How to identify a possible first Elliott wave without hindsight
Keep a candidate first wave provisional and document the evidence that could support or reject it.
Published: (UTC+3)
Русский · English · Deutsch · Español · Français · Italiano · 繁體中文 · 日本語 · 한국어
The first advance after a decline can have more than one interpretation. It may be part of a developing motive sequence or a movement within a larger correction. Identify the alternatives before treating the earliest visible advance as a confirmed first wave.
Preserve the preceding context
Keep enough earlier history to describe the movement preceding the candidate. Record the proposed origin, timeframe and structural degree. The first candle in the visible window is not automatically the origin of the relevant model.
Inspect the candidate movement
Record its turning points and the internal structure required by the model under consideration. A strong upward close or a visual five-segment sketch is not a substitute for inspecting that evidence. Keep a corrective alternative when the available information does not resolve the role.
Use a later observation explicitly
In an invented upward ordinary-impulse hypothesis, the candidate first wave starts at 100 and ends at 110. A proposed second-wave low at 99 goes below that origin and rejects this hypothesis. A low at 105 does not show that particular breach, but it still does not prove the entire impulse.
Record when the conclusion became possible
Save the provisional label and the later observations as separate entries. Do not wave hypothesis that a first wave was certain at its earliest candle because a later completed structure looked clear. The timestamp of available evidence is part of an honest review.
Does a later low at 105 prove the complete upward impulse?
No. It avoids the stated origin breach, while other structural requirements and alternatives still need examination.