پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-143

On your website you say “X-waves are allowed to (and should) take more time than the preceding A-B-C correction IF that X-wave is larger in price.” On another portion of your website you say “X-waves should NEVER take more time than the entire A-B-C correction before it.” Which is true?

ANSWER:

The above statements refer to two, different types of X-waves. One where the X-wave is larger in price than the prior A-B-C Flat (or Triangle). The second where the X-wave is 61.8% or less in price of the prior A-B-C. 

In the first instance, where wave-X is larger in price, it can (and frequently is) more time consuming than the total time of the prior A-B-C. In this second instance, when wave-X is 61.8% or LESS in price of the prior A-B-C, it must also be LESS time-consuming than the prior A-B-C (or at least not more time-consuming).

پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-142

In past updates I’ve seen you reference waves-F and G. Is there a limit to this Wave “alphabet”? Why not just begin anew with a-b-c?

ANSWER:

Unlike orthodox Elliott Wave, which allows great variance in the behavior, relationships and time consumption of specific patterns, NEoWave imposes strict limits. Accurate forecasting can only be accomplished when precise rules relating to price, time, complexity, behavior and relationships are required of all waves in all patterns. 

An important part of the construction of 3-legged patterns (Flats and Zigzags) is that clear alternation exists between the 3 segments on a time, complexity and behavior basis. Since larger degree patterns (under NEoWave) impose maximum time restrictions on smaller degree patterns, a developing (smaller degree) correction only has so much time to unfold. If a correction is allowed no more than 10 days to form (based on the next larger degree) and the market wants to form a Flat, there can be great variance between waves A, B and C in TIME during period. For example, wave-A might take 1 day while wave-B takes 6 days, leaving 3 days for wave-C. This also follows the necessary TIME alternation required in Flats. 

On the other hand, under the same 10-day time restriction, if a market wants to form a 7-legged formation (such as a NEoWave Diametric), that leaves little room for time variance between waves. Waves-A and B might take 1 day, while C, D and E take 2-days, which only leaves 1-day for waves-F and G. As a result, the more waves a pattern contains, the more similar each must be to fit within the time limits imposed by the larger degree pattern. From personal experience, the limit to the wave “alphabet” is A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I, which forms a NEoWave Symmetrical. 

The reason waves-F and G (and sometimes H and I) must be used to label some wave patterns is because specific time and behavior characteristics are required of Flats and Zigzags that are not present in NEoWave Diametrics and Symmetricals. Time relationships during corrections are your primary tool for determining the kind of correction unfolding. If the first 3 waves of a correction are very different in time, a Flat or Zigzag is forming. As time between the waves becomes slightly more similar, a Triangle is the next best choice. As the time between waves becomes very similar (but price differences still exist), a Diametric is your best option. If the waves are very similar in time and also very similar in price, a NEoWave Symmetrical is your only choice. 

Because all corrections possess a specific “time behavior stamp,” that is the reason you cannot simply start a new ABC when you become uncomfortable with the continuation of the correction. A completed ABC Flat or Zigzag must possess clear alternation in time between all three waves. If that time alternation is not present, a Flat or Zigzag is NOT forming, but a more complex formation that requires the use of D and E, sometimes F and G and in rare cases, H and I. 

پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-141

I’ve followed NEoWave’s S&P strategies for 6 years. During that period you mostly went Short. How come and what conditions must exist to go Long?

ANSWER:

On Sept. 5, 2000, a 20 year bear market began in the S&P. As a result, and by definition, the S&P’s largest and fastest moves will primarily be to the downside (remember how violent the declines were in late 2008 and early 2009?). Due to the size of the correction unfolding (20 years in this case), counter-trend rallies can last years and be very large in price, but they will almost certainly be slower and smaller than the declines. As a result, for the next 20 years, the majority of the best trades will be Short trades. That is the primary reason most, but not all, of my trades the last 6 years have been on the Short side. 

Another reason Short trades should be the primary focus for the next 2 years is because a smaller degree, 4-6 year bear market began Jan. 2008 (it is inside the larger bear market beginning Sept. 2000). So, from Jan. 2008 until late 2012 or so, the largest, fastest and most predictable market moves will be declines.

The problem we are currently experiencing is due to the size of the counter-trend moves. They are SO large in price that they can last for 1-3 years, but still (under wave theory) they are counter-trend, which makes them more difficult to predict and trade. 

Once the 4-6 year bear market (starting Jan. 2008) is over, a multiyear rally will begin. When that occurs, it should be the first time since March 2003 (when I last turned bullish for several years), that a MAJOR buying opportunity will exist that is predictable and tradable under wave theory. Until then, we are must tolerate this highly complex, very large, very time-consuming counter-trend rally off 2009’s low. Once this large (B)-wave rally has ended, trading and market predictability will increase substantially for at least 6-12 months.

پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-140

On two charts of the same market (one arithmetic, one logarithmic), the extended wave is a different wave depending on which chart I use. Which chart should I trust?

ANSWER:

When it comes to finance, the most important things are measured in percentages (i.e., interest rates, return on investment, yield). Since everyone is working with different amounts of capital, the important variables are quoted in percentages. When it comes to stock and commodity market behavior, price relationships based on percentages will always be more accurate. As a result, if left with a conflict between which leg is the longest on two separate charts, always trust the information on the LOG chart over that of the arithmetic chart. Arithmetic charts are easier to work with, but provide less accurate representations of reality.

پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-139

Twenty-years (20) after Mastering Elliott Wave, do you still mantain that the 0-2 and 2-4 trendlines should not be violated by any leg of wave-3?

ANSWER:

When it comes to standard (trending) Impulse patterns (5-3-5-3-5), the answer is YES. When it comes to Terminal Impulse patterns (3-3-3-3-3), it is an entirely different story. Terminal patterns are composed of five corrections strung together to form the last impulsion of a larger formation. Because Terminals are conclusionary patterns, the 0-2 and 2-4 trendlines ARE allowed to be broken during the formation of wave-3. Such breaks can even occur more than once during wave-3’s formation.

پرسش و پاسخ با گلن نیلی-138

You no longer use the term extracting triangle…why not?

ANSWER:

In the early 1990’s, soon after the release of Mastering Elliott Wave, a host of new patterns began to emerge (Diametrics, Symmetricals, 3rd Extension Terminals, and oddly shaped Triangles). Prior to the 1990’s, if you saw an expanding Triangle, wave-B was smaller in price than wave-D. When a contracting Triangle formed, wave-B was larger in price than wave-D. 

That rigid behavior construct began to crumble in the 1990’s. If the environment started off with a large A-wave, instead of wave-B retracing at least 61% of wave-A, wave-B might retrace as little as 30% of wave-A and end up being shorter in price than wave-D. If the pattern started off with a small A-wave (suggesting an expanding Triangle), the reverse occurred. Wave-B might be much larger (138% of wave-A), followed by a D-wave that was much shorter in price than wave-C and shorter in price than wave-B. That behavior gave these patterns the appearance of EX-panding in one direction and con-TRACTING in the other (“extracting” was the term I coined by merging the two words). 

At first I assumed these new Triangles were the result of Reverse Alternation between waves-B and D (a phenomenon previously only witnessed in Impulsive patterns between waves-2 and 4). While that was partially correct, over time it became apparent the situation was more complex. It took me a few years to fully understand, but as I studied more patterns, I was able to more logically categorize them. 

In the same way 5-legged, Impulsive patterns have three main variations (i.e., 1st, 3rd and 5th extensions) with each able to possess standard or reverse alternation between waves-2 and 4, the same rules apply to 5-legged corrections (i.e., Triangles). If wave-A of a Triangle “extends” it is known as a contracting Triangle. If wave-C “extends” it forms what I termed a neutral Triangle. If wave-E “extends” it is known as an expanding Triangle. 

With the addition of neutral Triangles I realized these patterns were not always expanding in one direction and contracting in the other, but sometimes “bulging” in the middle. That’s when I realized the term “extracting” was not accurate enough to describe the phenomenon unfolding and, as a result, I stopped using the term.