At 5m 34sec of the video, Peter refers to his NDX / DJIA ratio analysis as "his baby" (!!!), so we certainly know how he feels about it!

If I take an "orthodox interpretation" of the data that he presents in this video, I have to point out that if this ratio falls to the double-lines that he's drawn on the ratio plot, there is a preponderance of evidence supporting the view that this should be interpreted as a "buy signal", with a tight stop placed below the point-of-entry. Peter's point is, if the ratio breaks these double-lines to the downside, then this is a VERY bearish signal. And, I agree with this. But, this remains to be seen.

If we look at what has happened in the past -- a VERY small sample size, by the way, which is the main reason I'm VERY skeptical of the usefulness of this ratio analysis -- there are only two historical instances of the double-lines being broken to the downside, although Peter implies we may see a third instance in the near future. However, there are at least four historical instances of the double-lines holding, and a potential "buy signal" with the tight stop, being generated.

In my opinion, this is NOT a good forecasting indicator that can be used for either market timing nor trading purposes. It is more of a confirmation of market direction, after the point-of-entry, which may have some academic value but is of limited usefulness in initiating a trade.

Last updated 1 year ago

CS- as we observed last week- all you needed was a counter trend move back UP in the US $ to get the stock market to drop , a little. so far, that is all that it is.
i prefer to watch videos midday. it doesnt create a "bearish bias" sunday night, 1st thing in morning....

daniel039209 said:

CS- as we observed last week- all you needed was a counter trend move back UP in the US $ to get the stock market to drop , a little. so far, that is all that it is.
i prefer to watch videos midday. it doesnt create a "bearish bias" sunday night, 1st thing in morning....

LOL! Understood!

peter, if it is possible, after showing the confirmed downside projections in SPX< NDX< IWM< Willshire, can you show the levels on maybe just SPX or NDX to where the projections get invalidated? looks like the spx already did and NDX being up 252 maybe means something else? And went up another 92 NDX points to finish up 344. my gosh.

Last updated 1 year ago

Huge BTC downside projection on the weekly looks like it will be in validated soon.

Cosmic Consciousness said:

Huge BTC downside projection on the weekly looks like it will be in validated soon.

Peter: Can you include in a future video a BTCUSD weekly 100 / 110 offset cycle projection update, using a logarithmic Y-axis? We're unable to do this in the Web App at this point, and my "seat-of-the-pants" cycle projections are showing $80K - $100K range, but still only preliminary at this point. Need your validation / correction to my "seat-of-the-pants" work, so far.

Last updated 1 year ago

CS37 said:

At 5m 34sec of the video, Peter refers to his NDX / DJIA ratio analysis as "his baby" (!!!), so we certainly know how he feels about it!

If I take an "orthodox interpretation" of the data that he presents in this video, I have to point out that if this ratio falls to the double-lines that he's drawn on the ratio plot, there is a preponderance of evidence supporting the view that this should be interpreted as a "buy signal", with a tight stop placed below the point-of-entry. Peter's point is, if the ratio breaks these double-lines to the downside, then this is a VERY bearish signal. And, I agree with this. But, this remains to be seen.

If we look at what has happened in the past -- a VERY small sample size, by the way, which is the main reason I'm VERY skeptical of the usefulness of this ratio analysis -- there are only two historical instances of the double-lines being broken to the downside, although Peter implies we may see a third instance in the near future. However, there are at least four historical instances of the double-lines holding, and a potential "buy signal" with the tight stop, being generated.

In my opinion, this is NOT a good forecasting indicator that can be used for either market timing nor trading purposes. It is more of a confirmation of market direction, after the point-of-entry, which may have some academic value but is of limited usefulness in initiating a trade.

@CS37 I have been saying this since the INTRODUCTION of his BABY THERE are many reasons why its not the same as the 30 years - HOW about the INCLUSION OF APPLE in the DOW = and its also the largest weighted in the NQ The BETTER ratio I said would be /NQ TO /XLK but that was months ago

HE DOES NOT REMEMBER what he says

IF WE GO over 4400 its a different story he said......... MEANWHILE BACK AT THE RANCH I BEEN SAYING !!! /NQ 18500 HERE WE COME GET ON IT

XXSPOWER127 said:

CS37 said:

At 5m 34sec of the video, Peter refers to his NDX / DJIA ratio analysis as "his baby" (!!!), so we certainly know how he feels about it!

If I take an "orthodox interpretation" of the data that he presents in this video, I have to point out that if this ratio falls to the double-lines that he's drawn on the ratio plot, there is a preponderance of evidence supporting the view that this should be interpreted as a "buy signal", with a tight stop placed below the point-of-entry. Peter's point is, if the ratio breaks these double-lines to the downside, then this is a VERY bearish signal. And, I agree with this. But, this remains to be seen.

If we look at what has happened in the past -- a VERY small sample size, by the way, which is the main reason I'm VERY skeptical of the usefulness of this ratio analysis -- there are only two historical instances of the double-lines being broken to the downside, although Peter implies we may see a third instance in the near future. However, there are at least four historical instances of the double-lines holding, and a potential "buy signal" with the tight stop, being generated.

In my opinion, this is NOT a good forecasting indicator that can be used for either market timing nor trading purposes. It is more of a confirmation of market direction, after the point-of-entry, which may have some academic value but is of limited usefulness in initiating a trade.

@CS37 I have been saying this since the INTRODUCTION of his BABY THERE are many reasons why its not the same as the 30 years - HOW about the INCLUSION OF APPLE in the DOW = and its also the largest weighted in the NQ The BETTER ratio I said would be /NQ TO /XLK but that was months ago

HE DOES NOT REMEMBER what he says

IF WE GO over 4400 its a different story he said......... MEANWHILE BACK AT THE RANCH I BEEN SAYING !!! /NQ 18500 HERE WE COME GET ON IT

BIGLY YUGE!

I was wondering what happened to you! Glad that you didn't drown in the East River after pulling a garbage bag over your own head, and taking a high jump off of the Brooklyn Bridge that I paid you for! Hope you sold your AAPL shares ...

Last updated 1 year ago

CS37 said:

XXSPOWER127 said:

CS37 said:

At 5m 34sec of the video, Peter refers to his NDX / DJIA ratio analysis as "his baby" (!!!), so we certainly know how he feels about it!

If I take an "orthodox interpretation" of the data that he presents in this video, I have to point out that if this ratio falls to the double-lines that he's drawn on the ratio plot, there is a preponderance of evidence supporting the view that this should be interpreted as a "buy signal", with a tight stop placed below the point-of-entry. Peter's point is, if the ratio breaks these double-lines to the downside, then this is a VERY bearish signal. And, I agree with this. But, this remains to be seen.

If we look at what has happened in the past -- a VERY small sample size, by the way, which is the main reason I'm VERY skeptical of the usefulness of this ratio analysis -- there are only two historical instances of the double-lines being broken to the downside, although Peter implies we may see a third instance in the near future. However, there are at least four historical instances of the double-lines holding, and a potential "buy signal" with the tight stop, being generated.

In my opinion, this is NOT a good forecasting indicator that can be used for either market timing nor trading purposes. It is more of a confirmation of market direction, after the point-of-entry, which may have some academic value but is of limited usefulness in initiating a trade.

@CS37 I have been saying this since the INTRODUCTION of his BABY THERE are many reasons why its not the same as the 30 years - HOW about the INCLUSION OF APPLE in the DOW = and its also the largest weighted in the NQ The BETTER ratio I said would be /NQ TO /XLK but that was months ago

HE DOES NOT REMEMBER what he says

IF WE GO over 4400 its a different story he said......... MEANWHILE BACK AT THE RANCH I BEEN SAYING !!! /NQ 18500 HERE WE COME GET ON IT

BIGLY YUGE!

I was wondering what happened to you! Glad that you didn't drown in the East River after pulling a garbage bag over your own head, and taking a high jump off of the Brooklyn Bridge that I paid you for! Hope you sold your AAPL shares ...

Unlike you dem O crack SHEEP I know how to scale in and out of positions. my appl trade was TIMED PERFECTLY and I shared it with you SHEEP -> same with TSLA same with multiple /NQ ALERTS for you dem o rats

So go sit in your EZ chair and ponder life as you stare at your wandering Joe Boy as he gets led off stage to have his diaper changed ..and listen to MIKE Obama podcast about how she is scared Its right up your alley

YUGE

XXSPOWER127 said:

CS37 said:

XXSPOWER127 said:

CS37 said:

At 5m 34sec of the video, Peter refers to his NDX / DJIA ratio analysis as "his baby" (!!!), so we certainly know how he feels about it!

If I take an "orthodox interpretation" of the data that he presents in this video, I have to point out that if this ratio falls to the double-lines that he's drawn on the ratio plot, there is a preponderance of evidence supporting the view that this should be interpreted as a "buy signal", with a tight stop placed below the point-of-entry. Peter's point is, if the ratio breaks these double-lines to the downside, then this is a VERY bearish signal. And, I agree with this. But, this remains to be seen.

If we look at what has happened in the past -- a VERY small sample size, by the way, which is the main reason I'm VERY skeptical of the usefulness of this ratio analysis -- there are only two historical instances of the double-lines being broken to the downside, although Peter implies we may see a third instance in the near future. However, there are at least four historical instances of the double-lines holding, and a potential "buy signal" with the tight stop, being generated.

In my opinion, this is NOT a good forecasting indicator that can be used for either market timing nor trading purposes. It is more of a confirmation of market direction, after the point-of-entry, which may have some academic value but is of limited usefulness in initiating a trade.

@CS37 I have been saying this since the INTRODUCTION of his BABY THERE are many reasons why its not the same as the 30 years - HOW about the INCLUSION OF APPLE in the DOW = and its also the largest weighted in the NQ The BETTER ratio I said would be /NQ TO /XLK but that was months ago

HE DOES NOT REMEMBER what he says

IF WE GO over 4400 its a different story he said......... MEANWHILE BACK AT THE RANCH I BEEN SAYING !!! /NQ 18500 HERE WE COME GET ON IT

BIGLY YUGE!

I was wondering what happened to you! Glad that you didn't drown in the East River after pulling a garbage bag over your own head, and taking a high jump off of the Brooklyn Bridge that I paid you for! Hope you sold your AAPL shares ...

Unlike you dem O crack SHEEP I know how to scale in and out of positions. my appl trade was TIMED PERFECTLY and I shared it with you SHEEP -> same with TSLA same with multiple /NQ ALERTS for you dem o rats

So go sit in your EZ chair and ponder life as you stare at your wandering Joe Boy as he gets led off stage to have his diaper changed ..and listen to MIKE Obama podcast about how she is scared Its right up your alley

YUGE

:P