Rick Ackerman

With ‘mechanical’ trades, the more times a correction pounds on the green line, the less likely a bid there will turn a profit. The opposite seems to be true with rABC trades, since a second trade initiated after the first has been stopped out (often profitably) tends to do even better than the first. In this lesson, we examine this seeming paradox while also looking at a few more ‘textbook’ set-ups using both ‘mechanical’ and rABC techniques.

Just because the futures topped Friday almost exactly where we'd expected doesn't mean the rally is over.  It will be, eventually, perhaps even in our lifetime. But odds favor more upside most immediately to at least D=4413.75 (see inset) before buyers take a breather. I'm down with getting short there, but let's at least try to make a few bucks on the remaining 50 or so points to the target.  This will require close attention to the intraday charts, since there can be no true impulse legs on the daily chart when the averages are making new record highs.  To keep things in perspective, especially for hopeful permabears, the September contract could plunge to the red line (p=4216), and be none the worse for it -- be a fetching 'mechanical' buy, actually; or even to x=4118 and still look bullish. _____ UPDATE (July 13, 10:13 p.m.): A promising 'mechanical' long triggered late in the session off this pattern, but I did not sanction it because it promised a long night for bulls. This was irrespective of whether one's goal was the red line (not recommended), or just a nominal profit. True to the forecast at the time (in the chat room), the futures stopped out the intraday low before embarking on a so-far weak rally that is break-even at the moment. _______ UPDATE (July 14, 9:31 a.m.): After bottoming out in the dead of night, the September contract has miraculously rallied to the red line, producing a profit of $3600 for anyone who boarded four lots 'mechanically' yesterday afternoon at x=4359.75. I'd suggest exiting at least half here while noting there is probably more profit left in the trade, since the phony JPM/GS shakedown is spent. D=4413.75, our old friend. _______ UPDATE (Jul 15, 5:39 p.m.):  The weakness is becoming

August Gold tripped a theoretical buy signal last week when it touched the green line (1809.8). We won't rush to get long(er), but the persistence with which the future head-butted the line could be likened to a gentleman caller who rings the doorbell four or five times to announce himself. The pullbacks were shallow as well, strongly implying bulls will dominate for the next couple of weeks if not longer.  I'll suggest using p=1869.40 as a minimum upside projection for now and trading with a bullish bias, but we'll need to see a convincing punch through it before we allow ourselves to enthuse over a further push to D=1988.70. ______ UPDATE (Jul 12, 6:37 p.m. ET): The futures' pathetic struggle at the green line today reminded me that I'd resolved not to be any more bullish in my comments than is justified by the technical evidence. My earlier assertion that the so-far shallow pullback after tripping a buy signal portends a week or two of strength was overreaching. We'll continue to use 1869.40 as a target, but I'm not offering it as a done deal. In any event, the August contract would need to close for two consecutive days above x to merit a more upbeat outlook. ______ UPDATE (Jul 14, 9:44 a.m.): Gold has popped to 1831.10 this morning, high enough to break free of the green line's gravity. You can use p=1869.4o as a minimum upside target for now.

You've got to admire the pluck the futures showed last week in repelling an assault by sellers that should have pushed the August contract down to at least p=25.69.  That would have been a great place to attempt bottom-fishing, but the fact that we were denied the opportunity can and should be construed as bullish.  Assuming the upthrust that ended the week starts the new one by taking out some minor 'external' peaks, we should be able to devise some 'mechanical' set-ups for some profitable rides higher as the futures bid fair to wreck the bearish pattern shown in the inset. Zoom the rightmost abc on the hourly chart down to the 15-minute chart or so  (A=25.92 on 7/9  and at 9:00 a.m. ET) and you'll have your starter kit. This will be a high-odds trade for Sunday night-owls, since the competition, emerging from weekend lethargy, will not be looking for a buy signal quite this subtle. Here's a chart to help guide you. _____ UPDATE (Jul 12, 7:07 p.m. ET): The futures didn't dip low enough to trigger the trade, but an alert chat-room denizen flagged another that would have produced a $3000-or-more profit on four full-size contracts in a little more than two hours. Check his post at 10:19 a.m. to determine whether the opportunity would have suited you. ______ UPDATE (Jul 15, 5:55 p.m.):  Silver is in an uptrend, although you'll need sensitive equipment to detect it.  The pattern shown here, with a 27.15 target, looks very promising for trading and predicting. It already signaled a 'mechanical' entry on Wednesday that was worth a quick $6800 to  anyone who bought four lots 'mechanically' on the 'textbook' pullback to the green line.  

DaBoyz goosed shorts Friday to kick off an unmistakable lurch toward a 363.15 target that has been beckoning for several weeks. (A similarly bullish target at 365.67 had teased bulls since May but was negated by mid-June's fake breakdown.) I see no particular opportunities at the moment and note that even the obvious one, a 'mechanical' buy on a pullback to x=340.30, was denied us when DIA's engineered plunge last Thursday failed to touch the green line where we like to position 'mechanical' bids.  We should expect little more generosity on the way up, but since we know where DIA is headed, it should be fairly easy to grab short hops along the way. Stay close to the chat room or activate 'Notifications' on your account page to stay apprised.

Rick's Picks subscribers ended the week transfixed by a powerful rally in the E-Mini S&Ps whose inevitable destination was 4362.25. Why inevitable? Mainly because a chat-room ace whose trading system has been getting the big swings exactly right lately had said so the day before. If he were a pistol sharpshooter, this trick would be akin to turning a Roosevelt dime into a pinky ring at fifty paces. For not only had he chiseled the 4362.25 target in stone, he also provided the time of day when a profitable short position he'd advised earlier was to be exited and reversed for a further gain of as much as $3000 per contract.  You'd have to have been there to believe all of this, but even allowing for a little hyperbole, the feat handily refutes 'fundamentalists' who think technical analysis is voodoo. Fools Well Equipped Surprising as it may seem, however, the ability to predict trend and target with seemingly uncanny precision does not guarantee easy profits.  On the contrary, the opposite sometimes obtains, since the violent countertrend swings that invariably punctuate rallies tend to shake the confidence of even the most fervent believers.  In technical terms, it is a matter of valleys exceeding peaks as a stock makes it way higher. Thus does each $3 leap beget a pullback of $2 or more, subjecting the trader to at least $2 of risk for each new $1 of profit gained at the next high. Since no prudent system for managing risk can survive this rollercoaster ride, it is mostly fools who get rich, at least for a while, staying with spectacular rallies. Experienced traders understand that corrections tend to be as vicious as trends are steep, a fact that impels them to take partial profits on the upswings.  One can always play

I've been tracking this heap because it once had a following, but the portfolio monkeys long ago moved on to more lucrative, invented themes, jettisoning humble 'value' for lunatic growthies that are easier to expand to a horizon set at infinity.  Not that there was ever much real value in the small-caps, only that they were less absurdly priced than the FAANGs. I'll keep IWM on the home page nonetheless but leave it to some sharp-eyed subscriber to wake me when opportunity knocks. The 237.72 target is still valid, by the way, and I wouldn't mind shorting there if the opportunity should arise, but we should have no illusions that this will happen soon. ______ UPDATE (Jul 13, 10:36 p.m. ET): The 215/220/225 butterfly spread I recommended on June 9 has nearly quadrupled in price, so it's time to exit if you haven't already. A subscriber reported he was in $ 0.35 and out today for 1.26.  Any others? ______ UPDATE (Jul 31, 4:35 p.m.): I am leaving this glue horse on the list as a placeholder, pending the day when the portfolio chimps who made it their absolutely favoritest flavor between March 2020 and February of this year return it to fashion. _______ UPDATE (Aug 5, 11:19 p.m.): A rising tide lifts all boats, as the saying goes, so don't be surprised if an explosive rally in QQQ that looks imminent hoists this garbage barge's gunnel above the water line. ______ UPDATE (Aug 14): The garbage barge has gone nowhere, other than gratuitously up and down to annoy everyone. IWM's behavior shows how DaBoyz are in complete control, owing in no small part to an almost complete absence of sellers. Although institutional demand for Russell 2000 stocks is effectively at zero and has been since March, it still doesn't

Friday's wild-eyed thrust looked well capable of propelling this MIRV to the 368.70 target shown. This is notwithstanding QQQ's trouble getting airborne after its initial push past the midpoint pivot at 333.09 back in March. Once it finally got its footing with a return to the green line, DaBoyz apparently decided there would be no more deciding until new, Olympian heights were achieved. The relevant pattern is too obvious to the droolers of the trading world to offer an opportune place for us to get short, although there is probably close to zero chance that a tradeable top will NOT occur close to the blue 'D' line. It's a matter of how long it takes for a decent pullback to occur, and my hunch is that it will take more time (and patience) than any of us is willing to devote to the task.  There is one more possibility we shouldn't overlook: Shorting via an rABC pattern, with 'c' pegged at around 359.80. That's the arithmetical middle of the void between p and p2, and therefore a good place to look for a downturn from within the 'discomfort zone' that has become the focus of our trades. The point 'a' high I prefer for anchoring  the pattern before 'c' occurs lies at 324.33, a peak recorded on March 2.  For newcomers, that implies the short would be triggered by a downturn of exactly 6.71 points from somewhere very near 359.80. Exactly how near?  That's a question that will be easier to answer when we've seen how this fusion reactor trades on Monday. ______ UPDATE (Jul 10): There's still no doubt about where this steroid-addled stallion is going. But check option prices going back six months if you need to be convinced that not a dime was made by anyone who

Six weeks of flouncing around have done little to burnish bitcoin's myth, let alone stoke cryptomania. Its deep-pocketed sponsors surely realize that there is too much supply between here and $60,000 to attempt a half-hearted short-squeeze that would probaly fail, creating yet another troublesome layer of supply.  Better to bide their time for as long necessary, waiting until the environment is right to suck in enough rubes at lower levels to trigger a buying panic. That's why I think BRTI will fall below $30k and stay there for a while before we see the mania revive. Regardless of what I think, if a wilding-spree-from-nowhere should push this hoax above the 42,577 'external' peak  recorded on May 20, that would likely suffice to bring back the crazies in droves. ______ UPDATE (Jul 9, 5:11 p.m.): Make that seven weeks of flouncing around. Zzzzzzzzz.