After triggering a conventional 'buy' signal at the end of 2022, this vehicle has gone nowhere as it continues to toy with the green line. If this were a Warner Brothers cartoon, Daffy Duck would stick a bottle rocket up GDXJ's posterior to get things going. Perhaps if we visualize this, something will happen. In the meantime, we'll have to accept the fact that GDXJ is bound to move less energetically than gold futures because, no matter how high bullion contracts go, someone will still have to labor mightily to dig gold out of the ground.
February Crude has been on a 'mechanical' buy signal since early December, when a pullback first touched the green line. The futures have since gone flat, dancing a jig a 'x' that suggests DaBoyz are in no hurry to let it loose. Geopolitical mayhem, including the targeting of tankers in the Suez, has had surprisingly little effect, and we hesitate to ascribe this to ordinary forces of supply and demand. But with China's economy weakening and the U.S. headed as always into recession, perhaps that is the explanation. Crazy world! In any event, the futures have pussyfooted at the green line for long enough that the buy signal, even if still theoretically valid, is no longer enticing. Look for quotes to fall below C=64.21 over the next eight to ten weeks, pulling gas prices down below $3 in most states.
Reader Scott Baker took issue last week with my unsettling prediction of a deflationary bust. The mountain of debts that I believe will cause this is really no big deal, says Baker. He quotes economist Michael Hudson to back him up: "Debts that can't be repaid, won't be." That certainly doesn't sound very menacing. So who will lose if a global banking system holding $2 quadrillion in hyper-leveraged securities implodes? According to Baker, the pain will fall mainly on supposedly sophisticated investors who failed to perform due diligence. And fortunately for them, the damage won't be nearly as bad as I've calculated, he says, since the value of all derivatives is probably less than half of the $2 quadrillion figure that is accepted widely, if not universally. Well, okay, I'll give him a little slack on that. But even if one allows that the size of the market is 'merely' $1 quadrillion, that's still nearly ten times as much as the world produces in goods and services. That can only mean that the collateral backing the market is dangerously thin. Baker believes the economy could survive the hit anyway, but for a reason that sounds like something Yogi Berra might say: 'Because derivatives are on all kinds of things...they literally cannot fail all at once.' A Debt Bomb The clock is ticking on this debt bomb, and optimism is not going to prevent it from triggering. Nor will any of us escape the effects. The late C.V. Myers, whom I've quoted here before many times, has provided the simplest explanation of why deflation is so likely: Ultimately every penny of debt must be paid -- if not by the borrower then by the lender. To understand why, you need only consider that if, say, students skip out on $1.8 trillion
The futures are bound for an all but certain test of the 4688.75 midpoint support, which I expect to fail. We'll wait for a verdict in real time, but p can be bottom-fished nonetheless with an rABC trigger interval of 24.50 points (a= 4743.25 on 12/20). The $5,000 entry risk demands a 'camouflage' set-up on the 15-minute chart or less, so the trade is advised for skilled Pivoteers only. The pattern looks reliable for trading purposes and targeting even though its A-B segment is unusually steep and elongated. That implies it would trigger a 'mechanical' short with a rally back to x from p or lower. _______ UPDATE (Jan 12, 9:03 a.m.): Surprising strength has trashed my bearish outlook, sending me back to the chart for a second look. It turns out the 'mechanical'-short set-up I'd found so striking never occurred. That would have required the decline from late December's highs to have touched the red line. It missed by 11 points, actually, implying that any rally back up to the green line would signal strength capable of achieving new highs. So far, the effort has fallen shy by four points. The rally may yet fail, possibly after a breakout to a marginal new peak. We'll keep close track in any event, and act accordingly, as the futures continue to frolic menacingly in the 'discomfort zone'.
Sellers obliterated the 187.47 'midpoint support' of the pattern shown last week, clearing a path for more downside to at least D=175.31. Any one- or two-level rally in the meantime would set up an attractive 'mechanical' short. Bottom-fishing at D will be a high-odds play as well, although the pattern, even though an rABC, may be too obvious for a penny-ante stop-loss. In such situations, shorting puts is likely to be a better tactic than buying calls.
I've included MSFT on the list this week because the bearish pattern shown offers as much certitude as AAPL's. The initial plunge through the red line on December 4 not only 'guaranteed' a further fall to at least D=352.89, it also made the 'mechanical' short at the green line on December 13 an almost certain bet. The situation should be good for a winning option trade on the way down, but if the best opportunity should involve naked shorting, I'll provide more detailed guidance in the chat room on request.
Two conventional ABC patterns are driving crude higher to, respectively, 75.80 and 77.48. Both of these Hidden Pivot resistances are shown in the chart, with HP levels that should be tradable. That implies that a pullback to the green line from Friday's high at our sweet spot would trigger an appealing 'mechanical' buy. Also, a subsequent rally to the target could be shorted with a tightly constructed reverse pattern. The larger ABC has a midpoint resistance at 73.44, and an 'x' green line at 72.26 that also would be buyable. Bottom line: Expect Feb Crude to continue higher, with no dips below C=69.28, to at least 77.48.
Just a little lower and it will be Katie-bar-the-door time for the buck. Last week's moderate rally pushed DXY out of the red zone, but the trend will have to exceed the 104.26 peak recorded on 12/8 to become a safe bet, if only for a short while. In retrospect, the failure to push above the 107.99 'external' peak recorded last February foreshadowed problems. Bulls turned timid just when they needed an extra inch of push, and that may have sealed the dollar's fate over the intermediate term.
Silver futures fared worse than their gold counterpart last week, leaving a 'mechanical' buy triggered on December 29 hanging by a thread. The weekly low at 22.888 came within a dime of stopping out the trade, which I did not recommend. There is a voodoo number not far below the pattern's point 'C' low where bottom-fishing could be attempted with relatively little risk, but we'll nature take its course before we hatch any bullish plans.
The stock market is so pumped with hubris, lies and delusions that I'm beginning to doubt whether the bull market will see Microsoft rally to $430 before everything comes crashing down. I've been using MSFT as a bellwether because it has been the strongest megacap stock in the world for the last four years, and because the company's subscription-based revenues will continue to flow even in a severe economic downturn. The stock's weekly chart implies it will make a very important top if and when it hits 430, but there are no guarantees it will get there. The chart's bullishness is persuasive on this point because of the ease with which buyers exceeded the p=322 'midpoint pivot' of the pattern. However, the implied power of the move would have been greater if the rally had impaled p and never looked back. Instead, MSFT took its sweet old time over a period of five months in turning the midpoint pivot into a launching pad. This, in my estimation, has made the stock an 80% likelihood to reach 430, as opposed to a 95% bet if buyers had pulverized p=322 on first contact. So how do we deal with 20% uncertainty about how and when a top will occur? It is important to get this right, since the bear market that's coming stands to bring even greater hardship to most Americans than the 1930s. People were more resourceful then, with 30% of the work force tied to agriculture, literally living off the land. They were not in hock up to their eyeballs, and women had the option of staying home with their children. The dollar was backed by gold and fundamentally sound. Government statistics tied to job creation, unemployment and GDP growth were not horse manure like the numbers shoveled at us
