Applying Elliot Wave Theory ( "EWT" to the Ripple (XRP) graph clearly shows us that we are currently forming the C-correction leg, after which a new upward impulse wave should be very likely to start.
--> We clearly see the movement of the five subwaves in the upward impulse wave, followed by the ABC correction, as prescribed by Elliot Wave Theory. --> The C leg has been drawn for the first part, but can be expected to go lower (according to the wave theory principles), before a new uptrend can start, which is also confirmed by MACD and RSI indicators (see further).
*Applying the Elliot Wave Theory rules:
EW Theory can be easily explained and applied looking at this graph. We can see the three rules hold true: --> Rule ("I") Elliot Wave Theory rule 1: Wave 2 cannot exceed wave 1 in retracement (wave two can not correct to a lower price than wave 1’s starting point) —> OK --> Rule ("II") EW Theory rule 2: Wave 3 can never be the shortest: a tricky one but subwave 3 is still longer than subwave 1 —> OK --> Rule ("III") EW theory rule 3: wave 4 can never overlap wave 1 —> OK
*Some guidelines are also highlighted and confirmed:
--> (i) Guideline: if wave 2 is steep, then wave 4 is relatively flat: Wave 2 shows a retracement from 0,000052 to 0,00003564 or 46% correction, which is quite steep so 4 will be relatively flat and is actually around 20% —> OK --> (ii) Guideline: After a "5-wave" impulse advance, corrections ( abc ) usually end in the area of prior Wave 4 low —> we use this as a FIRST ESTIMATE to where the price will retrace BEFORE taking of for the next 5-legged impulse wave upward!
*Additional information on the graph confirms our viewpoint: --> The MACD is still in decline with the red line over the blue + will reach a bullish cross somewhere around end of leg C. --> RSI is also in a downward trend for the moment.
*Conclusion: --> It is best to sit back some more while leg C is developing, and jump back into XRP when indicators such as MACD and the start of a new first wave leg confirm a bullish reversal (note: price potential at this time to All time high is around 100%, but will be even more from the C leg bottom).
PS: this article is by no means intended as formal investment advice, please do your own due diligence and best of luck!
Bình luận
⋅
Update: our leg C was drawn a little bit too steep initially, but we can clearly see it continuing. Moreover, don't forget that it is an overall guideline that the correction leg should end near the top of wave 4. You can also see that we are likely in the 5th subwave within leg C.
You don't get to arbitrarily change the rules for EW theory to force it upon a chart. Wave 3 is the largest impulse, clearly not true on your analysis and invalidates the setup. You also, for whatever reason chose to ignore the peak at 18k sats and the retrace to 11.5k before the high 21k. Fairly significant moves to just bypass for no reason.
Seems less like genuine analysis and more trying to shoehorn a pattern to fit a preconceived notion, that notion being a drop to 6k
moonmonkey100
⋅
@Mastodonic_, i do not agree with his chart (see mine below) BUT you say wave 3 must be the largest wave? that is incorrect, it just cannot be the smallest. It is often the largest but sometimes it is not.
A_Cryptastic_Mind
⋅
@moonmonkey100, thx and I agree, wave 3 can just not be the smallest as per the 3 MUST HOLD rules of EWT.
A_Cryptastic_Mind
⋅
@Mastodonic_, Hi Mastodonic, fellow technical analysis avid:
--> First of all, I can always understand and welcome a contradictive point of view. This is most likely also part of the point of the Tradingview platform: challenge each other and learn from each other in the attempt to and aspiration of become better technical analysts.
--> I have no idea why or how I - in some way - would have offended you (did I?), and maybe I am not interpreting your feedback correctly, though this feels more like an attack than constructive criticism.
--> EWT is straightforward in its 3 MUST HOLD TRUE rules, being the ones I mentioned above; as @moonmonkey100 also correctly points out: WAVE 3 does not have to be the longest, it can simply just not be the smallest! (why are you convinced this is not correct?)
--> Moreover, and while I don't really care about users' reputation as long as they provide good feedback and analysis, I see that you have absolutely no credibility so far as your reputation is exactly equal to zero AND you are attacking other author's viewpoints in a non appreciative way.
--> I would encourage you to i) review your technique of providing feedback, ii) review your theoretical knowledge of Elliot Wave theory, and iii) back up your welcomed critique on my graph with one of your own (cf. @moonmonkey100 )
All the best and feel free to still back up your own point of view with a graph, I will be very interested to have a look and see how it can improve my/our knowledge and technique.
moonmonkey100
⋅
moonmonkey100
⋅
i would propose that we haven't completed a five wave impulse move yet.. What you're calling 5 is potentially a 3. That would mean the current ABC is putting in a 4. some confirmation of the impulsive 5 wave structure would confirm the 4 is in and we're moving to the 5. The next long would be at a .50 - .618 retrace of a new 1 wave.
thoughts?
A_Cryptastic_Mind
⋅
@moonmonkey100, thx for the feedback, what's important here is that we are not talking about the same time frame: I am using the daily, you are using the weekly. I am predicting a further retracement in a leg C on the daily, which will then result in a next upward move. You are actually doing the same thing, as you are stating that there is still some more downward to flat movement before a next boost upwards. So we are basically talking about two different graphs (more or less), with the same outcome and with similar validity of EWT?