In-depth trading ideas

Discover detailed market analysis from traders. See how others approach this instrument, compare different strategies, and discover perspectives that can shape your own view.

Buying Bonds Here - Different Statistics Bonds (ZN & ZB) are the only markets that have different parameters and statistics compared to the rest. Among other things, they are the only markets where statistics show that taking partials is more profitable Here, the Unit of Risk is 8 ticks, that is the maximum risk allowed per contract . Noise = 3 ticks Test with Good Separation = 3 ticks Why these lines and not others? It's what the system finds. I don't ask and I don't try to optimize based on what I think, I execute.

by Principlesofmathprob

Back to the Basics - Market Structure & Risk Management This is perhaps the most basic structure that the trading community in general considers tradable. It is not the only one that exists, but it certainly repeats quite often and is extremely profitable. There are two points that need to be understood for effective trading: market structure and risk management. I placed a series of numbers from 1 to 6 on the chart to explain each mechanical step that markets take. 1) In order to generate a high, the market has to come from somewhere. That implies that there are participants with committed capital/interest. It is unlikely that any fund or trader has infinite capital or risk. That move up is important and its magnitude and type (vertical or with pullbacks) must be taken into account because they contribute to context and quality. Some structures are more fragile than others. A vertical move up generally ends in a trend change at some point, while a more sustainable move can last for a very long time. 2) The market makes a first bearish move, leaving a high behind that will later be cleaned to the upside. These two movements, this part of the structure, are where ranges are generally generated. Sometimes there is real indecision or an important change in outlook, which is what ends up forming contraction ranges. It may also be that the market has entered a period of low volume and in that environment ranges are more likely to form. Why it happened is not as important as what it produces; an effect is more important than an interpretation. 3) The market eventually moves up and cleans the high that was formed during that first down move. That is when everyone who had accumulated short positions is forced to buy and the limit orders of large traders are filled. Obviously, this is the first opportunity to sell. But that type of trade is the most advanced. For this post I am explaining the next most advanced one. 4) A low is broken for the first time. This is the signal of a Change in Behavior, the Reversal is confirmed. 5) Wait for price to move close to the high before shorting, placing a stop above the high, giving other traders a chance to fill the limit orders they place at highs and lows. If that time or price margin is not given, then the inherent protection that can be achieved and is necessary is not being utilized. The trade must have asymmetric risk/reward. If someone does not want this, then they are completely wasting their time, because if the goal is to trade without that asymmetry, then it is better to trade other setups that inherently have better probabilities or frequency. 6) Up to this point, the easy part, entering the market. Now comes trade management, which is really where traders make the difference. There is no single universal plan. Sometimes it is simply better to apply a hit and run approach, meaning enter, reach a nearby TP, get out, and that's it. Other times the move that can be captured is much larger and the trade needs to be managed properly for that. That is the case I am going to explain. The structural logic is the same: a high is confirmed when a new low is made; a low is confirmed when a new high is made. Once we confirm that extreme point in the market, we use those pullbacks to trail the stop. The stop is placed in the same way as on the entry, seeking to take advantage of the limits that the rest of the participants leave behind.

by Principlesofmathprob

ZN 109 Hold: Temporary Relief or Structural Shift? A Market Caught Between Oil Shocks, Fiscal Anxiety, and a Reluctant Fed The macro backdrop for ZN futures has been anything but quiet over the past month. The US-Iran conflict, which broke out in late February 2026, has been the dominant driver reshaping rate expectations across the board. The disruption of oil exports through the Strait of Hormuz pushed energy prices sharply higher, contributing directly to US producer prices rising 6.5% year-over-year in May, the highest reading since November 2022 and slightly above consensus estimates of 6.4%. Consumer prices followed the same trajectory, hitting a three-year high. That combination effectively repriced the Fed's path for the rest of the year. What began 2026 as a market pricing two rate cuts has since shifted dramatically, with futures markets at various points assigning as high as a 50% probability of a rate hike by December, before settling back to a more balanced stance as Iran peace talks emerged mid-June. As of June 12, the 10-year yield hovered near 4.47%, pulling back roughly 10 basis points as President Trump signaled a potential peace agreement with Iran could be signed in Europe that weekend, triggering a sharp drop in oil prices and easing inflation concerns. Layered on top of the geopolitical shock is the persistent fiscal overhang. Moody's downgraded US sovereign credit from Aaa to Aa1 in May 2025, and the budget deficit is now widely expected to widen toward 9% of GDP, adding a meaningful term premium to longer-dated yields. Bank of America flagged in a June 2026 report titled "Foreign UST demand shows cracks" that central banks have been reducing Treasury holdings at the New York Fed by an average of $17 billion per week since late March, with total net reductions approaching $4 billion through the week ending June 11. Foreign appetite for US debt has softened materially, and while recent long-end auctions have been described as "solid," the structural concern about who absorbs ongoing supply remains in the background. The yield curve itself is signalling a late-cycle environment. As of June 12, the curve is upward-sloping, with the 2-year yield near 4.09% and the 10-year at 4.47%, producing a 2s10s spread of roughly 38 basis points. That steepness is not the healthy, growth-driven variety. Instead, it reflects the long end pricing in inflation persistence and term premium risk while the front end stays anchored near the Fed funds target of 4.25%. Charles Schwab's fixed income mid-year outlook noted that inflation remains sticky and the Fed is likely to stay patient, with the 10-year yield expected to hold in the 4% to 4.5% range, with risks skewed to the upside. Watch the US dollar as well, with DXY near 99.8 after a recent surge toward 10-week highs driven by geopolitical safe-haven flows, the dollar remains a key co-variable to watch alongside oil and bond prices for ZN direction. What the Market Has Done Market liquidity checked at the start of March above 113'11'5 (Daily Level 1) and failed, marking the beginning of a sustained trend lower. From that March high, ZN sold off steadily, driven by the escalating US-Iran conflict, energy-driven inflation re-acceleration, and the repricing of Fed rate cut expectations away from the 2026 consensus. Price found its way down to 109 (Daily Level 2 / May lower HVA), which represents the daily support zone from April and May 2025 and has acted as a meaningful reference point for buyers. In the most recent week, the market appears to have found buying liquidity at this zone, with buyers stepping up bids and price stabilizing, consistent with the broader easing in oil prices and the Iran peace deal narrative gaining traction around June 12. The broader structure, however, remains a downtrend from the March highs, and the onus is on the buyers to demonstrate they can reclaim higher ground with conviction rather than a bounce. What to Expect in the Coming Weeks The key levels to watch are 110 (May VPOC) and 109 (Daily Level 2 / May lower HVA). How price behaves around these two references will determine the next directional leg. Neutral Scenario Expect two-way rotation within the 110 to 109 range as the market re-establishes value before committing to a directional move. Price may oscillate between these references across multiple sessions as participants digest the already-hot May CPI print of 4.2% year-over-year and position ahead of the next key inflation catalyst on July 14, when June CPI drops. This is the chop scenario where neither buyers nor sellers gain a decisive edge, and range-fading strategies become more viable than directional bets. A stable macro backdrop with no major surprises from inflation or geopolitical developments would support this rotational environment. Bullish Scenario If the market is able to break and accept above 110 (May VPOC), expect a move back towards 110'25 (Apr VAL / May VAH). Reclaiming 110 with acceptance would effectively break the downtrend structure from the March highs, shifting the character of price action from sellers-in-control to a recovering market. Watch for volume confirmation and follow-through above 110 before treating any initial breach as a genuine structural shift. A possible macro trigger could be a confirmed Iran peace agreement that sends oil prices sharply lower, meaningfully reducing inflation expectations and reviving rate cut pricing for late 2026, which would be a direct tailwind for bond prices. Bearish Scenario If buyers do not defend 109 and prices accept below that level, expect further downside to 108 (Daily Level 3 / Feb 2025 low), representing a resumption of the downtrend from March. A clean break below 109 with follow-through would confirm that the buying liquidity found this past week was corrective rather than structural, and the path of least resistance remains lower. This is the scenario where the fiscal overhang, foreign demand erosion, and persistent inflation all reassert themselves simultaneously, offering sellers the macro justification they need. A possible macro trigger could be a renewed escalation of the Iran conflict, a surprise hot inflation print in June, or an unexpected Fed hawkish pivot that pushes markets to price in a rate hike more firmly, sending yields higher and ZN futures lower. Conclusion ZN sits at a genuine decision point. On the technical side, price is parked at a critical support zone (109 / Daily Level 2 / May lower HVA), where buyers have shown up in the past week, yet the overarching trend structure from the March highs at 113'11'5 remains intact and bears watching. The 110 level (May VPOC) is the line in the sand; holding below it means the downtrend is in force, and only a sustained acceptance above it shifts the narrative. On the macro side, the developing Iran peace deal is the near-term wildcard, having already pulled the 10-year yield back to around 4.47% from recent highs. But the structural headwinds of a widening fiscal deficit, foreign demand erosion from central banks, Moody's credit downgrade, and sticky inflation do not disappear with a ceasefire headline. The Fed remains on hold with no clear catalyst to pivot dovish. The market has shown buyers are present at 109, but buyers showing up and buyers being in control are two very different things. Which side of 110 does ZN close in the weeks to come? That answer should tell you everything about whether the dip here is an opportunity or the beginning of a deeper move to 108 and beyond. Drop your view in the comments below. Disclaimer: Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. Trading futures involves substantial risk of loss and is not appropriate for all investors. This content is intended for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute trading advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any futures contract. Trade your own plan and manage risk. Acronyms: C - Composite w - Weekly m - Monthly VA - Value Area VAH - Value Area High VAL - Value Area Low VPOC - Volume Point of Control LVN - Low Value Node LVA - Low Value Area HVN - High Value Node HVA - High Value Area SP - Single print ATH - All time high

A Skeptical Trader's Guide to Trading Repeated Failed Breakouts Technical patterns often look straightforward in textbooks. A recognizable formation develops, price eventually breaks through a key level, and traders begin evaluating potential opportunities. In reality, however, markets are rarely that cooperative. One of the more challenging situations traders face occurs when a pattern appears valid, yet repeatedly fails to deliver the anticipated breakout. Each failed attempt chips away at confidence. The pattern may still be technically intact, but the market's inability to follow through can create growing skepticism among participants. This distinction is important because technical analysis is not only about identifying patterns. It is also about understanding how market participants are reacting to those patterns. The daily chart of 10-Year T-Note Futures provides an interesting case study of this concept. A Falling Wedge pattern developed over several months and eventually produced an upside breakout. Yet before that breakout finally gained traction, multiple attempts had already failed. For some traders, those repeated failures may have been enough to justify a more conservative approach. Rather than focusing on predicting what would happen next, this article examines how a trader might manage uncertainty when a technical pattern begins to lose credibility after several unsuccessful breakout attempts. Understanding the Falling Wedge The Falling Wedge is a chart pattern characterized by two downward-sloping trendlines that gradually converge over time. As the pattern develops, price fluctuations become progressively narrower, suggesting a reduction in downside momentum. From a technical perspective, the pattern is often interpreted as a potential reversal or continuation formation depending on the broader market context. The key observation is that sellers continue pushing prices lower, but each subsequent push tends to lose strength. Eventually, price reaches a point where a breakout above the upper trendline becomes possible. Many technical traders monitor these formations because they provide clearly defined boundaries. The pattern itself offers structure, while the breakout provides a framework for developing a trading hypothesis. However, one important reality is frequently overlooked. Patterns do not exist in a vacuum. The quality of a breakout often depends on what happened before the breakout occurred. A breakout that succeeds on the first attempt may be viewed differently than a breakout that follows multiple failed attempts. This distinction becomes particularly relevant in the case study shown on the chart. When a Pattern Starts Losing Credibility One of the most valuable lessons technical analysis can teach is that markets are ultimately driven by participant behavior. A chart pattern can remain technically valid for weeks or months. Nevertheless, if traders repeatedly observe failed breakout attempts, confidence in the pattern may gradually deteriorate. This phenomenon can be described as pattern fatigue. Pattern fatigue occurs when a market repeatedly attempts to move in a particular direction but fails to sustain momentum. Over time, participants become increasingly skeptical about the probability of success. The Falling Wedge shown on the chart illustrates this concept particularly well. Throughout May, multiple attempts were made to break above the upper trendline of the pattern. Each attempt appeared promising initially, only to reverse and fall back into the structure. From a purely technical perspective, the pattern remained valid. From a psychological perspective, however, confidence was likely declining. A trader observing these repeated failures might reasonably begin asking several questions: Is the pattern still relevant? Are buyers truly in control? Is this breakout attempt any different from the previous ones? Should additional confirmation be required before acting? These questions reflect a healthy degree of skepticism. In many cases, skepticism is not a weakness. It can be a risk-management tool. The objective is not to become permanently bearish or bullish. The objective is simply to require stronger evidence before committing capital. This is where trading styles often begin to diverge. Aggressive Traders Versus Conservative Traders Not all traders approach chart patterns the same way. An aggressive breakout trader may choose to enter as soon as price moves beyond the trendline. The logic is straightforward: if the breakout succeeds, entering early may provide favorable positioning. There is nothing inherently wrong with this approach. However, repeated breakout failures can cause some traders to modify their process. A more conservative trader may decide that the pattern itself is no longer sufficient evidence. Instead, additional confirmation may be required. This confirmation can take many forms: Increased volume. Stronger momentum. A successful retest. Market structure confirmation. Support and resistance validation. A continuation signal following a pullback. The key idea is simple. The more uncertainty created by previous failed attempts, the more evidence some traders may require before entering a position. The chart provides an excellent example of how such an approach could be implemented. Conservative Alternative #1: Waiting for the Pullback After the eventual breakout occurred, one possible approach would have been to avoid chasing price immediately. This concept is especially relevant after a series of failed breakouts. Repeated failures often condition traders to expect disappointment. As a result, buying immediately after a breakout can feel uncomfortable. A more conservative trader may instead choose to wait for price to revisit an area of support. On the chart, a relevant buy-side UFO (UnFilled Orders) support zone was located between: 109’12’0 and 108’27’0 Interestingly, price retraced into that area immediately following the breakout. For traders using market structure alongside technical patterns, this retracement provided an opportunity to evaluate whether buyers were still willing to defend previously identified support. Rather than entering during the breakout itself, the trader could have waited for price to return toward the support zone and then assessed whether the original bullish thesis remained intact. This approach introduces an important advantage. Instead of reacting emotionally to the breakout, the trader allows the market to provide additional information. The retracement becomes a test. If buyers continue defending the support area, confidence in the breakout may increase. If support fails, the trader avoids participating in a potentially unsuccessful setup. Neither outcome guarantees success. The objective is simply to improve decision quality through patience. Conservative Alternative #2: Waiting for Confirmation After the Pullback Some traders may choose to be even more selective. For them, the retracement itself is still not enough. After multiple failed breakout attempts, they may require evidence that buyers have regained control following the pullback. This is where continuation confirmation becomes relevant. On the chart, the retracement day established a clear high and low. Once price subsequently traded above the high of that retracement day, the market provided another piece of information. Buyers were no longer merely defending support. They were actively pushing price beyond the prior day's range. From a price-action perspective, this behavior can be interpreted as evidence of renewed upside participation. Again, this does not guarantee that prices will continue higher. No chart pattern can provide certainty. However, for a trader who has already witnessed several failed breakouts, this additional confirmation may help justify participation. The important lesson is not whether the trade ultimately succeeds. The important lesson is understanding how confirmation can be layered into a trading process when confidence in a pattern has been weakened by repeated failures. A technical pattern does not become more reliable simply because it has existed for longer. In some situations, repeated failures may justify raising the standard of evidence before acting. What If the Pattern Works? What If It Fails? Every trading hypothesis eventually arrives at two critical questions: What happens if the market moves in the anticipated direction? What happens if the market proves the hypothesis wrong? Surprisingly, many traders spend far more time thinking about the first question than the second. Yet from a risk management perspective, both deserve equal attention. In the case of the Falling Wedge shown on the chart, a traditional chart-pattern trader might begin by calculating a projected target. This process typically involves measuring the height of the pattern and projecting that distance from the breakout point. Applying this methodology to the current structure produces a projected objective near: 113’03’0 There is nothing inherently wrong with this technique. It has been used by technical analysts for decades and provides a systematic way of estimating potential price movement. However, projected targets have one notable limitation. They are purely mathematical. The calculation itself does not consider the actual structure of the market that exists between the breakout point and the projected destination. This is where some traders may choose to incorporate additional layers of analysis. Looking Beyond the Pattern Projection One challenge with pattern projections is that markets rarely move in straight lines. Even when a pattern functions as expected, price frequently encounters support and resistance levels before reaching a theoretical objective. Ignoring those areas can sometimes result in unrealistic expectations. The chart highlights several relevant UFO resistance zones positioned below the projected target. The first significant resistance area begins near: 111’12’5 This observation creates an interesting dilemma. Should a trader focus exclusively on the textbook pattern target? Or should market structure influence trade management decisions? Reasonable traders may reach different conclusions. Some may continue targeting the full projected objective. Others may decide that the presence of meaningful resistance justifies a more conservative approach. In this case, a trader emphasizing market structure might view 111’12’5 as a logical area to evaluate potential profit-taking decisions. The rationale is straightforward. If sellers have previously demonstrated interest in that region, price could encounter friction before reaching the larger technical projection. The objective is not to predict a reversal. Rather, it is to acknowledge the existence of nearby market structure that could influence future price behavior. This distinction is important because risk management is often less about certainty and more about preparation. Defining Invalidation While traders frequently discuss entry techniques and profit objectives, invalidation is equally important. Every trading idea begins with a hypothesis. In this example, the hypothesis may be summarized as follows: The Falling Wedge breakout remains valid and buyers continue to maintain control above support. If that assumption proves incorrect, the trader needs a predefined mechanism for exiting the position. Returning to the chart, the previously discussed UFO support zone extends between: 109’12’0 and 108’27’0 For traders using this area as a key component of their analysis, a move below the lower boundary may suggest that the bullish thesis is weakening. More importantly, it could indicate that the breakout itself has failed. This concept highlights one of the advantages of combining chart patterns with market structure. The pattern identifies opportunity. The surrounding structure helps define invalidation. Rather than placing a stop loss at an arbitrary distance, some traders prefer using levels that directly challenge the assumptions underlying the trade. If the market moves beneath the support zone, the original rationale for participating may no longer be present. Whether the trader ultimately exits or reassesses the situation becomes a matter of individual process, but the principle remains the same: A hypothesis should always include a mechanism for determining when it is no longer valid. Understanding Treasury Futures That Trade in Fractions Treasury futures are unique compared to many other futures contracts because they are quoted using fractional pricing conventions. Traders familiar with stock indices, energy products, currencies, or metals often encounter a learning curve when first analyzing Treasury markets. Instead of conventional decimal pricing, Treasury futures are generally quoted in points and fractions of a point. For example, a quotation such as: 109’12’0 should not be interpreted in the same manner as a stock trading at 109.12. Treasury futures use a fractional system where each tick equals 1/2 of 1/32 of one point. This convention dates back many years and remains widely used throughout fixed-income markets. Understanding this pricing methodology is important because even relatively small price movements can represent meaningful changes in contract value. For newer market participants, Treasury futures may initially appear unusual compared to other futures markets. However, once the fractional pricing structure becomes familiar, chart interpretation becomes considerably easier. The key takeaway is simple: Always understand how a market is quoted before evaluating risk, reward, or position sizing. 10-Year T-Note Futures Contract Specifications The 10-Year Treasury Note Futures contract is one of the most actively followed interest-rate futures products. Some key contract characteristics include: Contract size: $100,000 face value of a U.S. Treasury Note. Tick value: 1/2 of 1/32 of one point = $15.625 per contract. Margin requirement: ~$1875 per contract. Margin requirements are subject to change, traders should always verify current figures directly through their brokerage provider before evaluating a trade. Because Treasury futures reflect expectations and activity within the fixed-income market, they are frequently monitored by traders, portfolio managers, hedgers, and institutional participants seeking exposure to interest-rate movements. The contract's liquidity and long history make it a widely recognized benchmark within the Treasury futures complex. Illustrative Trade Case Study Using the chart as an educational example, a conservative trader might construct the following hypothetical framework: Observe the Falling Wedge breakout. Recognize the existence of multiple failed breakout attempts. Wait for a retracement rather than immediately chasing the breakout. Monitor the UFO support zone between 109’12’0 and 108’27’0. Wait for price to demonstrate renewed upside decisiveness. Observe price trading above the retracement day's high. Use nearby UFO resistance around 111’12’5 as a potential area of interest. Use a stop below the UFO support zone to define invalidation. This example is not intended to suggest future market direction. Instead, it demonstrates how additional confirmation can be incorporated into a trading process after repeated breakout failures create skepticism. The educational lesson is not whether the trade succeeds. The educational lesson is how a trader might adapt their process when confidence in a pattern has been weakened by prior unsuccessful attempts. Risk Management: The Real Lesson Behind the Pattern Many discussions about technical analysis focus on finding opportunities. Far fewer discussions focus on managing uncertainty. Yet uncertainty is the one characteristic present in every market. The most valuable lesson from this chart may not be the Falling Wedge itself. It may be the decision-making process surrounding the pattern. Repeated failures created doubt. Rather than ignoring that doubt, a conservative trader could choose to respond by requiring additional confirmation. That confirmation might come from: A successful retest. Support validation. Stronger price action. Market structure alignment. Trading above a key reference level. Different traders will have different standards. What matters is having a process. A technical pattern should never be viewed as certainty. It is merely a framework for organizing probabilities. Risk management remains the mechanism that protects traders when those probabilities fail to materialize. Conclusion The Falling Wedge pattern discussed in this case study ultimately produced an upside breakout, but the path leading to that breakout is arguably more educational than the breakout itself. Multiple failed attempts during May likely reduced confidence among many market participants. A trader who had witnessed those failures may have chosen not to trust the next breakout immediately. Instead, patience could have become part of the strategy. Waiting for a retracement. Waiting for support to hold. Waiting for price to trade above the retracement day's high. Each additional requirement raises the threshold of evidence needed before participation. Whether one agrees with that approach or not, the underlying principle remains valuable. A technical pattern does not necessarily become more convincing simply because it remains on the chart longer. Sometimes repeated failures justify becoming more selective. In those situations, skepticism is not necessarily a sign of indecision. It may simply be another form of risk management. Data Consideration When charting futures, the data provided could be delayed. Traders working with the ticker symbols discussed in this idea may prefer to use CME Group real-time data plan on TradingView: www.tradingview.com - This consideration is particularly important for shorter-term traders, whereas it may be less critical for those focused on longer-term trading strategies. General Disclaimer The trade ideas presented herein are solely for illustrative purposes forming a part of a case study intended to demonstrate key principles in risk management within the context of the specific market scenarios discussed. These ideas are not to be interpreted as investment recommendations or financial advice. They do not endorse or promote any specific trading strategies, financial products, or services. The information provided is based on data believed to be reliable; however, its accuracy or completeness cannot be guaranteed. Trading in financial markets involves risks, including the potential loss of principal. Each individual should conduct their own research and consult with professional financial advisors before making any investment decisions. The author or publisher of this content bears no responsibility for any actions taken based on the information provided or for any resultant financial or other losses.

ZN Short — $ZNM26 breaking down through 110.10 support on rising Setup: On the 4h chart ZN has been in a sustained downtrend since the mid-April high near 111.75, making a series of lower highs and lower lows. The most recent bounce off the ~110.10 low stalled at 110.28-110.33 resistance — the prior intraday base from early May — and price is now rolling back over. The 1h chart shows a clean sequence: the May 6-8 bounce peaked at 111.0, rejection followed with increasing red volume, and today's session broke below the 110.25 consolidation zone on expanding volume (~250k+ bars at 07:00-08:00 1h). Current last print 110.0625 sits at the breakdown of that zone, with sellers clearly in control. Flow: COT shows leveraged money (HFs/CTAs) net short -2.0M contracts — an extreme structural short bias that aligns with the directional move. Asset managers are reducing longs (WoW -32k) and adding shorts (+87k), confirming institutional distribution. DXY strength and 10y yields +4bps are direct headwinds for ZN. The 10-Year Note Auction in ~36 minutes is the wildcard — a weak auction (high yield, low bid-to-cover) would accelerate selling; a strong auction could trigger a short-squeeze spike. This imminent event risk is the primary reason confidence is not higher. Plan: Entry on a limit at the breakdown retest of the 110.10-110.125 level, allowing for a small bounce into the break zone. Stop sits above the 110.328 consolidation shelf — above that level the breakdown thesis is invalidated and the May 6-8 bounce structure reasserts. Target is the 109.75 zone, the next structural support visible on the 4h chart below the current lows. The auction risk means size should be trimmed; a spike through 110.40+ on a strong auction is the hard invalidation signal. 📍 Entry: 110.125000 🛑 Stop: 110.328125 🎯 Target: 109.750000 ⚖️ R:R: 1.85

ZN Short — $ZNM26 breaking down through 111.30 support with rate Setup: On the 4h, ZN has been rangebound between roughly 110.75 and 112.00 since late March, but the current price action sits in the lower half of that range after failing to hold the Apr 17 spike high near 111.80. The 1h shows a clean staircase breakdown from 111.65 to current levels — lower highs and lower closes over the past two sessions with expanding red volume on the drops. The most recent bars (Apr 21 07:00–10:00) show a high-volume flush through the 111.30 shelf with no meaningful bid recovery, price settling just above the 111.25 area which is the next visible congestion. Flow: The rates complex is broadly offered — ZT, ZF, ZN, and ZB all showing coordinated selling pressure consistent with 10Y cash yields up 4bps on the session. DXY firming adds to the headwind for bonds. Waller in roughly 130 minutes is a known risk, but the tape is already leaning hawkish in positioning, and the pre-speech drift is consistent with shorts building into the event rather than covering. Plan: Stop is placed above the Apr 21 breakdown shelf and the cluster of 111.45–111.50 resistance that capped overnight — reclaiming that zone would invalidate the breakdown thesis. Target is the 110.875 area, which corresponds to the Apr 12–13 consolidation floor and aligns with the broader range mid-support on the 4h. R/R is approximately 1.9:1. A Waller comment more dovish than expected could squeeze the position; size accordingly ahead of the event. 📍 Entry: 111.28125 🛑 Stop: 111.5 🎯 Target: 110.875 ⚖️ R:R: 1.86

Pick Of The Week - Bond Shorting Opportunity Relative Equal Lows @ 111'16'0 Bullish Order Block Inside Hourly BISI @111'21'5 - 111'18'0. Expecting A Repricing Lower. Great For Short Term Trades

Technical Shift in 10-Year Treasuries The recent price action in 10-Year T-Note futures is signaling a potential regime shift. After a prolonged period of consolidation, we are seeing a significant confluence of bearish indicators: Structural Breakdown: The rejection at the 114'000 resistance level has formed a textbook distribution top. The subsequent breach of the ascending support line suggests that the path of least resistance has shifted lower. Momentum Exhaustion: Despite price testing the upper bounds earlier this month, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) failed to confirm those highs, printing a clear bearish divergence. Key Levels to Watch: We are currently seeing an expansion in volume as price tests the lower consolidation boundary. A failure to hold the 111'200 level would likely open the door for a retest of the 200-day moving average. Market Take: The technicals are beginning to align with a higher for longer fundamental narrative. I'll be watching for a retest of the broken trendline as a potential area of supply.

by GoldenZoneFX

ZN 2026 Yearly outlook - Where is price? Price is in area 3, below the static yearly PLdot but above the live yearly PLdot (next year). Direction is down, slope is down but decreasing. Yearly down c-wave aborted, down flow is stopped. Next candle will open above the next years static PLdot. - What is it doing? As next year will open above the PLdot, this will make in the beginning of the year, this 2026 candle a congestion entrance candle. These candles tend to provide a target which is usually 2-3 PLdots back which would make for a yearly congestion entrance target of 128’16. The congestion entrance will then also define a dotted line which is the lowest low of the previous down trend which is 105’10. Direction is slowly turning up, slopes are getting horizontal (PLdot). Long term down trend is pausing, 2025 candle shows rejection of lows. - What is next? Down trend pausing and switching to congestion action trading with a potential retest of lows

10-Year Treasuries Into FOMC: What to Expect 1. Big Picture: What’s Been Driving Bonds? Over the past several months, the U.S. Treasury market has been defined by diverging forces across the curve, the short end (2Y, 5Y) pricing near-term monetary policy outcomes and the long end (10Y, 30Y) reflecting inflation persistence, fiscal supply, and long-horizon term premium. The short end has behaved like a proxy for rate-cut expectations, compressing aggressively whenever inflation cools or recession probability ticks higher. Meanwhile, the long end has been more sensitive to duration demand, bond auctions, and forward-looking macro risk, often moving independently when supply shocks or inflation surprises hit the tape. The result? A curve driven by two narratives: policy timing vs long-run risk. This sets the stage for next week’s meeting and the reaction likely depends less on the cut itself and more on the messaging around rate trajectory. 2. What did the Market do? Following the U.S.–China tariff escalation in April (formerly referred to casually as the “Trump Tariff War,” though a better description is the Tariff Re-Escalation Phase), the ZN stabilized. Buyers stepped in between May to July 2025, compressing price toward the 112'08'0 region, which is a key daily resistance zone. In early September, momentum shifted. Buyers overwhelmed offers and lifted prices through 112'08'0, and the move appears linked to expectations of a softer policy stance and improving forward inflation indicators during the first week of September. Sellers responded at 113'07'0 area and market has been trapped in a three-month range between 113'25'0 high and 112'08'0 low. This week, price rotated from the top of range and swept through the composite LVN 113'00'0 to 112'24'0, near the 1st 3 weeks of November composite VPOC. 3. What to Expect: Scenarios Into FOMC Week Until the rate decision, compression seems likely. Expect 2 way indecision before FOMC: Expect two-way trade between 113'03'0 (LVN) and 112'24'0 (1st 3 weeks of Nov composite VPOC) as the market waits for the FOMC. Bearish Scenario (Base case): If sellers hold at 113'03'0, continuation lower toward 112'07'0 (range low / composite VAL) Bullish Scenario: If buyers reclaim 113'03'0 decisively, possible market move back up to 113'23'0 (Daily Range high), keeping the multi-month balance intact and potentially positioning for a breakout if FOMC guidance surprises dovish. 4. FOMC Risk: What Could Surprise the Market? The market is currently pricing ~88.6% probability of a 25bps cut which means the cut itself is not the event. The surprise lies in the tone. 🟢 Bullish Bond Reaction (Yields lower) if: Forward guidance hints at a sequence of cuts, not a one-off Growth risks emphasized > inflation risks Dovish dissent or language suggesting easing bias remains intact 🔴 Bearish Bond Reaction (Yields higher) if: The Fed downplays future cuts or signals higher-for-longer Inflation risk is prioritized Dot-plot or press Q&A implies only one cut on table Conclusion Unless the press conference delivers a clear dovish or hawkish surprise, expect a similar indecisive, two-way response in the markets, similar to past FOMC market reactions. What’s your call on ZN and the bond markets going into the week of FOMC? Drop a comment and give a boost so more traders can weigh in. Disclaimer: This is not financial advice. Analysis is for educational purposes only; trade your own plan and manage risk.

(ZN1!): The Wedge of Decision. Rate Cut Confirmation Imminent ?The Core Thesis: The 10-Year T-Note futures price has been locked in a massive, multi-year symmetrical triangle or falling wedge pattern. A decisive breakout from this formation will not only determine the next phase of the bond market but will also confirm the direction of the 10-Year Yield, which acts as the global benchmark for borrowing costs. Technical View: The Wedge Breakdown/Breakout The Pattern: The Weekly chart shows a clear consolidation, characterized by lower highs and higher lows, forming a tightening range. The market is coiling, anticipating a major break. Breakout Level (Bullish): A sustained Weekly close above the upper trendline, which corresponds roughly to the 113'16 to 114'00 zone on the chart, would signal a bullish breakout. Price Implication: T-Note prices move UP (a bullish breakout). Yield Implication: The 10-Year Yield (US10Y) moves DOWN. Breakdown Level (Bearish): A definitive close below the lower trendline (around the recent lows, near 112'00) would signal a bearish breakdown. Price Implication: T-Note prices move DOWN (a bearish breakdown). Yield Implication: The 10-Year Yield (US10Y) moves UP.

by GoldenZoneFX

Projecting Interest Rates Beyond the Current Fed Regime CBOT: 10-Year T-Notes Futures ( CBOT:ZN1! ) Since hitting an all-time high (ATH) of 48,431 on November 12th, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 1,841 points, or -3.8%, to 46,590 on Monday. Meanwhile, the Nasdaq Composite has lost over 1,300 points, or -5.5%, from its ATH of 24,020. The S&P 500 is down 250 points, or -3.6%, from 6,920. Both the Nasdaq and the S&P reached their ATH on October 29th. Cryptocurrencies have been harder hit than stocks. Today, Bitcoin prices dropped below $90,000, a whopping 29% drawdown since the King of Crypto hit ATH of $126,080. An entire year of gains has been erased. Two key market forces are driving the US stock market downtrend. Firstly, Wall Street grew worried about the AI bubble bursting. Earlier this month, “Big Short” investor Michael Burry grabbed headlines after his Scion Investment’s 13F filing showed bearish bets on Nvidia (NVDA) and Palantir (PLTR). Last week, Softbank offloaded all 32.1 million shares of NVDA it held. This is followed by Peter Thiel’s hedge fund, which sold off all 537,742 shares of NVDA on Monday. On my October 27th commentary, I discussed that heavy exposure in High Tech stocks (64%) made Nasdaq very venerable. The Dow could weather the downturn better with a lower weight (21%). The recent market trend resonates with my theory. Secondly, the Federal Reserve has turned hawkish on monetary policy. The Fed made the last rate cut on October 29th, without the aid of updated economic data due to US government shutdown. Fed officials have warned that further rate cuts are not a sure thing if new data does not support policy easing. On October 27th, the odds for a December cut were 98.5%, according to data from the CME FedWatch tool. Today, it went down sharply to just 57%. Not cutting has the same effect as raising expected interest rates, which tends to drive down stock valuation. www.cmegroup.com The Future is Less Uncertain than the Present In my view, the market obsession with what the Fed Chair says day by day is overblown. Anybody remember a quote from Alan Greenspan? While modeling short-term decisions into long-term trends, we risk overlooking the impact from changing of guards at the Fed. The current Fed Chair’s term will end in May 2026. Between now and then, there are four FOMC rate-setting meetings: December 9-10, 2025, January 27-28, March 17-18 and April 28-29 in 2026. What could possibly happen in four meetings: • If the Fed is hawkish and refuses to cut rates, the policy Fed Funds rate could stay at the current 375-400 bp range. • If the Fed turns dovish and cut 25bp every time, Fed Funds could be at 275-300 bp. In recent meetings, the Fed no longer had consensus in its policy votes. Each decision is like a toss-up. If we only focus on the short term, trading results could be very volatile. The next Fed Chair will be nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate. We know for a fact that the President favors aggressive rate cuts to support the economy. Only someone who is 100% in agreement with the President could get nominated. Latest news indicates that five candidates have made it to the final list to be considered for a Fed Chair nomination. They are Michelle Bowman, Christopher Waller, Kevin Warsh, Kevin Hassett and Rick Rieder. If the Senate confirmation gets delayed, the President could pick a current Fed governor as Acting Chair. Whoever that may be, he or she will have to align with the President in terms of the direction of monetary policy. Gone with the independent central bank. Even though we have no idea what happens next month, we could still form a good estimate of what the Fed will do in the next 2-1/2 years, starting in June 2026. In my opinion, the expected policy rate will eventually go down to 1.0-1.5%, or even lower. This is not what the Fed currently says. Instead, I am forming an opinion based on a new Fed regime with a new Chair and multiple Fed governors supporting rate cuts. With that in mind, we can now discuss trade strategies going beyond the next Fed meeting. We don’t have to wait a long time for everything to move in places. Once a new Fed Chair candidate is announced, the market will start pricing a different interest rate trajectory. Latest news suggests that the President may be meeting with three candidates after the Thanksgiving holiday. Trading with 10 Year T-Notes Futures As I mentioned earlier, US stocks have the risk of AI bubble bursting. We could wait a while to see how things play out. My trade idea today is a pure play on interest rates. We know that Treasury prices are negatively correlated with interest rates. When rates go down, prices will likely go up. Our major chart illustrates this relationship. CBOT 10-Year Treasury Notes Futures have a face value of $100,000 at maturity. The March 2026 contract (ZNH6) is currently quoting 112'240, equivalent to $112.75. Buying or selling one contract requires an initial margin of $1,875. The 10Y futures are one of the most liquid futures contracts in the world. According to CME Group data, trade volume on November 17th was 1,779,688 contracts. Open Interest (OI) is 5,748,386 contracts at market close. OI is notional term is $574.8 billion. In the next three FOMC meeting cycles, the contract prices could go either way depending on how the Fed votes. However, as soon as the President nominate his Fed Chair candidate, Treasury prices would get a big boost as the market will price in the new and lowered expected interest rates. Hypothetically, if ZNH6 moves up 1% to $113.8775, the $1.1275 price gain would translate into $1,127.5 for a long futures position, given each dollar gain in price quotation equals $1,000 per contract. Using the initial margin of $1,875 as a cost base, the trade would produce a theoretical return of 60.1% (=1127.5/1875). The long futures position will lose money if the Fed puts rate cuts on hold, and the new Fed Chair candidate is not announced in the next three months. Happy Trading. Disclaimers *Trade ideas cited above are for illustration only, as an integral part of a case study to demonstrate the fundamental concepts in risk management under the market scenarios being discussed. They shall not be construed as investment recommendations or advice. Nor are they used to promote any specific products, or services. CME Real-time Market Data help identify trading set-ups and express my market views. If you have futures in your trading portfolio, you can check out on CME Group data plans available that suit your trading needs www.tradingview.com

by JimHuangChicago

ZN Bearish Move Might Steps In?After the breakout and the liquidity that has been sweept the price performed a small pullback which confirms the short position setup. Follow @GoldenZoneFX for more content and valuable insights.

by GoldenZoneFX

When a Quant Tries to Be Tori Trades for a Day I’ve been experimenting with a wide range of strategies from full quant models to pure price action, from EAs to structure-based setups. Recently, I came across Tori Trades’ trend line method, and I was intrigued. It’s clean, visual, and grounded in logic: draw structure, follow the reaction, keep it simple. So I decided to test it. Not on metals or indices, but on something different: ZN (10-Year T-Note Futures). This is a swing setup based purely on trend lines, horizontal structure, and compression. Let’s walk through it. Why Trend lines? The idea behind trend lines is simple: price respects geometry when enough participants see it. - Connect higher lows or lower highs to define pressure. - The more touches, the stronger the validity. - When trend lines converge into an apex, volatility often compresses before an explosive move. I wanted to see if this visual logic could translate into a clean, tradable swing setup so here we are. The Setup ZN has been coiling for months inside a symmetrical triangle formed by multi-touch trend lines: - A clear horizontal key level at 111’165 sits just overhead. - This level has acted as resistance for over a year — and now price is pressing right beneath it. - The chart shows classic compression: higher lows building pressure into a flat ceiling. My Bias & Trade Plan I’m going long but only on confirmation: - Entry: Above 111’165 ideally 111’200–111’300 (momentum or retest) - Stop: Below the most recent higher low (110’300) - TP1: 113’150 – major swing structure target - TP2: 115’000 – macro resistance zone - Bias: Bullish until structure fails or compression resolves downward This is structure-only. No indicators, no overlays. Just price, geometry, and behavior. I’ll be honest, I’ve never been a fan of using trend lines alone as a complete strategy. I usually lean toward data-backed models, confluence stacking, or algo-driven setups. But the reality is: Tori’s made this work. She’s built a career around this method, and that in itself is impressive. It’s a good reminder that every trader’s edge is personal. What works for one may not work for another but you’ll never know unless you test it under pressure. So this is that test my version, my market, my rules. If I’m Wrong If price fails to break and hold above 111’165 — or worse, breaks below 110’300 the long thesis is invalidated. In that case: - The compression likely resolves downward - I’ll sit on the sidelines and reassess or flip short if new structure develops - This becomes a great lesson in patience and discipline not every coil breaks up I’m not here to predict. I’m here to react to structure and manage risk. Win or lose, this setup gets published. The edge isn’t just in the trade it’s in the tracking. That’s the Staakd way.

10 - Notes Call Technical analysis of 10Y T-Note Futures (ZN1!) on 4H timeframe Elliott Wave count with Fibonacci retracements and completed A-B-C corrective structure. Currently observing potential start of new impulsive wave (1)-(2). Breakout from descending triangle confirmed above dynamic support. Monitoring for further bullish continuation or validation of larger corrective structure.

by alfredo_gomez_gxof

10 - Notes Technical analysis of 10Y T-Note Futures (ZN1!) on 4H timeframe Elliott Wave count with Fibonacci retracements and completed A-B-C corrective structure. Currently observing potential start of new impulsive wave (1)-(2). Breakout from descending triangle confirmed above dynamic support. Monitoring for further bullish continuation or validation of larger corrective structure.

by alfredo_gomez_gxof

How to Trade the Commitment of Traders Report Part 1 Hey Traders so today I wanted to start a 3 part series on how to use the Commitment of Traders report to help you in your trading. Enjoy! Hope This Helps Your Trading 😃 Clifford

15:32

by The25YearTrader

US 10 YR. T-NOTE 4 HR./ CORRECTIVE WAVE 4 IS LIKELY OVER!1). Price is very likely heading towards the fair Market value @ 107. 2). Risk Assets are Weak today on US$ strength! 3). BANKS ARE SELLING! 4). Volume is dropping. 5). Trendline is intersecting with target fib. level 50% TOWARDS 107! 6). Corrective wave 4 is likely dropping to complete wave 5. 7). At the bottom of wave 5 we will look for a long (Buy) position! 8). RISK ASSETS TEND TO FOLLOW THE 10 YR. T-NOTE US BOND!

Steepening Yields & Uncertainty: What says the Bond Markets? CBOT:ZN1! US Yield Curve in Image Above Showing yields on May 27, 2024 vs May 27, 2025 . What happened in a year and how to understand this? Looking at the image above, the yield curve was inverted on this day last year. Comparing last year’s term structure to today’s, we can see that the yield curve has steepened sharply. What does this signify? Let’s dive deeper as we share our insights and assessment of what the bond market is doing. At the March 16, 2022, meeting, the FED finally pivoted away from their "transitory inflation" narrative to a significant supply shocks narrative—supply-demand imbalances and Russia-Ukraine war-related uncertainty. This started a rate hike cycle, with rates peaking at 5.25%–5.50% in the July 26, 2023, meeting. The Fed Funds rate was reduced by 100 bps, with a cut of 50 bps on September 18, 2024, and two cuts of 25 bps in the November and December 2024 meetings. The FED paused its rate cutting at the start of the year, citing—as we have all heard recently—that the inflation outlook remains tilted to the upside, and given policy uncertainty and trade tariffs, the risk to slowing growth continues to increase. Businesses are holding back spending due to this confusion and continued uncertainty. ** Refer to the image of FED rate path above. The start of the rate hike cycle also began the FED’s balance sheet reduction program—from a peak of $8.97 trillion to the current balance of $6.69 trillion. **Refer to the image of FED's balance sheet above. Rates remained elevated at these levels to bring down inflation, which peaked at 9.1% in June 2022. Inflation has currently eased to 2.3% as of April 2025. Refer to the CPI YoY image above. Ray Dalio, Jamie Dimon, and most recently non-voter Kashkari (FED) highlighted stagflationary risks. FED Chair Powell noted risks to both sides of its dual mandate in its most recent meeting March 19, 2025. In the March meeting, they also announced a slower pace of reducing Treasury securities, agency debt, and agency mortgage-backed securities. In this announcement, Treasury securities reduction slowed from $25 billion to $5 billion per month, while maintaining agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities reduction at the same pace. Many participants and analysts noted this as a dovish pivot. However, given the current market conditions and the supply-demand imbalance emerging within US Treasury and bond markets, we note the rising yields. The yield curve steepening signifies that investors want better return on their bond holdings. The interesting turn of events here is that US Treasuries and bonds have not provided the safety they usually do in times of uncertainty and policy risk. The dollar has fallen in tandem with bonds, resulting in a devalued dollar and rising yields. Thirty-year yields touched the 5% level, and the DXY index traded at levels last seen in March 2022. Looking deeper under the hood, we note that a repeat of COVID-pandemic-style stimulus measures may perhaps result in an uncontrollable inflation spiral. The ballooning twin deficits—i.e., trade and budget deficits—with the new “Big Beautiful Bill,” or as some analysts joked, noting this as a foreshadowing of the newest credit rating: “BBB.” Any black swan event may just be the catalyst needed to tip these dominoes to start falling. As we previously noted in some of our commentary, debt service payments are now more than defense spending. The new bill, once passed, is going to add another $2.5 trillion to the deficit. While the deficit is an issue in the US, it is important to note that it is a global issue. The key question here will be: in due time, will the US bond market and US dollar regain their usual haven status? Or will we continue seeing diversification into Gold, Bitcoin, and global markets? So, to summarize these mechanics playing out in the US and global markets—in our view—sure, the US administration, one may debate, is not helping by creating this environment of uncertainty in global trade, coupled with a worsening deficit and higher-for-longer rates. The markets currently are perhaps at their most unpredictable stage, with so much going on in the US and across the world. It is still too early to write off US exceptionalism, and there will be value in rotating back to US markets once the dust on policy uncertainty settles. We suggest that investors stay diversified, watch for any upside surprises to the inflation and do not chase yields blindly as the move may already be overstretched. It is also our view that we are past the extreme policy uncertainty having already noted Trump put when ES Futures fell over 20%. Although note that near All-time highs or at 6000 level, we are likely to see further headline risks until trade deals are locked in. As always, be nimble, pragmatic and be ready to adjust with evolving market conditions. Definitions Plain-language definition: A “basis point” (bps) is 0.01%. So, a 50 bps cut = 0.50% reduction in interest rates. Plain-language definition: A steep yield curve means long-term interest rates are much higher than short-term ones. This can reflect rising inflation expectations or increased risk. A “black swan event”—an unpredictable crisis—could set off a chain reaction if confidence in US finances weakens further. Trade deficit: Importing more than exports Budget deficit: Government spending far more than it earns

Ten-Year Treasury Notes (ZN) Face Persistent Selling Pressure The decline in Ten-Year Treasury Notes (ZN) from the high on July 4, 2025, is unfolding as a double three Elliott Wave structure, signaling potential bearish momentum. From that peak, wave (W) completed at 109’08, followed by a corrective rally in wave (X) that topped at 112’02. The Notes have since turned lower, approaching a critical level below the wave (W) low of 109’08. A break below this level would confirm a bearish sequence, strengthening the case for further downside. Within the ongoing wave (Y), the decline from the May 1, 2025, peak currently exhibits a five-wave impulsive structure, favoring continued downward pressure. From the wave (X) high, the initial decline in wave ((i)) ended at 110’27. A corrective rally in wave ((ii)) then followed peaking at 111’22. The Notes then extended lower in wave ((iii)), reaching 109’18, with a subsequent bounce in wave ((iv)) concluding at 110’21. Currently, wave ((v)) is unfolding, structured as another five-wave sequence in a lesser degree. From the wave ((iv)) high, wave (i) ended at 109’20, and wave (ii) rallied to 110’14. As long as the pivot high at 112’21 remains intact, expect further downside in the Ten-Year Treasury Notes, with potential for increased volatility as the bearish structure develops.

by Elliottwave-Forecast

Bearish Outlook for 10-Year Treasury Note Futures Next Week Targets: - T1 = $108.75 - T2 = $107.50 Stop Levels: - S1 = $111.20 - S2 = $112.50 **Wisdom of Professional Traders:** This analysis synthesizes insights from thousands of professional traders and market experts, leveraging collective intelligence to identify high-probability trade setups. The wisdom of crowds principle suggests that aggregated market perspectives from experienced professionals often outperform individual forecasts, reducing cognitive biases and highlighting consensus opportunities in 10-Year Treasury Note Futures. **Key Insights:** The 10-Year Treasury Note Futures (ZN) exhibit continued downward momentum due to rising 10-year yields (TNX) and shifting investor sentiment. With TNX trending between 4.6% and 4.8%, bond futures face sustained selling pressure in response to inflationary concerns and tighter monetary policies. Traders should anticipate near-term bearish trends with potential price breaks at key technical levels. **Recent Performance:** The 10-Year Treasury Note Futures have been moving within a downward trajectory driven by sustained increases in TNX yields, which negatively affect bond prices. The current price action reflects heightened market sentiment toward higher yields and declining futures prices. **Expert Analysis:** Analysts strongly agree that the bearish outlook is supported by the inverse relationship between yields and bond futures. With TNX rising toward 4.8%, tighter monetary conditions and inflation concerns cause downward stress on ZN futures. Support at $106.95 is critical to monitor, and resistance near $113.35 represents significant overhead constraints for bullish reversals. **News Impact:** Positive TNX yield momentum is fueled by expectations of further central bank tightening and inflation persistence. Upcoming macroeconomic data reports and Federal Reserve guidance will play a pivotal role in defining short-term market conditions for ZN. Traders must stay vigilant toward developments in economic policy and inflation data releases, which may steer bond markets further toward bearish zones. **Trading Recommendation:** Traders are recommended to take SHORT positions in 10-Year Treasury Note Futures, targeting price levels of $108.75 and $107.50 while closely monitoring the $111.20 and $112.50 stop levels to manage risk. Sustained bearish yields and inflation expectations point to a continued downside for bond futures.

by CrowdWisdomTrading

ZN US TREASURY PRICES BASED ON A 110 TO 134 RANGE. TIME FUNCTION Basic Fib Framework for the ZN US Treasuries with anchores on 110 and 134 to give a range of 24 for the base reference range. 24 h = 1 day , any connection ?

Bonds Could be Forming a Big Low The drop in bonds took them down the 76 retracement level and this is where we're stalled out, at least for now. Action in this area is consistent with a head and shoulders - and if that pattern is in play then we'd be into the rally in bonds now. Something that's always worth noticing is when there's a lot of talk of something dramatic happening in something but it doesn't make a new extreme. During the last drop in bonds there was extreme bear sentiment (It's not even something I'm all that interested in and I was seeing it everywhere) but this drop has so far failed to break the low and, perhaps critically, remains above the 76. Currently in the pending reversal zone we have the formation of a possible reversal pattern. This is a premise we can invert to the yields also. If these reversals play out, they predict that these start to change really quickly. We'd be heading out of the late reversal stages and into the early trend. We'd expect to see bonds sharp up and yields sharp down. Failure of these levels as reversals would imply a far stronger trend in these, but I do think the odds skew better towards reversals here as per the TA norms.