocket. Now it has started to come off slightly. Do you see any setups right here? All I can do is manage what I have based on the last setup, and wait for something to set up from here. If I feel this has more to go without it coming off much more I could look for smaller ABCD's and such on lower timeframes for trades based on those timeframes, but even that has a lower reward/risk than I like at this point.

I'll add some work to the chart, and we'll assess that.





I added an 'adjusted' ML set onto the chart. This compares that last thrust down to this last move to the launch point. You know I had this on my charts when I got so excited about that smaller ML set on the abcde. It all hit at the same spot. Do a full workup and you'll see some other things of note. Notice that the NDX.X is approaching the upper // now, and had zero respect for the ML. The black line is a trendline off two obvious swing-highs.

I didn't show it here because of the timeframe, but a bigger set I adjusted to best fit the data has its upper //, and a slightly lower sliding // coming in right at this area. There is no doubt a lot of big lines are sitting right above here. They may go, but a pullback in an ABCD to say that ML, with intermarket analysis pointing 'up' would be something that I would be looking at. See what I am getting at?"

I hope this helps.


Charts courtesy of Dynamic Traders Group - www.DynamicTraders.com

Jim, thanks a lot. This was very helpful.

If you don't mind and if it's possible for you to answer I would like to now, what do you mean by " and had zero respect for the ML".
price went through the ML and never tested it again?
but if price has zero respect for the ML what is the conclusion out of this?

I'm trying to do a full workup as you suggested and I have already put in a new down Fork, because we have seen two lower highs in the NDX.
Is this suitable?

thanks for this discussion
Hannes

Hannes,

I watch the lines very closely on sets that have shown me they are being 'seen'. I am looking for clues about the price action. I'm trying to judge the strength and see if the reactions I expect, based on my premise at the time, are happening. Say I watch the ML and expect at least a small pullback there, or at least a struggle. Instead it blasts right through without even a stall. That implies even more strength than I expected. I now weigh that one clue into the mix.

I am constantly collecting clues, trying to see how things act at the areas I am watching. Price action goes from one area to the next, and how it acts there tells me which fork in the road I want to follow, as far as the next step of my assessment. Price action gives a lot of clues, but most people don't take the time and put out the effort to study this to any great extent.

As far as the sets, I tend to put a lot of sets on my charts, so any time I have clear swing points I try a set and see if the price 'sees' it as the action unfolds. I see if it fits with everything else I have on my charts. I also do many 'adjusted' sets, but that is more than I can explain here, and I'd have to refer you to my books for that.

If you don't go down the route of studying my work to try to save yourself from reinventing the wheel you are stuck with doing what I did, and that is experimenting until you see what helps you, and what doesn't. I wrote the books because most people don't have the time or desire to do what I did, and that is put in 20,000 screen hours figuring out what I have. I'm not trying to sell you any books, just tell it like it is. Keep experimenting, and don't get discouraged.