What's the best intraday time period for Elliott waves?

[wotzit]

Hi,
Does anyone know the best intraday chart time period to view the Elliott waves count without constant relabelling?
Seems a good tool if it could make it's mind up!

TIA

[gspiker]

I have found that longer time periods are better. I have also found that it is critical to adjust your time template so that you have loaded a lot of bars. I use 1200, but that was not arrived at by any scientific means...

Garth

[wotzit]

Garth

Thanks for the reply. I have found the recounting and relabelling of waves on all the time periods I have looked at, (1/3/5/60min). If you have found a stable time period for indices I would be grateful if you would share it, as so far this GET Tool has made me less confident in trading than I was before. I will try the 1200 bars.

[epiphany]

Just an observation on your last post. The re labeling of a wave count does and will happen and being cognitive of the chance of this occuring is something we all strive for. With that said though there are a few steps that have helped me have the confidence to accept the risk. First off, AGET provides good value as what some may call a prognastic or predictive technical analysis tool (i.e. impulse/corrective patterns predicting future price from past performance) but in my application and opinion I have found the true value to be the mechanical nature of AGET that easily compliments a sound money management approach. I'll explain what I mean.

Confidence (for me anyway) comes from knowing that statistically I can be wrong by as much as 50% (some greater) and still be profitable. My approach in achieving this is two fold as mentioned above 1. mechanical approach and 2. Good money management. Where AGET fits those criterias for me is the "meat" of the system that I use. As a mechanical system it has allowed me to stop tying to predict and rather make reactive decisions with a probable edge and good risk / reward. For example lets assume that your concern is a relabling of a wave pattern. This is a valid concern (I have it as well) but with AGET I have the ability to clearly identify my Risk and Reward per opportunity and if that ratio fits my money management (say 2:1) than I can confidently take the trade knowing that even being wrong 50% of the time I can still be profitable. Additionally I can apply certain mechanics to increase that probabilty. Oscillator and wave relationships (i.e. applying wave ratio's or relationships of Waves to each other such as extended W3 should yield W5's similar or with Fib relationships to W1 (see the section in Applied Technical Analysis hand book for furter explanation)) provide that edge. Sound money management is very easy to apply with AGET because we can easily define risk such as a Fib stop 2 steps away from our W4 entry and reward defined as a "if this is a W4 actually being drawn than where should the targets be for a W5).

I am sorry for the ramble here but my point is really this... focus more on the Risk/Reward characteristics and set your dicipline to take only those trades that match something that will give you room to be wrong and still make $ in the long run. Eventually your use of Elliot Wave Theory and AGET principles will improve moving that statical edge in your favor even greater. Hope this has helped and not confused more.

[gspiker]

wotzit,

I didn't mean to imply that you would ever get rid of wave relabeling with AGET. Just as wave analysts often keep multiple wave counts, and sometimes are forced to change their "preferred count" to one that was an "alternate" count, AGET will determine it has labeled things wrong and relabel at times.

What I was trying to say is that I have noticed that if you only have a limited number of bars loaded (for example only 300), and you have set up AGET to look at only a limited number of bars (again say 300) that relabeling will be much more common. If you set up 600+ bars, and have AGET look at 600 bars of data, it seems the relabeling is less (In fact I KNOW it is less). But you do have to do both - set the number of bars loaded in the chart up past 600 and set the number of bars AGET looks at up to about 600.

The next part is something less than knowledge and more of a feeling. And that is that picking Daily and 60 minute intervals seems to yield better signals (Type I and Type II trades) and less relabeling.

Epiphany has done a good job in describing why occasional relabeling isn't an issue. Let me add a bit more...In reality you never end up (or at least I don't) riding an impulse wave from its start to its end. If you obey good money management and place your stops accordingly you will get stopped out of an impulse wave before wave 5 completes. In fact you will likely stop out (hopefully with a profit) and reenter a few times during a complete 5 wave formation. But these same rules that get you out early will save you when the wave counts end up being wrong and the wave relabels. In fact, even then you can often escape with a small profit. The key is to keep you eyes open to what can happen, and not trust everything to stay static. The markets just don't work that way.

I have noticed that a lot of experienced AGET users seem to use other methods (ellipses, etc) on smaller timeframes to get them in and out of trades, and if getting in on a trade on a smaller timeframe works with a setup with a wavecount on a higher, then they might allow a longer period for the trade to develop. I would be interesting on hearing more from people who do these kinds of things to see what exact setups they look for on the shorter intervals.

Garth

[MR]

gspiker and epiphany,

Thanks for the answers! It is appreciated. You both offer good comments.

[esignal73]

I use 3,5,15,30 and sixty min time frames, but I only trade 15 minuts but do look at all charts and try to cross reference it and see what is cooking. For my personality and trading style 15 min works better than other time frames. 15 min takes the lot of noise out of the market, and you have enough time to decide about probable setups.

[wotzit]

Thanks guys for all the replys so far. As far as I see it the 'GET' Elliott waves is not true Elliott waves count at all, hence all the errors when trying to count the waves in the first place.
I have tried the usual time scales, 3/5/15/30/60, and even checked daily and even that gets recounted and changed.
As a day trader, I haven't got the luxury to beable to go back in time and 'change' my trades like the 'GET' wave can, hence it is no use to me whatsoever as a trading tool.
As far as I'm concerned the GET elliott wave tool relies totally on it's 5/35 offload and when the oscillator falls back to 0 for a completed 4th wave is part of the problem why it's wrong so often. Jeeze those A,B,C' recounts are a pain too!
I myself can't use it, it's too much of a wind up and it leads you into a false sense of security. You have to check back on all your usual reliable (free) indicators before you make a trade, and as it's not counting the waves in true Elliott fashion, but by it's own oscillator, I ask you, what is it's use?
As a basic tool (free) it would be ok I guess, but as the indicators like MACD, Stochastic, etc do not go back and edit their own data, I don't see how GET waves can be a premium tool with a premium price tag.
I think it should be renamed to 'GET Advanced Wave' and miss out the 'Elliott' unless it is configured properly to count as such with no recounting.

wotzit.

[gspiker]

wotzit,

Some indicators work for some people and not for others...I personally find that the AGET system is useful.

I will admit it takes a while to get used to. For one thing, I think they do themselves a disservice to call the waves Elliott Waves. Because you are right, they do not use standard wave counting rules much of the time. They are Elliott like, in that they use many of the same rules. The other effect of calling them Elliott waves is that people try to use the wave count alone. I did this originally and was deeply frustrated, but then I sat down and learned that the wave count part of AGET wasn't designed to be used standalone. It is used in conjunction with other tools they provide, and layered in with a set of rules. Taken as a system, it does work well.

You complain a lot about the recount, and for someone used to Elliott that does take some getting used to (again, a problem with them telling use they are Elliott because it determines our mind set going in). But the reality is, that the changing counts really isn't any different from a whipsaw in a MACD or Stoch. And you shouldn't see recounts any more often (at least I don't) than you do false signals with indicators such as these. It's just the psychology of expecting static wave counts throws one off initially.

One key thing you say:

I myself can't use it, it's too much of a wind up and it leads you into a false sense of security.

leads me to believe that you are falling for this same trap yourself. I could be wrong, but it does give that impression. As I said I did the same thing, and you are right. Without understanding all the rules on a Type I and Type II trade, and going with the thought "well it labeled wave 5 - so I can jump right in now"...will kill you as a trader.

If you want to give these tools a chance, and have not gone through the lessons yet, I would suggest you do. There is gold in the hills if you put the work into digging it out...and are willing to start by throwing away some possibly preconceived idea's on how these tools work.

Garth

[wotzit]

Garth

When I stated I can't use the GET wave I should have included because I follow the real Elliott wave theory.
I have read all the notes and watched the CD that comes with the software.
As a daytrader at the moment I find it easier to make money using the older style indicators ( Fibonacci, ROC, Stochs, supports/resistances, chart patterns H&S, Dtops, etc, trendlines, pivots and using Candlesticks as a price marker) than using the GET wave system independantly with the MOB Ellispe, etc.
You spoke about whipsaws, now that is not something that you can blame the indicators on, that is pure market manipulation (stops getting hit, etc).
Certain whipsaws can be overcome by a few simple changed settings, with a greater timeframe on the chart. The whipsaws are by no means a fault to the software of the older stlye indicators, they record market movement only, they don't then go back and smooth out the whipsaw ripple like it never happened like the GET wave software does when it relabels its wave counts.
That is my whole point.
I am see you agree that it doesn't count the waves correctly like Elliott, that to me is misleading, as the product is not 'as described'.
I understand some traders will be able to see around the short comings and make some good trades, we all have different styles, but the point I am making is that if one has to subscribe and pay a premium price for certain software, then shouldn't that software provide one with premium results?
I am open to ways that can used to make this software find the 'gold', because as what I have seen and tested so far, it will make you some gold, but take it back with a 'recount' just as quick.
Edit: I find the 'JURIK' moving averages and tool set quite a help as the indicators are super smooth and have virtually no lag, and they are completely customisable including overshoot, and they can be used on esignal as an add-on.
For a fee of $250 for a years licence, now that's what I call value for money as they help you through the 'whipsaws'.

[gspiker]

Wotzit,

I don't want to get in an argument over it, if it doesn't work for you it doesn't work, but I thought I would comment on a few things...

You spoke about whipsaws, now that is not something that you can blame the indicators on, that is pure market manipulation

I greatly disagree that this is the cause of whipsaws. To say this is to imply that without manipulation, extremely simple mathimatical equations would be able to model the market action. The market is far too complex and dynamic to be predicted or modeled exactly by even the advanced math of our times.

Certain whipsaws can be overcome by a few simple changed settings, with a greater timeframe on the chart.

Of course, this is well known. The trade off being more of a delay until you get your signals...potentially giving up more money on both the entry and exit. You have similar ability to switch counts to agressive or less agressive counts in AGET. These give you similar trade offs.

they don't then go back and smooth out the whipsaw ripple like it never happened like the GET wave software does when it relabels its wave counts.

I'm not sure why this is an issue (other than for visual becktesting). If they didn't print up the new counts you wouldn't have current information, if they left the old counts up along with the new the charts would be confusing. I don't see how this is an issue with trading...

I am open to ways that can used to make this software find the 'gold', because as what I have seen and tested so far, it will make you some gold, but take it back with a 'recount' just as quick

Then I think you are missing something...it has been a good $ making system for me and many others. Changing counts, while disconcerting at first, really isn't a big issue if you trade with the proper rules.

This may get back to the "some idicators work for some people" idea. A person's psychology will often dictate trading style, which often dictates what indicators and rule sets they can work with. For example, I use, or have used all of the indcators and methods you mention but have never liked using pviots (this is a hard one, there are so many things people call pivots...and I'm assuming you are talking about the "floor trader's pivot"...which BTW most of the floor tarders I have talked to have said they don't use), and have never liked ROC. I used to like stoch's a fair amount, but have since replaced it with indicators I find much more reliable. Obvously you use these tools because they have meaning for you...and that's great. Doesn't mean they work for me.

Also, I strongly doubt there is anything anyone can show men that will ever make me give up price and volume pattern's...they are just too accurate and produce too much "easy" money. Having trained many a new trader, I can say that some people can never really pick up on this...they can eventually see the some of the patterns some of the time...while others are like me and able to see most of them most of the time and tell you when they will high probabily and when they will not be.

But if you don't have confidence in an indicator, as you don't with AGET, I agree you shouldn't even try to use it. It will just never work for you.

Garth

[wotzit]

Garth

This is a debate, a discussion about the pros and cons of AGET waves not an argument, please don't misread my intentions.
I think you made a valid point regarding the waves and not to look on them as the same count as Elliott, I will take this on board, and have another attempt with a clear mind, thanks for the tip.

Regarding whipsaws, many whipsaws, I and many other traders I know, believe are to knock out traders stops.
If you have had a problem in the past regarding whipsaws, you should really give the Jurik Tool set a chance as the tools are like I said, super smooth, fast, and help you over come whippy data, and you know how 'fussy' I am!
If you want a graphic example here's a link, it does what it says on the tin.

http://www.jurikres.com/catalog/ms_ama.htm

Regards

wotzit