USD/CAD Rises as Canada Trade Shock Hits the LoonieUSD/CAD rose half of one percent on Monday as the Canadian Dollar came under pressure after U.S.-Canada trade negotiations broke down. Markets reacted to the renewed tariff fight, with the U.S. imposing 50% tariffs on a range of Canadian goods and Canada preparing a dollar-for-dollar response. That hit the Canadian Dollar directly because it raises growth risk, threatens export demand, and adds a fresh political premium to Canadian assets. Even though the broader U.S. Dollar was not especially clean today, it outperformed the Canadian Dollar as trade risk became the dominant driver.
Oil made the move worse. Crude prices fell around 2% as markets waited for new U.S. sanctions on Iran, stripping away the usual commodity support Canada gets when energy markets are firm. For the BOC, this is a bad mix: tariffs threaten growth, oil weakness hurts the terms-of-trade story, and inflation risk is still complicated by trade policy. The central bank has room to stay patient, but the Canadian Dollar does not get much support from a patient BOC when the U.S. side still has firmer rate expectations and Canada is absorbing a direct trade shock.
USD/CAD is bouncing, but the chart has not repaired yet. The pair flushed hard from the late-June high above 1.4200, broke below the moving-average stack, and sliced through the prior support zone around 1.3920-1.3970. That zone is now the key resistance band. Today’s move back toward 1.3825 is a relief rally from oversold conditions, not a confirmed trend reversal.
The short-term damage is still visible. The 1-week and 1-month EMAs (exponential moving averages) are sloping lower, price is below the 50-day EMA, and the 1.3920-1.3970 shelf sits directly overhead. MACD remains negative, which says downside momentum has not fully unwound. Slow Stochastics are the one near-term bullish input: they are turning up from oversold territory, so the Canadian Dollar short squeeze has paused and the U.S. Dollar can bounce for a few sessions. But until USD/CAD reclaims the broken support zone, the move looks corrective. WTI - Inverse Head and Shoulders to 100Crude oil could be basing out in the form of an inverse head and shoulders.
And previous times at critical areas, whenever the Stoch RSI (4H) is oversold or overbought, there tends to be a reversal.
We're now forming a 4H oversold reaction at a broken multi-month trendline.
That, plus, we're retesting the green band (4h-50 EMA, 1 standard deviation), which currently signals a local uptrend and should act as support.
If price breaks the 87.84 neckline and holds above 85.95, oil is technically positioned for upside.
If price does not follow through and is accepted back below the trendline, then I would consider this a failed breakout.
Please keep in mind that: Oil is extremely sensitive to geopolitical developments in Hormuz, talks with Iran, tariffs, or even sanctions.
So this idea should be viewed as more of price confirmation of whichever catalyst ultimately breaks oil in either direction.
- Yang 
Long
Intel Might Be Sputtering After Big RunIntel has enjoyed a big surge in the last year, but now some traders may think it’s sputtering.
The first pattern on today’s chart is the July 22 high of $106.85. The chipmaker stalled at that level on August 13, which may suggest resistance has formed below its recent peak.
Second, the weakness occurs as the 50-day simple moving average turns lower. That may indicate that the intermediate-term trend has turned bearish.
Third, the 8-day exponential moving average (EMA) is under the 21-day EMA. MACD is also falling. That may reflect short-term bearishness.
Next, the stock gapped higher on April 24. Could traders look for a test of that price zone?
Finally, INTC is an active underlier in the options market. (Its average daily volume of 844,000 contracts ranks sixth in the S&P 500.) That could help traders take positions with calls and puts.
TradeStation has, for decades, advanced the trading industry, providing access to stocks, options and futures. If you're born to trade, we could be for you. Learn more here about TradingView’s Broker of the Year!
Past performance, whether actual or indicated by historical tests of strategies, is no guarantee of future performance or success. There is a possibility that you may sustain a loss equal to or greater than your entire investment regardless of which asset class you trade (equities, options or futures); therefore, you should not invest or risk money that you cannot afford to lose. Online trading is not suitable for all investors. View the document titled Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options at www.TradeStation.com . Before trading any asset class, customers must read the relevant risk disclosure statements on www.TradeStation.com . System access and trade placement and execution may be delayed or fail due to market volatility and volume, quote delays, system and software errors, Internet traffic, outages and other factors.
Securities and futures trading is offered to self-directed customers by TradeStation Securities, Inc., a broker-dealer registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and a futures commission merchant licensed with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission). TradeStation Securities is a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the National Futures Association, and a number of exchanges.
Options trading is not suitable for all investors. Your TradeStation Securities’ account application to trade options will be considered and approved or disapproved based on all relevant factors, including your trading experience. See www.TradeStation.com . Visit www.TradeStation.com for full details on the costs and fees associated with options.
Margin trading involves risks, and it is important that you fully understand those risks before trading on margin. The Margin Disclosure Statement outlines many of those risks, including that you can lose more funds than you deposit in your margin account; your brokerage firm can force the sale of securities in your account; your brokerage firm can sell your securities without contacting you; and you are not entitled to an extension of time on a margin call. Review the Margin Disclosure Statement at www.TradeStation.com .
TradeStation Securities, Inc. and TradeStation Technologies, Inc. are each wholly owned subsidiaries of TradeStation Group, Inc., both operating, and providing products and services, under the TradeStation brand and trademark. When applying for, or purchasing, accounts, subscriptions, products and services, it is important that you know which company you will be dealing with. Visit www.TradeStation.com for further important information explaining what this means. 
Long
Long
Long
Long
Long
Long
Long
Long
Long
Long 
Long
So goes IONQ, so goes quantumIt's still a difficult trading environment due to macro factors like yields, rates, oil prices, etc. The war in Iran presents geopolitical risk which is doing a lot of the driving of those macro factors.
But opportunities still exist, and if we get a reprieve - for instance if US wins the war in Iran for the 11th time - equities may get a lift.
On the theme of quantum computing itself: IonQ makes hardware and software for quantum but is a heavyweight holding within the theme, so if IonQ makes a move then the sector should see a pickup generally. As of right now though, the theme has logged three consecutive weeks improving in my sector rotation dashboard. This tool tracks themes are performing relative to index benchmarks.
Starting with technicals : IONQ is in a triangle outlined by the blue lines in the chart. The lower line anchors to lows in March of 2025 (not pictured here). The upper line acts differently: when IONQ hit the June high this summer, it dropped around 23% in two days. Rather than anchor to that drastic drop, I anchor to the post-drop period. And what we see here is that it bounced off of support in late July and has rallied ~40%. Price is still trapped inside, and could stay there longer, but a breakout that clears this rally-high at 48 could really get this moving and put an end to the lower highs in the triangle.
We're now at a really interesting spot where all the moving averages have converged: short-term trends from 10sma and 21ema are meeting intermediate 50sma and long term 200sma. This week was the first backtest to the short-term trend lines, and price responded favorably. If price breaks out from the 50- and 200- now, then intermediate and longer term trends begin to shape up. I've seen plenty lately where price breaks these intermediate and long term lines, then pulls back to test them, and then goes. (This is also what's happening now with short-term trends). There's a lot going on in here.
On the weekly chart, the MACD histogram is approaching zero from negative, and positive momentum from price is reflected here. The MACD line crossing the signal line is not far off if price continues its upward trajectory, a bullish cross that shows short-term momentum is accelerating against recent baseline.
IONQ remains below both the daily and weekly ichimoku cloud model, and that places major resistance around 52 and then 55.30. Gives me something to track going forward if I enter.
A lot of entry options for me: Watch for price breaking out from the cloud and pulling away from the moving averages. There is also the possibility of entering here, now, and placing stop below recent low (yesterday) of 40.33. This is about $3.40 per share of risk, not great, but possible with smaller risk. Another option, possibly safest in this atmosphere, is to let the breakout prove itself by clearing that ~48 area and then try to buy close to the 10sma or 21ema when they catch up. Could justify any one of these, but I am going to just wait for now, but watch closely.
Long
Trend Consensus Through Adaptive Moving Average LayeringThe Adaptive Moving-Average Ribbon: A Framework for Reading Trend Structure and Momentum Confluence
● 📜 Conceptual Origin
- The intellectual lineage of the moving-average ribbon traces back to the earliest attempts by technical analysts to resolve the central tension in trend-following mathematics: the trade-off between responsiveness and stability. A single moving average, regardless of its construction, is forced to compromise between reacting quickly to new price information and filtering out the noise that characterizes short-term fluctuations. Analysts working through the mid-twentieth century recognized that no single smoothing length could satisfy both objectives simultaneously, which gave rise to the dual-average crossover, and eventually to the layered, multi-length ribbon structure that treats trend identification as a spectrum rather than a binary state.
- The ribbon concept itself owes an intellectual debt to the work of technicians who formalized the idea of grouping multiple moving averages into a single visual construct representing the aggregate behavior of different participant cohorts. The premise is that shorter-period averages approximate the decision horizon of tactically-minded participants, while longer-period averages approximate the horizon of structurally-minded capital, and the degree of separation or compression between these groups becomes a proxy for consensus or disagreement about the prevailing direction of price.
- A parallel and equally important lineage comes from the adaptive-filtering school of technical thought, which challenged the assumption that a smoothing period should remain fixed at all. Researchers exploring efficiency ratios, cybernetic signal processing, and momentum-congruence weighting argued that a moving average's effective lookback should contract during periods of directional conviction and expand during periods of choppiness or indecision. This adaptive philosophy reframes the moving average not as a static parameter chosen by the analyst, but as a self-adjusting function of the market's own behavior, which is the conceptual foundation underpinning any ribbon that modulates its own responsiveness based on a measured probability of trend continuation.
● 📊 Narrative Technical Mechanics
• Ribbon Construction and the Fan Effect
- The underlying architecture is built by staggering a series of moving averages across a graduated sequence of lookback lengths, beginning with a comparatively short base period and stepping outward at fixed intervals until a full spectrum of intermediate views is achieved. When plotted together, these lines behave as a single coherent ribbon rather than as isolated series, and the shape of that ribbon becomes the primary object of analysis.
- During periods of directional conviction, the individual bands compress into close proximity and travel in visible parallel alignment, a configuration commonly described as a fan or a coil that has fully unwound in one direction. During periods of consolidation or transition, the same bands interweave, cross one another repeatedly, and lose their orderly separation, producing a visually tangled midsection that reflects genuine disagreement among the differing timeframes represented within the ribbon.
- The vertical distance separating the fastest and slowest bands, often referred to informally as the spread, functions as an unscaled proxy for trend intensity. A widening spread suggests that shorter-horizon price behavior is decisively outrunning longer-horizon price behavior, which historically correlates with expansion phases, while a narrowing spread suggests convergence toward equilibrium, which historically precedes either consolidation or a reversal of the prevailing bias.
• Adaptive Length Modulation
- Rather than holding every band's lookback constant, a more sophisticated implementation of this framework allows the smoothing length itself to breathe in response to a measured estimate of trend persistence. This estimate is typically derived from a weighted comparison of recent momentum readings across two related oscillator horizons, where historical instances exhibiting similar momentum congruence are used to infer the probability that the current directional impulse will continue rather than mean-revert.
- When that probability estimate leans toward continuation, the effective lookback of the averaging function contracts toward its shorter boundary, allowing the ribbon to track price with reduced lag. When the estimate leans toward exhaustion or indecision, the lookback expands toward its longer boundary, deliberately sacrificing responsiveness in exchange for additional noise suppression. This dynamic behavior distinguishes an adaptive ribbon from a purely static one, because the filter itself is conditioned on the market's own momentum history rather than on a single fixed parameter chosen in advance.
• Regime-Change and Confirmation Signals
- Two conceptually distinct classes of signal typically emerge from a ribbon of this kind. The first is a structural flip, which occurs when the fastest band crosses from one side of the slowest band to the other, marking a change in the ribbon's aggregate bias and, by extension, a hypothesized change in the balance of control between short-horizon and long-horizon participants.
- The second is a tactical cross, which occurs when price itself crosses through the fastest band without necessarily implying a change in the broader ribbon bias. This distinction matters because a structural flip represents a slower-forming, higher-conviction regime shift, whereas a tactical cross represents a faster-forming, lower-conviction re-engagement with an already-established trend, and conflating the two risks producing a misleading sense of signal frequency or reliability.
• Confluence Filtering
- Because a ribbon constructed purely from price averages is inherently reactive to price alone, a more disciplined analytical approach layers additional, independent evidence on top of the raw crossover logic before treating any signal as actionable. Directional-movement or trend-strength measures are commonly used to require a minimum threshold of underlying conviction, filtering out flips that occur while the broader market is directionless.
- A higher-timeframe bias check adds a second, independent layer of confluence, requiring that a signal generated on the working timeframe agree with the dominant structural bias observed on a slower timeframe, which reduces the likelihood of trading against the prevailing macro-structure of the instrument. A participation or volume-based filter adds a third layer, requiring that the transaction activity accompanying a signal exceed its recent historical average, on the reasoning that structural shifts accompanied by elevated participation carry more informational weight than those occurring on thin, indecisive volume.
● 🏛️ Institutional vs Retail Perspective
- Institutional desks that engage with ribbon-based frameworks tend to treat the visual fan not as a signal generator in isolation, but as a compact summary of multi-horizon consensus that can be cross-referenced against order-flow, liquidity positioning, and portfolio-level exposure constraints. For a desk managing risk across dozens of instruments simultaneously, the ribbon's principal value lies in its ability to communicate, at a glance, whether a given instrument's short-term and long-term participant cohorts are aligned or in conflict, which informs sizing and hedging decisions rather than dictating outright entries.
- Retail participants, by contrast, are more prone to treating individual crossovers as standalone trade triggers, extracting the signal from its broader structural context. This tendency is understandable given the visual clarity of a flip event, but it detaches the signal from the confluence conditions, such as trend strength, higher-timeframe agreement, and participation, that institutional desks typically require before assigning any weight to the same event. The result is a structural asymmetry in how the same visual information is consumed: institutional desks use the ribbon as one input among many within a broader risk framework, while retail participants are more susceptible to using it as a complete decision system on its own.
- This asymmetry is not a reflection of the framework's inherent validity so much as a reflection of differing risk infrastructure. A participant with access to portfolio-level hedging, execution algorithms, and deep historical performance attribution can afford to treat a ribbon signal as probabilistic evidence to be weighed, whereas a participant trading a single position with limited capital is more likely to experience each signal as a binary, high-stakes event, which materially changes how the same tool is psychologically and operationally deployed.
● ⚙️ Strategic Variance Across Market Regimes
• Trending Conditions
- In a well-established trending regime, the ribbon behaves closest to its conceptual ideal. The bands maintain clean separation, the adaptive lookback contracts to track price with reduced lag, and structural flips occur infrequently, typically only at genuine inflection points rather than as a product of noise. Confluence filters tend to remain satisfied for extended stretches, since trend strength measures stay elevated and higher-timeframe bias remains aligned with the working timeframe.
• Ranging Conditions
- In a ranging or sideways regime, the same mechanics that make the ribbon effective in trending conditions become a liability. The bands repeatedly interweave, the adaptive lookback oscillates between its shorter and longer boundaries without settling into a stable regime, and structural flips become materially more frequent, often reversing within a handful of bars. This is precisely the environment in which confluence filtering earns its analytical keep, since trend-strength thresholds are far more likely to remain unmet, suppressing a meaningful share of the false signals that would otherwise be generated.
• High-Volatility Conditions
- In high-volatility regimes, particularly those driven by abrupt liquidity shocks or macro-event repricing, the ribbon's adaptive length modulation is tested most severely. Extreme momentum readings can push the estimated continuation probability toward either boundary very quickly, causing the effective lookback to contract sharply and increasing the framework's sensitivity to whipsaw. Participation-based filtering becomes especially relevant in this regime, since elevated volatility is frequently, though not always, accompanied by elevated transaction activity, and distinguishing genuine institutional repositioning from thin, erratic price action is central to avoiding signal degradation during these episodes.
● 🧠 Psychological Architecture
- Engaging with a multi-band visual framework introduces a specific cognitive hazard: the richness of the visual information can create an illusion of certainty that is not supported by the underlying statistical reality of any single signal. A clean, well-separated fan is visually persuasive, and traders are prone to attributing higher confidence to a signal simply because it is easy to see, rather than because it has been validated against the confluence conditions the framework was designed to require.
- Loss aversion compounds this hazard in ranging regimes, where the frequency of structural flips tends to rise. A participant who has been stopped out by a series of whipsaw reversals is prone to either abandoning the framework prematurely, right before a genuine trending regime reasserts itself, or overcorrecting by tightening discretionary filters so aggressively that genuine signals are missed. Both responses stem from the same underlying difficulty: the human tendency to extrapolate a short run of unfavorable outcomes into a permanent judgment about a framework's validity, when in fact regime-dependent performance variance is an expected and unavoidable property of any trend-following construct.
- Confirmation bias presents a further, subtler challenge. Because the ribbon offers multiple visual cues, spread width, band color, fill gradient, and crossover geometry, a participant who has already formed a directional opinion can selectively emphasize whichever cue supports that opinion while discounting the others. Disciplined use of the framework requires pre-committing to a fixed hierarchy of confirmation criteria before a trade idea forms, rather than searching the ribbon after the fact for evidence that supports a conclusion already reached.
● 🎲 Risk and Probability Philosophy
- Any trend-identification framework of this kind should be understood through a probabilistic lens rather than a deterministic one. A structural flip does not represent a certainty of continued directional movement; it represents a shift in the estimated balance of probabilities based on the historical behavior of comparable momentum configurations, and that estimate carries an inherent margin of error that widens considerably during regime transitions.
- Position sizing, in this context, should be calibrated to the confidence embedded in the confluence stack rather than treated as uniform across every signal. A flip that satisfies trend-strength, higher-timeframe, and participation confirmation simultaneously represents a materially different risk profile than a flip occurring in isolation, and treating both with identical size ignores the very probabilistic information the framework was built to surface.
- Asymmetric risk-to-reward construction remains essential regardless of how the entry signal itself is generated. Because ranging regimes will inevitably produce a higher density of false signals, sound risk architecture accepts a lower win rate as a structural cost of participating in trending regimes, provided that the average magnitude of favorable outcomes meaningfully exceeds the average magnitude of unfavorable ones. Sample size discipline also matters a great deal here: any conclusion drawn about the framework's edge should be based on a sufficiently large and regime-diverse set of historical instances, since a small sample drawn exclusively from a single trending episode will systematically overstate the framework's reliability.
Based on the concepts previously discussed, the Multi-MA Trend Ribbon indicator was developed to reflect the academic and technical principles outlined in this article.
● ⚠️ Risk Disclaimer
- The content of this article is provided for educational and conceptual purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Trend-identification and moving-average-based frameworks are inherently probabilistic and regime-dependent; past behavior of any technical construct does not guarantee similar behavior in the future, and all forms of trading and speculation in financial markets carry a material risk of loss. Readers should conduct their own independent research, consider their personal risk tolerance and financial circumstances, and consult a qualified financial professional before making any trading or investment decision. 
Education
Bitcoin news: BTC reclaims $74,000 as ETFs see $5.3B volumeBitcoin’s latest rally has been backed by a sharp increase in institutional activity. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded more than $5.3 billion in trading volume as BTC reclaimed $74,000 for the first time in 86 days.
BlackRock’s IBIT dominated activity with $4.44 billion in volume. Fidelity’s FBTC came next at $438 million and Grayscale at $208.8 million. Meanwhile, Bitwise, ARK Invest, VanEck, Morgan Stanley, Franklin Templeton, Invesco, Valkyrie, WisdomTree and Hashdex accounted for the remaining volume as per data.
$517M Flows as Bitcoin Jumps 17%
U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs also attracted $517.19 million in net inflows, their strongest inflow day since May 4. Eight of the 12 funds recorded positive flows. BlackRock’s IBIT led with $284.7 million, followed by ARK and 21Shares’ ARKB at $77.7 million. Fidelity’s FBTC came next at $62.4 million.
The ETF activity came as Bitcoin surged roughly 17% in two days. It added around $11,000 and more than $220 billion to its market capitalization.
The rally has also triggered a major short squeeze. More than $3.6 billion in short positions have been liquidated over the past 72 hours, including $2.75 billion in Bitcoin shorts on Wednesday. Over the following 24 hours, another $783.2 million in Bitcoin positions were liquidated. Of this, $747.7 million came from shorts, according to CoinGlass data.
What Fueled this Rally?
The rally followed the U.S. Treasury Department’s decision to at least double liquidity-support buyback operations for longer-dated nominal coupon securities. This applies in the 10- to 30-year segment.
Additional catalysts included the SEC’s latest crypto proposal. There was also a White House meeting between President Donald Trump and prominent crypto executives, helping trigger the unexpected move higher.
McGlone Warns Rally Could Fade
Despite the surge, Bloomberg’s Mike McGlone remains bearish. He described the move as “a bounce within the purge”, arguing that August can produce short squeezes even during a broader bear market.
McGlone criticized Bitcoin’s volatility and correlation with stocks, saying institutional investors face unfavorable risk-reward characteristics. He also argued that the rapid expansion of the wider crypto market has created excessive supply. Consequently, he expects Bitcoin to potentially roll over by year-end.
While he supports blockchain technology, McGlone argues Bitcoin’s original peer-to-peer cash use case has weakened. This comes with the emergence of crypto-dollar alternatives. 
Long
Long
Long 
Another $1.2B in Short Liquidations. How Long Can the Fuel Last?Hi traders! ☀️🌴🧠
In yesterday’s post, I mentioned:
“Considering the amount of time spent accumulating within the 60–65K range and the way we broke through 65K, I expect the move to continue towards 78K.”
We have now hit both intermediate targets — 73.7K✅ and 76K✅ — as well as the main target at 78K✅✅
What’s next?
Short liquidations are still continuing, and right now they are one of the main drivers behind BTC’s move.
🔴 Around $1.2–1.25B in crypto positions have been liquidated over the last 24 hours.
🔴 Approximately $1.05–1.06B of those were shorts, meaning around 85% of all liquidations came from short positions.
🔴 Over the last two days, short liquidations have already reached roughly $3.8B.
🔴 And this is still an ongoing process — just yesterday I mentioned almost $3B in liquidated short positions.
🦬🚀🚀🚀The rally itself is extremely strong and confident. However, the current parabolic shape of the move is not a healthy structure that can be easily analyzed from a technical perspective. At this stage, it becomes much harder to define meaningful levels and reliable targets.
Right now, it’s much more important to watch how price behaves once the majority of shorts have been wiped out 🐻🔪⚰️🐻⚰️⚰️
If BTC can continue holding the $76–78K area and keep moving higher without the fuel of massive liquidations, that would be a much healthier signal for a continuation towards the next major horizontal level at $82.5K+.
At the same time, I don’t think it makes sense to tie the activation of a bearish scenario to the loss of any specific horizontal level right now. We’ve seen many times how Bitcoin can sell off just as aggressively after these kinds of pumps as it rallies.
I’m not going to set any new targets for this upside move for now. I’m going to stay on the sidelines and hope to see some consolidation.
It’s very important for the bulls to build a solid base around the current levels before attempting another leg higher and turning this parabolic move into a more technically structured uptrend 🛡️
Peace! 🌄
⚠️ Disclaimer:
All information shared on this channel is for educational and informational purposes only and is not investment advice. The author is not responsible for your trading decisions. Always manage your risk and make decisions independently.
DATAPATTNS is showing a bullish move at an ascending channelNSE:DATAPATTNS has been in a sustained bullish trend for several months and has recently found support at the lower boundary of its ascending channel on the daily timeframe , reinforcing the likelihood of continued upward momentum.
Additionally, the sectoral index , NSE:NIFTY_IND_DEFENCE , has retested its all-time-high with a morning star pattern , providing further confirmation of relative strength among the sectors and supporting the top-down approach.
The Daily RSI(14) at 47.51 is also indicating a bullish reversal signaling a potential formation of a higher low with a fresh leg up . The stock has currently tested its 50-day EMA with a hammer and a support at its previous broken resistance (Change in polarity) reinforcing the bullish setup.
With a move above 4355 , NSE:DATAPATTNS could potentially move towards 4660. Consider entering above the high of the hammer with a stoploss at 3800 on a daily closing basis.
Key Support Levels: 4230,4140,3800.
Targets: 4660,4930.5
Disclaimer:
Investments in the securities market are subject to market risks, read all related documents carefully before investing. Securities quoted here are exemplary, not recommendatory. I am not a SEBI registered financial advisor, please consult your financial advisor before investing. Please note that I do not guarantee any assured returns for the securities quoted here.
Stay updated with my latest trading ideas and market analysis by following me on TradingView.
Hari Narayan N
Chartered Market Technician (CMT – All 3 Levels Cleared)
Long
Long 
