Hello Every one,
Above is the chart of USDJPY from inception. Please share your thoughts on the same.
Looks like you were correct about the low coming in January/February. Based on this phasing I guess we should expect a peak (18M) mid-summer?
I expect the 54M VTL to hold, and the FLD target to not be achieved before reaching the 54M peak, although this disagrees with my cycle analysis in favor of my strong USD thesis. If the markets return to normal (i.e. staunchly bullish) this could all be invalidated and I’d return to the safety of the cycle graph.
Good phasing, USDJPY is going to be very interesting in the months ahead…
Because Japan is open to bitcoin.
Triangle. Wait to see whether it shoot up.
Dollar index basket. Yen contributes second power to Dollar. Therefore I strongly believe dollar will gain after 2024.
Euro (EUR), 57.6% weight
Japanese yen (JPY) 13.6% weight
Pound sterling (GBP), 11.9% weight
Canadian dollar (CAD), 9.1% weight
Swedish krona (SEK), 4.2% weight
Swiss franc (CHF) 3.6% weight
At least it seems possible to reach 108.00 months ahead of schedule.
I have read your comments, and it seems , while you are being critical of Hurst cycle analysis, you do not understand key points.
- While models gives you good idea about the price, time is more important. You need other tools to project price.
- There is no holy grail. Models do fail.
- Model is a road map, no more but no less. I do not understand how anyone can make profit consistently without a roadmap or model.
- Model provides time frame for the entry, but decision to entry the trade is made with the help fromvarious triggers. Volatility breakout ,volume information or fld crossover for example.
Look at the chart below, Pearson factor 0.7 is quite average, nevertheless top was correctly identified 45 weeks in advance. Dominant cycle ‘child’ channel is set to true time for the top, price could not brake the middle of the channel before collapsing and waterfalling through the FLD,s. Sharp move followed, and was stopped by the channel for the dominant ‘parent’ cycle at 2 standard deviations. A lot of this information was available as a road map 45 weeks in advance. Some of my models have Pearson rating above 0.90, British Pound is an example.
With quality factor down from 0.70 to 0.5, model needs some tuning.
Model quality factor was elevated back to above 0.9 and this is a new road map. Is it helpful? I would not leave home without it.
USDJPY should test recent lows, some time iby the middle of the February.
First let me apologize for my comment; it wasn’t of any value and yes, it smacks of frustration, or more accurately, weariness as I begin to fear my time spent with Hurst hasn’t been fruitful. I will say that of all the forecasts on this forum yours are the most appreciated (by me) since they are clear and they have a time horizon. This means I can actually tally a rough win/loss rate for your system, at least the part you think is worth sharing. That is something I can’t do with other prominent Hurstonians, including this forum’s founder. Please don’t think that I am belittling any of your content in my past comments or in what follows.
However now that we are on the subject I hope you won’t mind if I respond to your points.
Blockquote while you are being critical of Hurst cycle analysis, you do not understand key points.
Some variation of this has been a frequent reply from the sages on this forum, and while it may be true, I think I understand it well enough. What matters isn’t my understanding though, it’s the performance of those who claim to possess understanding.
In fact I am not being critical of Hurst cycle analysis I am questioning the notion that there are repeating cycles in the market - the foundations of Hurst cycle analysis.
I don’t really need to attack Hurst cycle analysis since (so far) I’ve found no practitioners who are consistently reliable. The real mystery is why it continues to garner defenders who insist that it works; but then again I suppose everyone has a different definition of success.
- I will stipulate that this is correct although I question whether any such tool exists.
- Correct, surely.
- The implication seems to be that I haven’t one, which I deny, but that’s not material to my critique so I’ll skip this.
- Yes, more degrees of freedom to narrow the scope of the individual trading rule, thus increasing its predictive value while reducing its cognitive content (Aronson).
Now I can’t comment further on the chart you’ve posted or your methods for a few reasons.
- This isn’t Hurst cycle analysis, it’s ‘Becker’s System’ or whatever you wish to call it.
- The successes don’t tell me anything about the ratio of success to failure so unless your claim is that some instruments are more ‘cyclical’ than others, what use is it to anyone but yourself?
- I have no wish to single out anyone, but really one only has to read (and evaluate and tally) the historical forecasts on this forum to see Taleb’s thesis on randomness played out on a small scale. If I discover someone who can beat a sampling error I will be sure to praise them. It’s not in my nature to be a ‘troll’ and I didn’t see myself as taking on that role here but so far a healthy dose of skepticism is the only thing of value that I have to offer because my Hurst analyses are just noise. And it appears to me, so is everyone else’s.
Now I will remain properly silent for a while until I’ve finished my research. Maybe I am ignorant and maybe I am wrong. After all I am in the minority.
Please remember when looking at forecasts, when forecast is not successful , I loose an opportunity and not the money. For example if usdjpy does not retest recent low in the time frame supported by the model I would not enter a long trade in the direction of the 45 week cycle. So there will not be a trade but it is not a loss. As I said before model is a road map it does not lead you to the trade, move to another trade. And certainly not all markets do equally well with cyclical analyses, but many do. off course it is not only Hurst analysis, but it is mainly Hurst. Believe it or not with a good money management you can make money by tossing a coin, so good and objective framework (model) helps.
I will add to this when a forecast is not successful you actually GAIN information for your phasing analysis, since the assumed analysis is wrong, the alternative has a higher probability of being right. At least thats my experience. I have sometimes been out on nailing a 80 day nominal low by a 10 or 20 day nominal cycle. Thats the risk you take with an edgeband transaction. I know its a cliche but it really is about probabilities for me. Hurst Cycles, with the help of a tried and tested mathematical foundation increase the odds more than other methods I have tried in the past. In addition they also make the most beautiful sense - which is a good sign in my book!