Saturday, July 11, 2009

SPX- The Preferred Count

Based on this interpretation I would have to say that this would be considered the best count(preferred count) with the triangle potential as one alternate.

What I have labeled here is a zigzag. I believe many others have this same view.

Adding the channel lines provides a look at where wave c may potentially end up. Wave c, according to Elliot Wave Principle Forecasting Guidlines, will touch the upper channel line that is parallel to the lower channel line that connects the beginning of wave a and end of wave b.

The Fibonacci relationship where c=a places wave c near 890. c=1.618xa=903

Based on the present structure, the channel lines and wave c's relationship to 'a', I would venture to guess that wave 'c' will strongly be attracted to 890 (+/- 5 pts).

Once this is complete, do we head lower or do we see a second zigzag for 'c' of B2? I say we go lower. The 888-890 level previously acted as support and was back tested once on 7/9 before it was slapped down. I guess we are trying for a second time. We shall see.


The one concern I do have that may affect this view is that of wave (ii) red of 'c'. In this view and my alternate view, wave (ii) red looks like a triangle. It is pretty choppy and at the 3 min and 1 min, it does look like a triangle.

Per EW Rules, wave 2 in an impulse (wave c always subdivides into an impulse or diagonal; EW rules for zigzags) always subdivides into a zigzag, flat or combination.

Per EW Guidelines, wave 2 is usually a zigzag or a zigzag combination.

So unless wave (ii) red is a combination, it violates the EW Rule for wave 2 and strays from the guidelines, which in turn may add weight to the alternate triangle view.

However, in the end, EW concedes that not all guidelines will be met. The structure that meets the largest number of guidelines should be considered the preferred count.

We will just have to see how the structure develops.


  1. not being a follower of EW for to long are you saying we should move up to around 890. and are you at the same time saying that there is a chance we don't and we continue this grinding out trip south down to around 820 or so(my guess). any more input appreciated.


  2. Aaron,

    Based on this chart/count, I'm saying that is the most likely scenario at this time, that we move to 890 if it is truly a zigzag (keep in mind though, that I laid out other alternatives as well, e.g. contracting triangle and expanding triangle, but the zigzag is the best count). However, there are no guarantees but the probability is greater that it may.

    Once there, based on the Elliott Wave principle, the wave structure for wave c is technically complete and with that wave B2 at the higher degree is complete. What should follow is a new abc wave creating wave C2 down.

    Wave C2 may be equal to or .618 times wave A2 (A2 started at 931.92 and ends at 869.32). When wave C2=.618xA2=850 and C2=A2=820.

    C2's length can be affected if wave B2 travels higher if it turns out to be a double zigzag, but I'm calling 890 the top (for what it's worth)because of wave
    c's relationship to wave 'a' would be equal and given the previous support and resistance levels at 888.

  3. thanks. nice job on preferred and alternate counts.