GOOG

S&P 500, SOX semi-conductor index and Alphabet GOOG

Hamilton

We showed the S&P triangle give or take ten days ago. First it went a little higher than expected but then it did start going down again and now even looks better than ever before;

s&p april 24 2018

Not only does it look good, but waves b, c and d are clearly 3-wave structures as they should all be. Wave a is a little less clear and d has yet to be completed. In any event it could definitely be a triangle. To my knowledge triangles are 4th wave structures that are continuation patterns and ALWAYS continue in the same direction as the triangle was entered! The only exception would be when the triangle was misdiagnosed in the first place (as in 1-2, 1-2 etc.) which proves the rule anyway.

The SOX or semi-conductor index is great for playing with options. It moves relatively fast and for no discernable sensible reason. The large fluctuations are evident in the following chart;

sox april 24 2018

This is essentially an unstable situation. The swings get bigger over time and here it is very easy to conflate different parts of different structures to come up with the desired result. Some even go so far as to refer to this pattern, incorrectly, as the jaws of death. Whatever the case, this one looks to be near perfect and just like the contracting triangle this expanding triangle should be resolved by a spurt up ( and very fast) to more or less meet the upper extended line (about 1550, almost 30%). Wave e, by the way, need not travel all the way to the lower line.

That brings us to some of the tech stocks. Alphabet – what an idiotic name – or Google (GOOG) is a perfect example of the previously discussed “flat” only this one is absolutely perfect and beyond reproach;

goog april 24 2018goog april 24 2018 b

A flat is called a flat because, in its perfect iteration, it is exactly that, flat. The c tends to be equal to the a and the intervening a-b-c is often well proportioned. It too is a correction so once it is complete the stock should go to a new high. It has a 5-3-5 structure. We have added a longer chart going back beyond the lows of 2009. I have used a semi-log setting as that results in a straight line if the rate of growth is constant. I do not recall ever seeing a nine year long trend continuing so precisely. If we do indeed have a flat, and all indications are that we do, then we should make at least one more high. My guess would be around 1270 where the upper line resides. I am not sure what the little triangle in wave 1 up is doing.

One of the other “problems” with the bear case is that gold and silver are not reacting as they should and show no signs of moving up.

GOOG, update.

Hamilton

goog feb 19 2013 bgoog feb 19 2013 s

At $675 this one looked pretty toppish back in August of last year. It seemed to be a sell , but quite obviously it wasn’t. Looking at the Bloomberg website, I noticed a blog in which a young lady, Genna S. , pontificated that this stock was a buy, much better than a lot of others. At least three financial reporters around the table looked on in awe and then proceeded to proclaim that the young sage had all the attributes of a Warren Buffett. At the risk of making a fool of our self, once again, we would like to disagree with this precocious investor. The count is ambiguous but there is either a big, or a small triangle there followed by what looks like a wedge, none of which is positive for the near future. A sell.

GOOG, Google.

Hamilton

GOOG L GOOG S

Google is a very interesting stock. Normally I would not attempt to venture a guess where this is going. Eye-balls and that kind of stuff is not my cup of tea. As a matter of principal I would never buy a stock that trades at $500 , whatever.

The chart is intriguing so I will hazard a guess. The stock should go down. The initial drop from $750 to $240 is either an A-B-C move or 5-waves, I prefer the former but is does not matter much. If it was an A-B-C that could have been it and a new bull would have started and it could be argued that the initial move back to $630 was wave 1 up and everything thereafter wave 2 down. The internals do NOT support this. On the detailed chart there are two 5-wave moves of almost equal size. They channel well. Therefore the mid leg cannot be a b in a wave 2 and must therefore be a C of the correction. The next 5 waves then has to be a wave 1 down (followed by a nice wave 2 a-b-c, mostly on news, stellar earnings). If correct the next move should be 3 down! Time will tell.