|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hmm,
Interesting numbers, but a little simple.. What
is needed is a study of Fibs at different time-frames to
find areas of Confluence. Confluence is far more consistent
than an individual Fib level. In addition, add a trigger to
enter only under certain circumstances..
That's what I do.. I also pay no attention to wave count.
Counting waves has not been beneficial to me.
Even so, as you say
>- 73% retraced between 50% and 62% of wave 1
So you place your entry at 50% and your stop at 62% ???
I would not recommend that at all. You need more
than that to have higher probabilities.
An interesting idea for novices though.
Best wishes,
-Neal.
At 08:08 AM 4/10/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>One problem I see in any analysis would be that for many the use of fibs is
>centered more around ranges than an exact number where something would turn.
>For example, if one were looking at a simple zig-zag ABC correction off a
>impulsive move, one would expect wave B retrace "around" 50% of wave A, not
>exactly 50% and wave C would roughly equa1 wave A, not "exactly" 1.0 of wave
>A.
>
>Here are the "statistical" numbers I was once given by AGET for example.
>
>Wave 2's - 12% held within a 38% retracement of wave 1
> - 73% retraced between 50% and 62% of wave 1
> - 15% retraced greater than 62%
>
>(Don't ask what happened been 38% and 50%, something is missing there?)
>
>Wave 3's - less than 2% of the time wave 3 is equal to or less than a wave 1
> - 45% of the time wave 3 was between 1.60 to 1.75% of wave 1
> -30% of the time wave 3 was between 1.75 and 2.62% of wave 1
> (so 75% of the time between 1.62 and 2.62)
> - 8% of the time wave 3 was greater than 2.62% of wave 1
>
>Wave 4's - 15% of the time retrace between 24 to 30% of wave 3
> - 60% of the time retrace between 30 to 50% of wave 3
> - 15% of the time retrace between 50 to 62% of wave 3
> - 10% of the time retrace greater than 62% of wave 3
>
>Wave 5's - 82% of the time will be between .62 and 1.0 of wave 1 to wave 3
>added to wave 4
> (or subtracted if a down move)
>
>Whether one uses EW pattern to determine what a move "might be doing" or not
>the "ranges" can be helpful and tell one when something is going wrong.
>"Ranges" not "exact" fibs.numbers is the point that needs to be considered.
>Yes it is great when prices turn right on one be certainly not necessary.
>don ewers
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: ztrader <ztrader@xxxxxxxxx>
>To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 7:29 AM
>Subject: [RT] Fibo predictions
>
>
> > On Wednesday, April 10, 2002, 4:46:58 AM, Jim White wrote:
> >
> > JW> the ground rules for the test,
> >
> > As a start, draw Fib lines on price charts. Draw random lines on the
> > same charts. Do the Fib lines have a higher probability of predicting
> > turning points than do random lines?
> >
> > ztrader
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|