Search -

in some markets there are no bullish reversals in the reversals tab. However, in the dashboard tab , there are bullish reversals. Has somebody an idea why this is? Those reversals in the dashboard seem to be valid reversals since they appear in the elected reversals table when they are elected.

Hi all,

it looks like the "aggregate" row of the weekly and daily arrays has been fixed. Turning points are now easily identifiable and do not change often.

Armstrong has published the buy and sell signals for the Dow on the below long term chart. He has mentioned the "net profit/loss" number, but that in itself is not telling much about the real profit that could have been made. I've Iooked at every single position and calculated this chart with some real position and equity numbers. The following was the outcome.

Positions are additive and for simplicity I've taken the initial Dow at 7000 points = 7000$ for 1 position, but this can of course be scaled up or down. Depending on how much drawdown you are willing to accept (or capital / leverage is used), the below table shows the profit that could have been made.
Since the initial position size of 7000$ will change over time, the average position size during those 18 year was 10.500$ per position . The maximum number of open positions at one point was 9 positions which equals around 120.000$ in total. This was between 2004 and 2008 and all 9 open buy positions were closed in 2008 when the first sell signal came up. Then the first sell position was opened when the bear market ongoing. In 2002 the amount of sell positions was 9 positions (from 9 sell signals) which results to about 76.000$ in total, In Oct. 2002 all 9 sell positions were closed and a buy position was opened at the same time.
There was one period during 2008 and 2009 where 8 positions were accumulated (= 55.000$) and and in 2013 til 2015 it were 5 positions ( = 70.000$)
The average equity used over the 18 years was 35.000$ in this example.
The maximum drawdown happened during 1999 and 2011 were 3 consecutive open positions were closed with loses during a choppy period.
These numbers are calculated on the long term. There were 3 bull markets and 2 bear markets during that 18 year period. To take advantage of these numbers, one should to stick to those signals for at least 2 years (better 3 or ideally 18 years), I would say. As Armstrong also said, these signals work well during bull or bear markets. If the markets move sideways for a long time (several years), then signals don't work so well without timing.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The below values are related to the average equity invested over the whole time period of 18 years. In this case it is 35.000$
9 simultaneously open positions max. = 120.000$ max. investment at some point.
Max. drawdown is related to the average equity.

Max. drawdown 9% profit 160% (56.000$ without leverage)
Max. drawdown 18% profit 320%
Max. drawdown 27% profit 480%
Max. drawdown 36% profit 640% (224.000$ - with a leverage of 4x per position)
Max. drawdown 45% profit 800%
Max. drawdown 55% profit 960% (336.000$ - with a leverage of 6x per position)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since having 120.000$ invested at some point might not be an option for everyone, I've calculated this for fewer positions as well
and skipping everything above that position number. This is given that the initial positions size is 7000$ per position and position size is growing over time.

3 simultaneously open positions max = (40.000$ max.) - 10.500$ in average per position , average equity used during the 18 years = 23.000$
The 50.000 for 3 positions were only when the Dow was at

Max. drawdown 15% profit 160% (37.000$ without leverage))
Max. drawdown 30% profit 320% (74.000$ - with a leverage of 2x per position)
Max. drawdown 45% profit 480% (111.000$ - with a leverage of 3x per position)
Max. drawdown 60% profit 640% (148.000$ - with a leverage of 4x per position)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During 1997 til 2015 the Dow itself had a max. drawdown of 50% (in 2008) and a total profit of around 250%. However, who could have known that it really goes up to 17.000 - 18.000 in 2012 with all of the banking crisis and subprime crisis going on. Who would have bought and sold the Dow during the panic of 2001 or 2008 correctly?

So in my opinion those signals were very successful compared to the Dow itself and it is super-simple to follow. You just have to consider the buy and sell signals by looking once a month at Socrates.
What also needs to be considered is position size, leverage, duration of investment, trading tools (ETF's or alike), the max. number of positions and the max. drawdown that can be accepted. Profits could be re-invested and additional equity could be added over time so that one doesn't have to start with 120k or 35k equity from the beginning.
With only 3 open positions max. it may happen that one is not trading at all for 2 years because there were more than 3 positions open at the same time. Also a leverage of 2x - 3x would be good to compensate inflation.

This one took me several full days to collect the data and create the formulas. Quite some work...



*** Update 1 ***
some stats on 9 positions strategy : 49 trades in total - 36 win / 13 lost
some stats on 3 positions strategy : 49 trades in total - 30 traded (20 win / 10 lost) - 19 trades omited (more then 3 trade at the same time)

Recently I've noticed in SOC Pro that there are many daily reversals are shown as elected, but have actually never been published in the reversals page. In another forum I've read that this can happen, but I'm not sure why and why so often. In about 7 weeks, out of 15 daily elected reversals in one market, 8 were not published. On the weekly level 3 out of 5. They were only shown the day after they were elected. And then there are also some elected from levels that not even briefly have been touched. E.g. The price is now at 45 and traded between 43 and 45 in the last session and the reversals stands at 50. Then all of a sudden an elected reversal appears at 37 where the price not even remotely was in the last trading session(s).
I assume this is still the expected behavior, but it would still interested to know more about it. If someone finds an explanation for this it would be nice to post the link here.

MA wrote yesterday:

Zitat

---

Our Capital Flow models have been spot on showing the strength of the rally in the Dow is driven by foreign inflows.

---

I wonder why he is saying that.

The monthly projected capital flow map seem to have predicted capital outflow from the USA. I.e. Dow Jones and USD down instead of up, as it was the case in Oct. so far
Maps from Oct. 10

Sept. 22 ................................................. Oct. 6 .................................................... .............Oct 10

On the weekly level it seems to be good for the DOW though. So maybe MA is referring to the weekly maps then.

Sept 23 .....................................................Oct 06................................................. Oct.9 ......................................................... Oct 15



recent article about capital flows 2017
generic article about capital flows 2015
Comment about capital flows - 1996 Major Forecast

Capital Flows Movements 2012

Mainstream Media is Dying — Facebook Recognizes Trend

Zitat

---

Facebook explained the move is not about privileging certain sources over others, but about better “connecting people and ideas.” This move will allow online sources to be given favored status above the mainstream media, which confirms the trend is changing.

---

I can't fully agree with this statement MA made today.
Here in Germany mainstream media is now heavily involved with promoting news articles over Facebook. Facebook has its own algorithms for newsfeeds which it does not disclose. I seriously doubt that the avarage facebook user will be presented controversial news that friends are reading. Facebook itself has become mass media / mainstream media. I have no doubt that Facebook does , at least partially , control what will be big news and what won't. That is totally in-transparent and Facebook will have even more power over media than traditional mass-media had up until now because it's Facebook who is deciding who will get which news.

Hi there,

I'm looking at a daily array in Oil and I'm thinking what is considered to be a day with a rising price vs. falling price. Here is a constellation where in case 1 oil is rising intraday but falling on a closing basis. Case 2 is the opposite. It's falling intraday but rising from one day to the next day.
So my question is, what is MA consider to be a rising price (or falling price)? intraday or on a closing basis? In this case it's the daily level, but this can also happen weekly, monthly or yearly.
Thanks.
Alex

Martin wrote on Feb 28th

Zitat

---

Our target for a turning point was February. That appears to have been accomplished during the week of the 8th. .....
... We still need to look forward into March and May for turning points.

---

note: Martin says Feb, March and May are turning points, no mention of directional changes which may behave slightly different. Unfortunately Martin didn't post the monthly array itself.

from the monthly chart I find it difficult see where April and May is heading to.



Option 1: from the daily chart I would say that Feb was the high, March the low and May should make the high. But if May would make another high, then we are probably looking into the 116 level. Martin also said that the Euro would most likely not break before May.



Option 2: Another way looking at this . I think this would better fit with what Martin says about the 116 level and that it's not likely going up to that level.
What do you think? Which option might play out into May?
Going only by the arrays I tend to choose Option 1, also because a turning point with low in February is hard to justify when looking at January. Option 2 would better fit to what Martin says about the direction which the Euro should take in the coming weeks (down). So it's a bit of a conflict here for me.

I noticed that arrays can change over time. The one on the right hand side is an updated array that Martin has posted recently and left one is 5 weeks old.
I know that the composite bars are proportionally and can change over time because the bars in one row stand in relation to each other. But in the above case it doesn't have to do with proportional changes, in my view.
Martin also stated that the lowest bar can be a turning point. If I look it that way, then the 03/28 is still a turning point.
The bar on the 25th went up a lot for some reason I don't understand. But it seemed before a significant bar and now has become even more significant (or a definitive turning point)
Volatility on 03/28 is now gone where previously there was something.
In this case direction changes and the panic is still unchanged, but I noticed cases where that did change also.

[removed array - please see the gold report forum]

recently Martin mentioned on his blog that Gold may close either sideways directed or neutral.
What is the difference?
Does sideways mean definitely sideways and neutral means that there is still up-and downside potential? I thought that both is the same.
Thanks