Whenever I prepare an idea to publish, well... I don't prepare.
As you may already have realized, my "blog" is not about trading / investment analysis. It is an attempt of mine to describe the indescribable. To smell the un-smellable (like a Greek song said).
My first ideas were an attempt of mine to reach out to others to spark conversation.I wasn't trying to give out any meaningful insight, because I had none. Now I think I have information to share, but Socrates would not agree with me, he is certain that he knows nothing. Since I cannot / don't want to be like Socrates, I will be like Diogenes the Cynic, I like him more... His views on philosophy and the world have grown on me.
And speaking of grown...
Apple has grown. From a seed of a Macintosh in a wooden box, into to a computer that would destroy Orwell's 1984, and then to a pair of smart glasses that would become the dystopia they tried to avoid.
Traders have also grown, most only in their age and appetite. The minds stood still.
And prices have grown higher and higher, but lighter than ever before.
Many analysts develop indicators in reverse. They want profit and shape indicators in a way to satisfy this growing appetite. The appetite of the man who isn't satisfied with the few, cannot be satisfied with the many. I have done this myself in the past.
There are two ways this chart is misleading.
First: Price on top of Bollinger Band can be interpreted as a "strong push", and at the same time an "overextended price". The indicator by itself is not misleading. It is us who don't analyze it properly.
Second: While this indicator calculates a statistical deviation (a pure mathematical idea), it fails in the act. Statistical deviation of trending prices cannot be calculated with ordinary moving averages. Don't listen to me, listen to the scientists from whom I found this, research it yourselves. A secondary problem is log scale.
A portion of traders, whom I call gamblers have grown light minded, it seems. They don't want prices to
And just like gamblers, lighter my charts have apparently become. I simply try to shed some light into the darkness of technological / artificially untelligent societies.
Since my publications of indicators have been buried in the darkness, now it is time for them to shine, in simple terms.
And so, fixing analysis needs many steps. I show again the original statistical band:
Our data lives in a log-scaled world of increasing proportions, not increasing amounts. So, we re-shape our/Bollinger's mathematics to survive in this wild world of massive numbers. We then conclude to the log-scaled band:
One of the major problems however has not been fixed. Mathematicians dictate that classical moving averages don't apply in "Time Series Data" i.e. price history. Statistics don't work in trending data.
To fix this issue I have constructed a simplified MA model and applied it in multi-timeframe price data using PineScript.
The MA-Model is not a moving average (it doesn't describe an average price). It is instead one of the infinite trend-nullifying lines, from the base of which statistics are calculated. The band is the same 2-sigma area like the classic Bollinger.
What is the conclusion of this chaotic story, I hear you say...
It is either too simple or too complex.
The simple explanation is that history repeats itself.
Going back to 1998, we see the following:
Price divergences have become apparent from statistics. On the first arrow of each one, price reaches a 2-sigma deviation. On the second arrow of each divergence, price fails to make a second deviation jump, price instead returns to mean.
It is as if prices move in two steps. First they define a trend from a 2-sigma event (either bullish / bearish), then they follow up on the trend, while reverting to mean.
Now in 2025, in a larger timeframe, Apple seems to crave bitter sweets.
The 1998-2000 bubble is dwarfed from this massive chart.
Apple has done it. From the bottom of the world and a sub 1% market share, to conquer the world. It is the most loved brand. Sells the most popular smartphone. Designs the most powerful chips. Shapes future trends. And ironically, this very idea is typed on a modern Apple device.
You have reached the top, when everyone is sure that you will live forever.
And I mean everyone, including me who hypocritically votes against them.
The drop will come when a single person changes their mind.
Be wise. Be safe. Be aware.
-Breen
P.S. I will follow up this idea with some interesting charts on SPX in the following days.
As you may already have realized, my "blog" is not about trading / investment analysis. It is an attempt of mine to describe the indescribable. To smell the un-smellable (like a Greek song said).
My first ideas were an attempt of mine to reach out to others to spark conversation.I wasn't trying to give out any meaningful insight, because I had none. Now I think I have information to share, but Socrates would not agree with me, he is certain that he knows nothing. Since I cannot / don't want to be like Socrates, I will be like Diogenes the Cynic, I like him more... His views on philosophy and the world have grown on me.
And speaking of grown...
Apple has grown. From a seed of a Macintosh in a wooden box, into to a computer that would destroy Orwell's 1984, and then to a pair of smart glasses that would become the dystopia they tried to avoid.
Traders have also grown, most only in their age and appetite. The minds stood still.
And prices have grown higher and higher, but lighter than ever before.
Many analysts develop indicators in reverse. They want profit and shape indicators in a way to satisfy this growing appetite. The appetite of the man who isn't satisfied with the few, cannot be satisfied with the many. I have done this myself in the past.
There are two ways this chart is misleading.
First: Price on top of Bollinger Band can be interpreted as a "strong push", and at the same time an "overextended price". The indicator by itself is not misleading. It is us who don't analyze it properly.
Second: While this indicator calculates a statistical deviation (a pure mathematical idea), it fails in the act. Statistical deviation of trending prices cannot be calculated with ordinary moving averages. Don't listen to me, listen to the scientists from whom I found this, research it yourselves. A secondary problem is log scale.
A portion of traders, whom I call gamblers have grown light minded, it seems. They don't want prices to
... slide backward into oblivion, just as (we / they) have finally begun to see the light.
And just like gamblers, lighter my charts have apparently become. I simply try to shed some light into the darkness of technological / artificially untelligent societies.
Since my publications of indicators have been buried in the darkness, now it is time for them to shine, in simple terms.
And so, fixing analysis needs many steps. I show again the original statistical band:
Our data lives in a log-scaled world of increasing proportions, not increasing amounts. So, we re-shape our/Bollinger's mathematics to survive in this wild world of massive numbers. We then conclude to the log-scaled band:
One of the major problems however has not been fixed. Mathematicians dictate that classical moving averages don't apply in "Time Series Data" i.e. price history. Statistics don't work in trending data.
To fix this issue I have constructed a simplified MA model and applied it in multi-timeframe price data using PineScript.
The MA-Model is not a moving average (it doesn't describe an average price). It is instead one of the infinite trend-nullifying lines, from the base of which statistics are calculated. The band is the same 2-sigma area like the classic Bollinger.
What is the conclusion of this chaotic story, I hear you say...
It is either too simple or too complex.
The simple explanation is that history repeats itself.
Going back to 1998, we see the following:
Price divergences have become apparent from statistics. On the first arrow of each one, price reaches a 2-sigma deviation. On the second arrow of each divergence, price fails to make a second deviation jump, price instead returns to mean.
It is as if prices move in two steps. First they define a trend from a 2-sigma event (either bullish / bearish), then they follow up on the trend, while reverting to mean.
Now in 2025, in a larger timeframe, Apple seems to crave bitter sweets.
The 1998-2000 bubble is dwarfed from this massive chart.
Apple has done it. From the bottom of the world and a sub 1% market share, to conquer the world. It is the most loved brand. Sells the most popular smartphone. Designs the most powerful chips. Shapes future trends. And ironically, this very idea is typed on a modern Apple device.
You have reached the top, when everyone is sure that you will live forever.
And I mean everyone, including me who hypocritically votes against them.
The drop will come when a single person changes their mind.
Be wise. Be safe. Be aware.
-Breen
P.S. I will follow up this idea with some interesting charts on SPX in the following days.
ملاحظة
I promised SPY. It will have to wait.Here is some DXY...
A micro accumulation is shaping in DXY.
This accumulation becomes a part of a much larger distribution in macro.
And a divergence is apparent. Price movement was occurring higher than the underlying trend. Price was overpriced.
ملاحظة
Diesel fuel perma bull?Learn from the past...
Is it too obvious to be real? Or is reality simpler than we think?
ملاحظة
I have some interesting insight into crops. Info like this is sometimes too precious to share that easily...ملاحظة
NVDA prints a massive no-go.ملاحظة
ملاحظة
ملاحظة
It really doesn't get any simpler. Energy has already made its move.ملاحظة
Watch your head......and shoulders.
ملاحظة
without_worries, It has been a long time since I have posted. I try to gain knowledge in life. Maybe in the future I could apply what I have learned in new ways to interpret stock charts.I have been thinking... at what point our opinions become self fulfilling?
SPX is diverging. This means that it has slowed down, not that it will slow down.
Maybe we need more speed... Maybe interest in stocks and bitcoin has faded. No more divergence from trend. Maybe the massive optimizations in modern finance will result in investment-auto-pilot. Until the pilot short-circuits....
ملاحظة
Too many notes...
إخلاء المسؤولية
لا يُقصد بالمعلومات والمنشورات أن تكون، أو تشكل، أي نصيحة مالية أو استثمارية أو تجارية أو أنواع أخرى من النصائح أو التوصيات المقدمة أو المعتمدة من TradingView. اقرأ المزيد في شروط الاستخدام.
إخلاء المسؤولية
لا يُقصد بالمعلومات والمنشورات أن تكون، أو تشكل، أي نصيحة مالية أو استثمارية أو تجارية أو أنواع أخرى من النصائح أو التوصيات المقدمة أو المعتمدة من TradingView. اقرأ المزيد في شروط الاستخدام.