Attacking the messenger is all you have instead of logic and reason to convince me to change my mind ? Risk is 26 points Downside targets are 2333 2203 2112
.... Whatever. Everyone's just sharing ideas. Nobody knows what markets do anyway. In any case, I think it's possible (not saying likely) for 2500 within the next 6 trading sessions. That will be top. Then the following 6 drops back to 2360ish right in time for FOMC. Then drag lower for the rest of the year. This is just based on the trend correlation analysis. The correlation coefficient was around ~0.7. Based on that trend, it had a gap move on exactly this date too. Might just be fluke. I personally still cannot even fathom 2400 let alone 2500 based off a worse case. I think fair value is 2150 or lower. For a bull run based on nothing of substance is irrational. The market should reset to 2150 so self proclaimed 'mark to market' policies can prove themselves "mark to market".
Volente has made some very good calls (checked some of them in the archives). A lot of this bickering arises over what defines a "top". Bone makes good points obviously, but I don't believe Volente is waiting for a pullback down to 2000 to take off the trade. "Macro" it's been a bull market forever, who wants to debate that. At this time a year ago, we were on the brink and yet here we are 600 S&P points higher. Then again, who could have held during the 335 pt drawdown in the S&P from May 2015-Feb 2016? If Volente sells it at 2400, covers 70 pts lower...good trade...what else really matters here?
I've got a pint that says we cross 2500 before we cross 2200. Do I think that makes sense? No. I'd rather see us at a 15 pe-ttm. But if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. What non-charty reasoning leads me there? Inflation (negligible), and earnings growth (material). I think most of the rise is over. I think 2400 is an early Christmas. And I'd be a lot looser in long positions were the pe something I didn't have to justify with an asterisk about negligible inflation and material growth in (expected-to-actual) earnings. But, as me dear ol' Mum used t'say, "Thomas, if you wish in one hand and piss in the other, guess which one gets filled first." Thanks, Mom. That find up-bringing gave me a two-aphorism post.
And on the technical side, it kinda 'looks' like it really wants to reach and test the top of the longer trend channel that goes back to 2009 to now as a catch up. That channel also happen to coincide with around 2500 level.
I can't think of a more painful, capital burning, unnecessary trading strategy than calling tops or bottoms to a market whose price action and momentum hasn't shown itself agreeable to one's personal inclinations and hubris.
Disagree completely.. Iv`e read a lot of criticism here regarding the inferiority of trying to catch tops & bottoms. Entry always defines the RR of any trade regardless, that said, there is nothing wrong with trying to catch the "Turn". As long as your RR parameters are in place & emotional stability sound, These are trades that can double & triple account size as long as it`s managed correctly. Trading/speculation is an intimate process that has to agree with ones personality type, unequivocally. To assume someone is burning capital and not "trading correctly" because they are implementing particularly inferior style is comical. J.L was notorious for trying to catch turns... he felt that offered him the greatest reward with minimum risk... He could be wrong 25 straight times but would crush it on his 26th attempt.. his RR parameters were in place.