نوشته‌شده در

Crypto Update: Coins Hit 6-Week Highs as Rally Continues

Overview

“Gaps” (as they are called in the West) and “windows” (their Japanese counterparts) have always attracted the attention of technicians – most probably because they are nearly impossible to be missed on a price chart. After all, a trading session lying completely outside of the prior day’s range, which is what gaps and windows are by definition, must carry some kind of predictive power. However, a critical question remains – are gaps and windows indicative of the beginning of a new trend (as it was the case for AAPL in Figure 1), or are they simply an overreaction and are subsequently quickly filled (as it was the case for MMM in Figure 2)? Notice how in the former case the gap stayed opened (and it still is) for more than a year, whereas in the latter case the gap was filled/closed within two months (i.e. subsequent price action in September completely overlapped the range of the gap).

Figure 1. AAPL Daily

Figure 2. MMM Daily

Note, from here on, only the term “gap” is used, even though there is an important difference between the two – “gaps” look at intraday prices when determining if they are “filled”, whereas “windows” only look at “closing” prices. At the bottom of the article, you can find references to several works on the price phenomenon, in which the difference between the two variations is discussed in-depth.

Given that gaps occur quite frequently (see referenced materials for details), it is easy to understand how any “gap” strategy can be depicted to have predictive power. Most traditional books on technical analysis include a list of gap trading strategies followed by a few stellar charts that are supposed to prove the strategies’ validity (charts similar to Figures 1 & 2). Furthermore, given gaps’ conspicuous nature, most traditional trading strategies have their “entry” on the day the gap occurs (or Gap Day). For example, proponents of gaps being a continuation pattern would suggest that taking a position in the direction of the gap on Gap Day is profitable. On the other hand, technical analysts who believe that “all gaps get filled” suggest taking a position on Gap Day in the opposite direction of the gap. In both cases, action is taken on Gap Day.

After trading and analyzing gaps for many years, I was certain that traditional theories do not work the way they are described to. Probably the most illogical stipulation made by various technical authors was that “the gap itself should serve as support or resistance” and “once filled, gaps become insignificant”. On the contrary, I had found that the gap itself is rarely a strong support or resistance and that very often the most significant gaps are those that have already been filled. This is when, in 2016, I developed a new theory on gaps (“K-Divergence), which significantly “diverges” from traditional theories.

Before discussing what the K-Divergence theory entails, an explanation of the most popular traditional theories is presented.

Traditional Gap Theories

1. A gap is a continuation pattern.

Strategy – taking a position, on Gap Day, in the direction of the gap.

This theory is based on the idea that if, on any given day, prices jump/fall significantly enough to never touch the prior session’s price range, something significant must have occurred and changed the market’s sentiment on the company. In this case, on Gap Day, prices are assumed to reflect the changing opinion of the stock only partially, and thus, further movement in the direction of the gap is expected. In the case of AAPL’s gap (Figure 1), on February 1, 2017, the company reported better-than-expected 1Q17 earnings on the heels of record breaking iPhone sales. Subsequently, the price continued moving higher in a swift fashion, leaving the up-gap behind it. Often, proponents of this theory use support and resistance levels, or technical indicators, as a confirmation that the gap has occurred at an important juncture and that it can be trusted. For example, zooming out and looking at the stock’s price action since 2015 (Figure 3), traders who utilize gaps as continuation patterns can claim that “the breakout occurred above the interim high of the multiple bottom formation, and therefore, carried high predictive power”.

Figure 3. AAPL 2-Day Chart

2. A gap is an overreaction.

Strategy – taking a position, on Gap Day, in the opposite direction of the gap

Advocates of this theory are convinced that gaps are a result of market participants overreacting to news (or “noise”) and that once participation subsides, the gap is expected to get filled. The famous adage “all gaps get filled” is often used in an attempt to support this supposition. Similar to the previous strategy, support/resistance levels and technical indicators are expected to provide further confirmation if the particular gap is to be filled. For example, looking once again at the MMM chart (2-day chart – Figure 4), one may say that the down-gap took prices close to a well-established uptrend (green trendline) and to a key moving average (100 SMA – yellow line). Also, to further support the thesis that prices will reverse, one may point to the positive reversal in RSI (not to be confused with a positive divergence), which indicated that the correction has taken the stock to oversold levels during the uptrend (i.e. RSI making a lower low, while prices making a higher low).

Figure 4. MMM 2-Day Chart

The above two strategies are a perfect example of technical analysis being more of an “art” than “science”, where it is up to the technician’s discretion to decide what action to take after observing a gap. While, after testing both strategies (see K-Divergence section), I found that neither the simple continuation nor reversal strategies are profitable on a systematic basis, there are definitely specific situations where the probability of a gap reversing is higher and vice versa. Unfortunately, the next strategy, the one found in almost any TA book, is one of the reasons why technical analysis has a bad name among most non-technicians.

3. A gap could be either a continuation pattern or an overreaction based on its “classification”.

Strategy – an ambiguous one based on hindsight

As it had become evident that gaps cannot be all “continuation patterns” or “overreactions”, the popular gap classification system was born – where gaps are categorized as either “breakaway”, “continuation/runaway”, “exhaustion” and “common”. This classification is based on two criteria – 1) the location of the gap relative to preceding price action and 2) whether the gap gets filled or not. However, as one can imagine, there is no way to know on Gap Day whether a gap will be filled in the future. That is, the classification system is based on hindsight. Let’s prove this point by looking at an example. Figure 5 shows an up-gap after a prolonged uptrend. Based on the widely-used classification system this gap can be “runaway” (if the gap does not get filled and prices continue higher), “exhaustion” (if prices quickly reverse, fill the gap and continue lower) or even “common” (if prices fill the gap but do not reverse or consolidate). Given the colour of the candle and the long upper wick, it seems like it is an “exhaustion” gap, right?

Figure 5. Daily Chart (real chart, ticker hidden)

Clearly, it is only in hindsight that this gap can be classified. In this case, the gap turned out to be of the “runaway” type as it did not get filled and the stock (MSFT) continued propelling higher (Figure 6). The point is, the classification system is futile for making decisions on Gap Day.

Figure 6. MSFT Daily Chart

K-Divergence (K-Div) Theory

4. Most gaps occur after prices have moved away from a significant support or resistance levels.

Strategy – taking a position in the direction of the gap, only after prices have returned to pre-gap levels

More specifically, the theory suggests that in most cases an up-gap transpires after prices have already jumped from a key support level and a down-gap – after prices have already fallen from a key resistance level. The theory is based on the premise that before a gap occurs prices have already reached a key level and have bounced from it. It is only later on, after most market participants agree on the direction of the next move and take positions in the same direction that gaps occur. This means that it is not the gap itself that should serve as a support or resistance, but rather the range of prices preceding it (pre-gap range). The most important implications of the theory are – 1) the gap itself should not serve as support or resistance and 2) a filled gap is not “insignificant”.

So why does the K-Divergence make sense from a technical point of view? After all, if prices gapped due to “news” that nobody was aware of, this would mean that gaps are nothing more than prices adjusting to the new information. Any such conclusion should render fundamental and technical analysis useless, for it would imply that no analyst is able to purchase a security before news gets disseminated. On the contrary, the K-Divergence assumes that the most astute market participants (i.e. the best fundamental and technical analysts, quants and even “insiders”) are able to trade in advance of the gap occurring. Therefore, true support and resistance levels lie prior to the gap transpiring and subsequent filling of the gap does not render it “insignificant”.  It is best to illustrate this with an example. I will use one of my most recent predictions based on the theory, which was sent to one of my clients. First, I will describe the rational in detail with an updated chart (Figure 7), which will be followed by screenshots from the day the signal was given.

After the close on February 1, 2018, Google reported its 4Q18. The next day, the stock opened sharply lower and continued falling into the close (Feb 2 – Down Gap in Figure 7). The stock continued falling along with the market until the Feb 9 low was set. Subsequently, while NASDAQ was making new highs in early March, GOOG reached the pre-gap range (Bearish K-Divergence Range – violet horizontal trendlines) and started stalling. Due to the strong bounce by the broader markets, the stock recovered and filled the gap. However, when the stock started trading at the pre-gap range, market participants were given a second chance to sell the stock for the same price it was trading at before the 4Q18 earnings were released. Price action confirmed the bearishness of the set-up (GOOG March 13 & 16 – Figures 8 & 9).

Figure 7. GOOG Daily Chart

Figure 8. GOOG March 13

Figure 9. GOOG March 16

In order to validate the theory, I developed two trading strategies based on it (one with the gap and one with the window variation) and backtested them along with 5 variations of the traditional gap strategies discussed above. Figure 10 shows the 1-, 2-, 5-, 10-, 20-, 30- and 44-day period returns of the 7 strategies (#6 & 7 being the two based on the K-Divergence theory) and Figure 11 shows the annualized returns for the those same periods. The backtest took into account a total of 14,219 gaps over nearly a 2-year period.

Figure 10. 1-, 2-, 5-, 10-, 20-, 30- and 44-day period returns

Figure 11. Annualized 1-, 2-, 5-, 10-, 20-, 30- and 44-day period returns

The two K-Div strategies were profitable throughout all periods. The only other consistently profitable strategy was “Fading the Gap” strategy which entailed taking a position in the opposite direction of the gap on Gap Day, but closing it immediately after the gap was filled. This once again goes against traditional theories which suggest that once a gap is filled, prices should continue going against the gap’s direction as, supposedly, an important support/resistance was breached.

It is noteworthy that the K-Divergence theory does not suggest that all gaps have occurred after important support/resistance levels or that they can all be traded profitably in a similar fashion as the GOOG example. Rather, it provides a framework for analyzing the gap phenomenon, on that all active investors/traders should believe in, which assumes that some market participants are able to act ahead of major moves (i.e. prior to the appearance of gaps). Furthermore, it eliminates the use of the “hindsight” gap classification system.

For more on gaps, I recommend reading Julie R. Dahlquist and Richard J. Bauer’s “Technical Analysis of Gaps” book, where they conduct, one of the first on the topic, objective investigations of the phenomenon. For a much more in-depth coverage of the K-Divergence and my research on gaps, you can view my thesis for the Master of Financial Technical Analysis (MFTA) Program, published in the 2018 IFTA Annual Journal.

Conclusion

In the future, regardless of whether you look for opportunities to trade gaps on Gap Day (strategies 1 & 2) or decide to use the K-Divergence as part of your trading arsenal, I hope this article would make you think more critically the next time you hear terms such as the “runaway” gap. And even more importantly, will push you to analyze gaps even after they have been filled, and according to traditional theory, have become insignificant.

Happy gap trading.

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock. 

فیلترشکن پرسرعت

نوشته‌شده در

Technical Analysis: Bitcoin Tests $9000 as Altcoins Pull Back after Strong Rally

Overview

“Gaps” (as they are called in the West) and “windows” (their Japanese counterparts) have always attracted the attention of technicians – most probably because they are nearly impossible to be missed on a price chart. After all, a trading session lying completely outside of the prior day’s range, which is what gaps and windows are by definition, must carry some kind of predictive power. However, a critical question remains – are gaps and windows indicative of the beginning of a new trend (as it was the case for AAPL in Figure 1), or are they simply an overreaction and are subsequently quickly filled (as it was the case for MMM in Figure 2)? Notice how in the former case the gap stayed opened (and it still is) for more than a year, whereas in the latter case the gap was filled/closed within two months (i.e. subsequent price action in September completely overlapped the range of the gap).

Figure 1. AAPL Daily

Figure 2. MMM Daily

Note, from here on, only the term “gap” is used, even though there is an important difference between the two – “gaps” look at intraday prices when determining if they are “filled”, whereas “windows” only look at “closing” prices. At the bottom of the article, you can find references to several works on the price phenomenon, in which the difference between the two variations is discussed in-depth.

Given that gaps occur quite frequently (see referenced materials for details), it is easy to understand how any “gap” strategy can be depicted to have predictive power. Most traditional books on technical analysis include a list of gap trading strategies followed by a few stellar charts that are supposed to prove the strategies’ validity (charts similar to Figures 1 & 2). Furthermore, given gaps’ conspicuous nature, most traditional trading strategies have their “entry” on the day the gap occurs (or Gap Day). For example, proponents of gaps being a continuation pattern would suggest that taking a position in the direction of the gap on Gap Day is profitable. On the other hand, technical analysts who believe that “all gaps get filled” suggest taking a position on Gap Day in the opposite direction of the gap. In both cases, action is taken on Gap Day.

After trading and analyzing gaps for many years, I was certain that traditional theories do not work the way they are described to. Probably the most illogical stipulation made by various technical authors was that “the gap itself should serve as support or resistance” and “once filled, gaps become insignificant”. On the contrary, I had found that the gap itself is rarely a strong support or resistance and that very often the most significant gaps are those that have already been filled. This is when, in 2016, I developed a new theory on gaps (“K-Divergence), which significantly “diverges” from traditional theories.

Before discussing what the K-Divergence theory entails, an explanation of the most popular traditional theories is presented.

Traditional Gap Theories

1. A gap is a continuation pattern.

Strategy – taking a position, on Gap Day, in the direction of the gap.

This theory is based on the idea that if, on any given day, prices jump/fall significantly enough to never touch the prior session’s price range, something significant must have occurred and changed the market’s sentiment on the company. In this case, on Gap Day, prices are assumed to reflect the changing opinion of the stock only partially, and thus, further movement in the direction of the gap is expected. In the case of AAPL’s gap (Figure 1), on February 1, 2017, the company reported better-than-expected 1Q17 earnings on the heels of record breaking iPhone sales. Subsequently, the price continued moving higher in a swift fashion, leaving the up-gap behind it. Often, proponents of this theory use support and resistance levels, or technical indicators, as a confirmation that the gap has occurred at an important juncture and that it can be trusted. For example, zooming out and looking at the stock’s price action since 2015 (Figure 3), traders who utilize gaps as continuation patterns can claim that “the breakout occurred above the interim high of the multiple bottom formation, and therefore, carried high predictive power”.

Figure 3. AAPL 2-Day Chart

2. A gap is an overreaction.

Strategy – taking a position, on Gap Day, in the opposite direction of the gap

Advocates of this theory are convinced that gaps are a result of market participants overreacting to news (or “noise”) and that once participation subsides, the gap is expected to get filled. The famous adage “all gaps get filled” is often used in an attempt to support this supposition. Similar to the previous strategy, support/resistance levels and technical indicators are expected to provide further confirmation if the particular gap is to be filled. For example, looking once again at the MMM chart (2-day chart – Figure 4), one may say that the down-gap took prices close to a well-established uptrend (green trendline) and to a key moving average (100 SMA – yellow line). Also, to further support the thesis that prices will reverse, one may point to the positive reversal in RSI (not to be confused with a positive divergence), which indicated that the correction has taken the stock to oversold levels during the uptrend (i.e. RSI making a lower low, while prices making a higher low).

Figure 4. MMM 2-Day Chart

The above two strategies are a perfect example of technical analysis being more of an “art” than “science”, where it is up to the technician’s discretion to decide what action to take after observing a gap. While, after testing both strategies (see K-Divergence section), I found that neither the simple continuation nor reversal strategies are profitable on a systematic basis, there are definitely specific situations where the probability of a gap reversing is higher and vice versa. Unfortunately, the next strategy, the one found in almost any TA book, is one of the reasons why technical analysis has a bad name among most non-technicians.

3. A gap could be either a continuation pattern or an overreaction based on its “classification”.

Strategy – an ambiguous one based on hindsight

As it had become evident that gaps cannot be all “continuation patterns” or “overreactions”, the popular gap classification system was born – where gaps are categorized as either “breakaway”, “continuation/runaway”, “exhaustion” and “common”. This classification is based on two criteria – 1) the location of the gap relative to preceding price action and 2) whether the gap gets filled or not. However, as one can imagine, there is no way to know on Gap Day whether a gap will be filled in the future. That is, the classification system is based on hindsight. Let’s prove this point by looking at an example. Figure 5 shows an up-gap after a prolonged uptrend. Based on the widely-used classification system this gap can be “runaway” (if the gap does not get filled and prices continue higher), “exhaustion” (if prices quickly reverse, fill the gap and continue lower) or even “common” (if prices fill the gap but do not reverse or consolidate). Given the colour of the candle and the long upper wick, it seems like it is an “exhaustion” gap, right?

Figure 5. Daily Chart (real chart, ticker hidden)

Clearly, it is only in hindsight that this gap can be classified. In this case, the gap turned out to be of the “runaway” type as it did not get filled and the stock (MSFT) continued propelling higher (Figure 6). The point is, the classification system is futile for making decisions on Gap Day.

Figure 6. MSFT Daily Chart

K-Divergence (K-Div) Theory

4. Most gaps occur after prices have moved away from a significant support or resistance levels.

Strategy – taking a position in the direction of the gap, only after prices have returned to pre-gap levels

More specifically, the theory suggests that in most cases an up-gap transpires after prices have already jumped from a key support level and a down-gap – after prices have already fallen from a key resistance level. The theory is based on the premise that before a gap occurs prices have already reached a key level and have bounced from it. It is only later on, after most market participants agree on the direction of the next move and take positions in the same direction that gaps occur. This means that it is not the gap itself that should serve as a support or resistance, but rather the range of prices preceding it (pre-gap range). The most important implications of the theory are – 1) the gap itself should not serve as support or resistance and 2) a filled gap is not “insignificant”.

So why does the K-Divergence make sense from a technical point of view? After all, if prices gapped due to “news” that nobody was aware of, this would mean that gaps are nothing more than prices adjusting to the new information. Any such conclusion should render fundamental and technical analysis useless, for it would imply that no analyst is able to purchase a security before news gets disseminated. On the contrary, the K-Divergence assumes that the most astute market participants (i.e. the best fundamental and technical analysts, quants and even “insiders”) are able to trade in advance of the gap occurring. Therefore, true support and resistance levels lie prior to the gap transpiring and subsequent filling of the gap does not render it “insignificant”.  It is best to illustrate this with an example. I will use one of my most recent predictions based on the theory, which was sent to one of my clients. First, I will describe the rational in detail with an updated chart (Figure 7), which will be followed by screenshots from the day the signal was given.

After the close on February 1, 2018, Google reported its 4Q18. The next day, the stock opened sharply lower and continued falling into the close (Feb 2 – Down Gap in Figure 7). The stock continued falling along with the market until the Feb 9 low was set. Subsequently, while NASDAQ was making new highs in early March, GOOG reached the pre-gap range (Bearish K-Divergence Range – violet horizontal trendlines) and started stalling. Due to the strong bounce by the broader markets, the stock recovered and filled the gap. However, when the stock started trading at the pre-gap range, market participants were given a second chance to sell the stock for the same price it was trading at before the 4Q18 earnings were released. Price action confirmed the bearishness of the set-up (GOOG March 13 & 16 – Figures 8 & 9).

Figure 7. GOOG Daily Chart

Figure 8. GOOG March 13

Figure 9. GOOG March 16

In order to validate the theory, I developed two trading strategies based on it (one with the gap and one with the window variation) and backtested them along with 5 variations of the traditional gap strategies discussed above. Figure 10 shows the 1-, 2-, 5-, 10-, 20-, 30- and 44-day period returns of the 7 strategies (#6 & 7 being the two based on the K-Divergence theory) and Figure 11 shows the annualized returns for the those same periods. The backtest took into account a total of 14,219 gaps over nearly a 2-year period.

Figure 10. 1-, 2-, 5-, 10-, 20-, 30- and 44-day period returns

Figure 11. Annualized 1-, 2-, 5-, 10-, 20-, 30- and 44-day period returns

The two K-Div strategies were profitable throughout all periods. The only other consistently profitable strategy was “Fading the Gap” strategy which entailed taking a position in the opposite direction of the gap on Gap Day, but closing it immediately after the gap was filled. This once again goes against traditional theories which suggest that once a gap is filled, prices should continue going against the gap’s direction as, supposedly, an important support/resistance was breached.

It is noteworthy that the K-Divergence theory does not suggest that all gaps have occurred after important support/resistance levels or that they can all be traded profitably in a similar fashion as the GOOG example. Rather, it provides a framework for analyzing the gap phenomenon, on that all active investors/traders should believe in, which assumes that some market participants are able to act ahead of major moves (i.e. prior to the appearance of gaps). Furthermore, it eliminates the use of the “hindsight” gap classification system.

For more on gaps, I recommend reading Julie R. Dahlquist and Richard J. Bauer’s “Technical Analysis of Gaps” book, where they conduct, one of the first on the topic, objective investigations of the phenomenon. For a much more in-depth coverage of the K-Divergence and my research on gaps, you can view my thesis for the Master of Financial Technical Analysis (MFTA) Program, published in the 2018 IFTA Annual Journal.

Conclusion

In the future, regardless of whether you look for opportunities to trade gaps on Gap Day (strategies 1 & 2) or decide to use the K-Divergence as part of your trading arsenal, I hope this article would make you think more critically the next time you hear terms such as the “runaway” gap. And even more importantly, will push you to analyze gaps even after they have been filled, and according to traditional theory, have become insignificant.

Happy gap trading.

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock. 

فیلترشکن پرسرعت

نوشته‌شده در

پرکردن به روز رسانی: سکه نگه خود زمین

پرکردن به روز رسانی: سکه نگه خود زمین

است Monero بالاتر از 225 $ جهش قیمت یک تصادف و یا بد یدلایمخیرات آوریل احمق جوک روز قیمت پرکردن آمار پایین خود را در تاریخ 1. از آن زمان به ما خبر دلگرم کننده در مقابل فنی لذت می برد.  Bitcoin به نظر می رسد به اطراف سطح دلار 8.000 برگزاری می شود در حالی که Ethereum سر خود را بالای 500 دلار poking نگه می دارد. در همین حال، موج دار شدن اطراف سطح $0.70 معلق در هوا است.

اتر بازنده بزرگ سه ماهه اول به ستاره cryptos عمده تا کنون در ماه آوریل با 35 درصد افزایش برابر موج دار شدن که 25% و bitcoin فقط سایه ای زیر 19% عطف است.  و تاییدیه باید با توجه به بسیاری از دیگر altcoins که در هر روز داده شده در اجرای برنامه های پیشرو تبدیل شده است.

تنها به ذکر است که قیمت را موج دار شدن رفتن بیشتر آن از چرخش در بازار cryptocurrency گسترده تر داشته است.  در آوریل 12, بانک سانتاندر اعلام کرد یک پرداخت ارز blockchain موج دار شدن شده استفاده کنند. این اجازه می دهد تا همان روز پرداخت برای مشتریان در کشورهای مختلف.  بانک های دیگر به احتمال زیاد خواهد شد دنبال سرب و رفتن با موج دار شدن. خبر بسیار خوب، تردیدی نیست.

تنها چیزی که معلوم نیست چگونه موج دار شدن خواهد شد پرداخت است: XRP یا فیات ارز.  این جامعه سرمایه گذاری یک مالش بزرگ در موج دار شدن شده است.

ناگهان خوب خبر همه جا

یکی از چیزهایی که در مورد سرمایه گذاری در cryptocurrencies عشق نوسانات در حرکت هستند.  وقتی تا کمی در مورد آینده این تکنولوژی شناخته شده است، همه چیز تمایل دارد که از نظر خبر خوب یا بد خبر تفسیر می کنید.

از آوریل احمق روز حرکت به راه راست شروع شده است.  بیشتر غم انگیز داستان اخبار مورد سرکوب دولت مقررات سفت و تمام چیزهای که. که اول آمد، گزارش قیمت های بالاتر و یا اخبار درخشان?

خوش خبری برای Ethereum

ICO بازار پر جنب و جوش است.  فهرست پیگیریهای ICO رکورد 20 پروژه های کار در بالا بردن 1.86 تریلیون دلار امسال تاکنون گزارش است.  البته، 850 میلیون دلار برای اعدام، توسط معامله در دوباره کردن دوباره برای تلگراف . حتی این را در نظر گرفتن، میانگین اندازه هم برای پروژه ها و ارائه کامل ارائه مراتب بالاتر از 2017 است.  این نشان می دهد می تواند به بهبود کیفیت ICO.

بستر های نرم افزاری Ethereum همچنان به دور و انتخاب برای آمدن.  برای بسیاری از سال گذشته اختصاص Ethereum مورد 75% – 77% از سهم بازار ICO بلکه همچنان افزایش به بیش از 80%.

محدودیت های پوسته پوسته شدن Ethereum را تیتر بهتر می شود.  Cardano و EOS موقعیت خود را به عنوان اصطلاح cryptocurrencies نسل سوم بر اساس خود را blockchains چند لایه و ویژگی های دیگر که هر دو سرعت و مقرون به صرفه برای حجم معاملات کم ارزش است که تجارت جهانی را تشکیل می دهند.  Ethereum را به طور متوسط حدود 14 معاملات در هر ثانیه باید بهبود و یا انقراض روبرو هستند.

از Cardano و EOS بیشتر نظری از عملیاتی هستند، Ethereum و موسس آن Vitalik Buterin را هم به دفع تهدید.  از نقطه نظر اتر قیمت گذاری Buterin در ایران تیتر سخنان چگونه ابتلا به “برنامه های Ethereum است با پوسته پوسته شدن پیچ می شود” و گزارش درگیری در کنفرانس توسعه دهندگان در پاریس انجام هیچ چیز را برای سرمایه گذاران.

در نهایت، آن اواخر آخرين گزارش شد که Buterin در نهایت عمل خود را با هم و راه حل پیشنهاد شده.  آن به سیستم sharding است که می تواند در مقایسه با سیستم چند لایه blockchain Cardano و EOS’ گفته می شود.

در سیستم sharding قرارداد بین دو طرف در blockchain جداگانه و یا تکه نگهداری می شود.  تنها زمانی که بازتاب را با blockchain اصلی متصل است یا برای باز کردن یا بستن کانال. این قابل توجهی کاهش مقدار داده ها در هر معامله مصرف و افزایش سرعت معامله.  حالا همه با هم کار گرفتن کار است.

بنابراین عملکرد قوی تا کنون در آوریل یک شوک بزرگ باید stitching تا زخم

اتر بزرگترین بازنده cryptocurrencies کلاه بزرگ در سه ماهه اول سال 2018 بود.  برای همه از فن آوری اتخاذ درگیر، توده bitcoin و اتر و موج دار شدن یا هر نام دیگری پیشنهاد بلند مدت است.

در ضمن ما با جستجوی مداوم برای تعادل بین ارزش فعلی و بالقوه باقی مانده است.  این است که در آن حرکت می آید و چه cryptocurrency بسیار جذاب در این دوره باعث می شود. حق که حرکت در حال کار نفع سرمایه گذاران و Ethereum در نهایت مانند رهبر اقدام.  

برجسته تصویر نیت Shutterstock. 

فیلترشکن پرسرعت

نوشته‌شده در

تجزیه و تحلیل فنی: Bitcoin دارای $8000، Ethereum باقی می ماند بالای 500 دلار میان قلاب

cryptocurrencies عمده همچنان صعودی عمل پس از هفته گذشته حرکت قوی حرکت بالاتر، به عنوان بزرگترین سکه تمام معاملات در اصلاحات جويبار و یا در حال حاضر در حال حرکت دوباره پس از قلاب کوتاه. بخش کل برگزاری به دستاوردهای اخیر در ارزش بازار با درپوش کل بازار ارز دیجیتال حدود 330 میلیارد دلار امروز معلق در هوا.

اگر چه نمی گیریم که روند جدید مثبت، با دو سکه های با ارزش ترین هنوز هم در روند کاهش گسترده ای کانال, تاسیس Bitcoin و Ethereum آماده برای مقابله با کلید روندها به محض این که این هفته ممکن است.

هم بستگي به شکسته شدن بین رشته که دیگر نشانه های صعودی شروع چند سکه های کوچک تر نیز از بازار گسترده تر در حال حاضر در اوج جدید تجمع اوایل امروز در معاملات تجاری قطع. با توجه به راه اندازی بلند مدت مطلوب ما با توجه به هر دو کوتاه مثبت باقی می ماند–و طولانی مدت اینجا موقعیت.

BTC/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

BTC همچنان نشان می دهد برخی از ضعف نسبی با وجود بالا پشتیبانی کوتاه مدت باقی مانده به عنوان منطقه مقاومت بسیار قوی فقط جلو نزدیک سطح 8400 دلار است. خط روند کاهش گسترده با مقاومت افقی که تجمع و ما انتظار داریم فعالیت های تجاری به بالاتر در آن منطقه منفجر سکه تلاش برک آوت. در حالی که پشتیبانی نزدیک $7650 و 7000 دلار پیدا مقاومت بیشتر پیش بین 9000 $ و $9200, است.

ETH/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

Ethereum زیر آخر هفته بالا، با تحکیم سکه تلاش به شکل کم بالاتر پس از فشار قوی بالاتر. با کوتاه مدت شاخص های حرکت دوباره خنثی نزدیک, test تجمع بالا به احتمال زیاد به زودی با منطقه مقاومت کلیدی بین 555 $ و $575 همگرایی با گسترده خط روند کاهش BTC به همین دو است. پشتیبانی زیر 500 دلار که 400 $ و $360، در حالی که هدف اصلی بعدی برای برک آوت در 625 دلار است یافت می شود.

Litecoin تجزیه و تحلیل نمودار روزانه

، Litecoin

LTC/دلار آمریکا است در حال افزایش است امروز، در نهایت قدرت نسبی کوتاه مدت پس از بازار عقب مانده در طول تظاهرات اولیه کردن پایین نمایش. سکه زیر مرز پایین تر از منطقه مقاومت $140-150 دلار، حق که معامله می شود خط روند کاهش نیز هست. از دیدگاه بلند مدت سکه هنوز هم واحد پول دیجیتال بیشتر صعودی است و حرکت بالای 150 دلار می تواند راه اندازی test منطقه $170-180 $ با پشتیبانی در 125 $110 $ و $100.

اگر چه آن نیز به بسیاری از دستاوردهای اخیر خود برگزاری داش داش

/ دلار آمریکا، 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

فاصله میان laggards کوتاه مدت بازرگانی هنوز منطقه مقاومت بین $360 و 375 همچنان. سکه چپ پشت غالب کاهش خط روند، اما سطح مقاومت قوی چند هنوز پیش رو دارد و روند صعودی کوتاه مدت هنوز برقرار نشده است. سرمایه گذاران می تواند هنوز هم اضافه کردن به منابع آنها در pullbacks با پشتیبانی یافت که 315 و 300 دلار و مقاومت پیش رو بیشتر آن 400 $ و $435.

موج دار شدن

XRP/USDT، 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

موج دار شدن هنوز است اطراف سطح کلید $0.68 در الگوی صعودی تثبیت پس از برک آوت روند کاهش با 0.73 $ و $0.84 سطح آستانه به عنوان مقاومت معلق در هوا. اصلاح کوتاه مدت می تواند بیش از به زودی، و هر دو کوتاه- و دراز مدت تصویر مثبت با سطوح کلیدی نزدیک 0.57 $0.54 و $0.45 به نظر می رسد.

هر چند سکه ثبات نشان داد در طول شیب بخش گسترده کلاسیک Ethereum

و غیره/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

Ethereum کلاسیک مجاورت $16 تا کنون ترک کند. ارز سمت راست در کلید کاهش خط روند، در حالی که سطح مقاومت مهم بعدی در 18 دلار معامله می شود. شاخص های حرکت دراز مدت هنوز در کف فروش خاک است و سرمایه گذاران سکه با سطوح حمایت $14.50 و را به 13.50 $ که جمع آوری می تواند.

Monero

XMR/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

در حالی که Monero در یک موضع قوی فنی بلند مدت باقی می ماند، سکه هنوز بازار کوتاه مدت، با سطح مقاومت 200 دلار آن را به عقب نگه داشتن عقب مانده است. که گفت: به عنوان پایه بلند مدت حالا احتمال تاسیس هر دو معامله گران و سرمایه گذاران به موقعیت خود را در اینجا، می رسند، می تواند در حالی که به دنبال برای بیشتر نقاط ورود قوی با 175 $ و $150 پشتیبانی و سطح مقاومت قوی جلو نزدیک به 240 دلار و دلار 280.

نئو

نو/USDT، 4 ساعته نمودار

نئو رهبری به عنوان سکه همچنان به عمل نسبتا قوی نسبت به رشته های دیگر پس از تجمع قوی برای test سطح 80 دلار است که با خط روند غالب تجمع احتمال است. در حالی که هدف بعدی پیش رو که 100 دلار در حال حاضر، سطح 64 دلار در تمرکز، با حمایت نزدیک به 50 دلار و 40 دلار است.

یوتا

یوتا/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

یوتا بازار بالاتر در تجمع اخیر فشار بالاتر از سطح کلید $1.50 در روند منجر به. سکه هنوز از دیدگاه کوتاه مدت overbought و بیشتر تحکیم به احتمال زیاد قبل از دیگری پا بالاتر است. ارز احتمال آغاز روند صعودی جدید حرکت قوی حرکت داده می شود و در حالی که پشتیبانی زیر $1.5 یافت که test سطح 1.9 $ در هفته های آینده است $1.2.

EOS

EOS/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

EOS همچنان به دستاوردهای بزرگ خود پس از پیشرو بازار بالاتر هفته گذشته، با سطح 9 $ بودن هنوز در تمرکز. اگرچه تصحیح در روزهای آینده ادامه می تواند شاخص MACD است بازگشت به خنثی و حرکت بالا نوسان بالا می تواند منجر به test سطح $12 با تمام وقت بالا درست در بالای که نزدیک $14.50 در بر داشت.

تصویر برجسته از Shutterstock

سلب مسئولیت: تحلیلگر صاحب cryptocurrencies. او دارای سرمایه گذاری در سکه ها موقعیت اما در کوتاه مدت و یا معامله در روز درگیر می کند و او را نگه ندارد موقعیت های کوتاه مدت را در هر یک از سکه ها.

فیلترشکن پرسرعت

نوشته‌شده در

تجزیه و تحلیل Cryptocurrency بلند مدت: پر از دست انداز جاده پیش رو با وجود قوی تجمع

نماند نهایت رمزنگاری-بخش از دوران ضعف شدید altcoin درست زمانی که Ethereum رسیده سطح make-or-break منطقه از آن خود برک آوت زمستان آغاز شده. هر چند دومین بیش از 75% آن ركورد بود، روند نزولی تنها کمی بیش از 1 ماه سود به طور مشابه به بسیاری از رشته های پاک روند صعودی سکولار هنوز دست نخورده است.

ETH/دلار آمریکا، تجزیه و تحلیل نمودار روزانه

ETH رهبری بازار بالاتر این هفته همانطور که سکه از آن پایین گرفت و شروع به بهتر BTC پس از یک دوره طولانی از ضعف نسبی. این تجمع تدریجی بود در ابتدا، اما روز پنج شنبه بخش کل بالاتر را منفجر شده همراه با BTC و altcoins ادامه قدرت میان افزایش نشان می دهد.

روشن باشد, روند کاهش گسترده هنوز دست نخورده است و داوران هنوز هم از اینکه آیا یا نه ما می دید پیشرفته است که چالش های اوج ژانویه است. سکه ارائه سیگنال های بلند مدت صعودی در خاک کف فروش و سرمایه گذاران بلند مدت می تواند هنوز هم اضافه کردن به منابع آنها در کوتاه مدت pullbacks با پشتیبانی یافت که $450، 400 $ و $360، در حالی که مقاومت کلیدی ايدز جلو نزدیک $626 و 725 دلار است.

BTC/دلار آمریکا، تجزیه و تحلیل نمودار روزانه

Bitcoin 7650 $ و $8000 سطح موضوع ساعت گذشته یافت اما این حرکت هنوز کافی نیست برای تغییر روند با وجود طولانی مدت مقاومت نسبی به عنوان کاهش گسترده است خط روند هنوز پیش رو به عنوان مقاومت است.

BTC بالا بهمن احتمال شکل گیری پایه تشکیل کم، برگزار شد و اگر چه بیشتر تحکیم ممکن است سرمایه گذاران بلند مدت هنوز هم می تواند به منابع آنها در اینجا، اضافه می کنید. مقاومت مهم پیش رو است بین 9000 دلار-$ 9200 و نزدیکی 10.000 $ و $11.300، با حمایت بیشتر در 6150 $-$ 6250 در بر داشت.

Litecoin تجزیه و تحلیل نمودار روزانه

، Litecoin

ETH در دلار آمریکا است شده عقب مانده بازار گسترده تر جاری با وجود برگزاری بالا پایین فوریه و نمایش قدرت نسبی دراز مدت. سکه چند سطح قوی مقاومت کرد و الگوی مثلث گسترده غالب به باقی مانده است. اشباع فروش ارز و پایه احتمال تشکیل بین $100 و 125 $ است، سرمایه گذاران بلند مدت هنوز افزودن به منابع آنها در pullbacks کوتاه مدت باشد. مقاومت پیش که $140، 150 دلار و در منطقه کلیدی $170-180 $ در حالی که پشتیبانی بسیار مهم 100 دلار است.

داش داش/دلار آمریکا

،

نمودار 4 ساعته تحلیل داش رهبران در روزهای اخیر نیز هست هنوز خوب زیر 400 دلار پس از مدت کوتاهی نزدیک به سطح کلیدی گرفتار شدن عقب مانده شده است. اگر چه پیش از قانع کننده بودن حرکت دراز مدت قادر به نمایش تصویر کمی صعودی است. که گفت با توجه به راه اندازی هنوز کف فروش سرمایه گذاران بلند مدت هنوز افزودن به منابع آنها را در pullbacks. بیشتر مقاومت قوی بالای 400 $ پیش که دلار 435، 500 دلار است و در حالی که upport اولیه که 300 دلار

موج دار شدن

XRP/دلار آمریکا، بین $575 و 600 دلار ساعت 4 تجزیه و تحلیل نمودار

XRP Ethereum outperforming بازار به عنوان سومین سکه پیوسته بالاتر منفجر شده در تاریخ پنجشنبه، رسیدن به تمام راه را تا سطح $0.68 برای افزایش 50 ٪ خاموش پایین قبل از ورود به مرحله تثبيت. ارز را از روند بلند مدت کاهش شکست اما با هنوز قوی مقاومت سطوح مختلف پیش رو، بیشتر فرار دارد انتظار می رود. مقاومت بیشتر جلو که 0.85 و $1، در حالی که پشتیبانی یافت که $ $0.57، 0.53 و 0.42 $.

کلاسیک Ethereum

و غیره/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار کلاسیک تحلیل

در میان laggards یخ Ethereum تجمع به عنوان سطح مقاومت 16 دلار متوقف پیشرفته، با گسترده ترین خط روند کاهش هنوز به پیش رو بودن. ارز است که هنوز هم از دیدگاه بلند مدت oversold و سرمایه گذاران بلند مدت می توانید به منابع آنها در اینجا، اما معامله گران باید با احتیاط به عنوان روند صعودی جدید هنوز هیچ دولت. پشتیبانی اولیه است در $14.50 در حالی که مقاومت پیش رو است که 18 دلار، 20 دلار و حدود 23 $.

Monero

XMR/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

Monero احتمال پایه در منطقه $150-175 دلار ساخته شده است و وجود آن است که نسبتا ضعیف کوتاه مدت، بلند مدت صعودی, است و سرمایه گذاران می تواند همچنان به جمع آوری سکه. حرکت در خاک کف فروش با سطوح مقاومت قوی در جلو است که 200 دلار 240 $ و $280.

نئو

نو/USDT، 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

نئو میان رشته قوی ترین از دیدگاه کوتاه مدت برگزاری اگر مجموعه دستاوردهای اخیر خود و معلق در هوا در اطراف مقاومت 64 دلار در داخل کانال روند کاهش گسترده بسیاری است. حرکت صعودی است، اما قوی مقاومت مناطق هستند پیش رو نزدیک به 80 دلار و 100 دلار، با 50 $ primarhy سطح حمایت. معامله گران و سرمایه گذاران می تواند به سمت خود نگه دارید و به دنبال نقاط ورود در pullbacks کوتاه مدت.

یوتا

یوتا/دلار 4 ساعته نمودار تجزیه و تحلیل

یوتا شکست از روند کاهش هنوز قدرت دلگرم کننده نمایش حتی در حالی که سطح $1.50 پیشروی را متوقف کرده است. هر دو کوتاه-راه اندازی بلند مدت تغییر دو تشکر صعودی به برک آوت و حرکت بالا $1.50 می روند صعودی کوتاه مدت جدید تایید. بیشتر مقاومت کلیدی پیش رو است که 1.9 و 2.2 $ و $2.35، در حالی که پشتیبانی نزدیک $1.2 و 1.1 $ و $1.1 یافت می شود.

تصویر برجسته از Shutterstock

سلب مسئولیت: تحلیلگر صاحب cryptocurrencies. او دارای سرمایه گذاری در سکه ها موقعیت اما در کوتاه مدت و یا معامله در روز درگیر می کند و او را نگه ندارد موقعیت های کوتاه مدت را در هر یک از سکه ها.

فیلترشکن پرسرعت