Get started

2007

General Market commentYesterday I cut half of my open positions. Namely the digestion I was looking to get, in the obvious line of resistance (200DMA) is not acting as per model. Historical Precedent What is different is the way that the market digested the correction. I was expecting much more the a tight sideways digestion on low volume (green) but the action is not tight (purple). Now the low volume is there (red) ! However, this makes me much more cautious about the bullish scenario. The model we wanted was a much tighter action. Do not let low volume mislead you! Check out the correction in 2007. We started on low volume but then on the bottom the down volume picked up. To be honest we never really got to "panic" mode in this bear market. The PutCall, VIX - never really showed panic markers, on the top of that the meme stocks are breaking out. Point being is that it is not impossible to bottom without these but it is unlikely.
SP:SPXShort
by TintinTrading
SPY repeats 2007Guys, it's hard not to notice how similar the 2007 AMEX:SPY chart is to our current 2022. Honestly, I wouldn't go so far as to say - "THE NEXT CANDLE/BAR WILL BE THE SAME!" But just to take note, I think it's probably worth it, because if you look closely, we're actually doing the same thing in the big picture. Conclusion: - Will I trade SPY trying to repeat the 2007 chart? No, I would not. - Is it worth using this as an additional variable in decision making? I don't know, let everyone decide for themselves. - Does this similarity mean that further action will be the same? No, 100% it does not.
AMEX:SPY
by Myst_Trader
Rebound is around the corner for Chinese developersLast week we discussed the scenario of Hong Kong/China equity rebound due to the political environment change in China. HSI did end up close above the May open, creating a hammer candle in the monthly chart, and stood atop the 50 days moving average. Both showed strong bullishness from the chart perspective (Last week note here: ) As a continuation of the rebound story, earlier there were some developments on the Chinese developers front, which there might be a distress revaluation opportunity for traders to make bets on . Update on Chinese Developers After almost 2 years since the Chinese government imposed “3 red lines” rules on developers, which later leaded to the Chinese high-yield bond collapse in 2021 (majority of Chinese high-yield are issued by the Chinese developer), on May-17 the Chinese government finally showed sign of relaxation on the crackdown, by supporting some developers to issue domestic bond to ease their cash insufficiency . This development is under the backdrop of Chinese economic slowdown, as well as poor monetary/fiscal policy transmission capability with weakened property market. As of today, there are 5 non-state-backed developers that have confirmed on the domestic bonds issue: Longfor (HKEX:960) Country Garden (HKEX:2007) Media Real Estate (HKEX:3990) CIFI Holding (HKEX:884) Seazen (HKEX:1030) Note that investors of the newly issued bond also have the option to get protection by purchasing the credit risk mitigation warrant (CRMW), of which China Securities Finance Corporation (state-owned) is the underwriter of the warrant . The important message here is that, in order for the Chinese government to take a “short-put” position, they must have vetted the Chinese developer names and shortlisted the above 5 companies for the most solid fundamentals (and political correctness). Essentially, the Chinese government is doing stock picking for us . Among this batch of developers, I would recommend Longfor (HKEX:960) and Country Garden (HKEX:2007) . In the sector-wide distressed situation, companies with more deployable cash or financing capability actually have the optionality to acquire and consolidate weaker developers to strengthen their future market share. Longfor and Country Garden are the largest and healthiest financials among the list. Comparing Longfor (HKEX:960) and Country Garden (HKEX:2007), the former actually have demonstrated stronger confidence among investors as one can tell from the severeness of price decline for the passed year. Hence if you are a less active investor who wants to buy this idea, go for Longfor (HKEX:960); for those who have the bandwidth for active management, Country Garden (HKEX:2007) might have more room for trading around positions with leverage. Trading Plan for Country Garden (HKEX:2007) Albeit the fact that I am writing a long side execution plan, please note that the stock technically is still in a bear trend, which we still see selling pressure near 20 and 50 days moving average . Hence this is not a trend following, but reversal-plus-breakout play, where more time is needed for the turnaround and breakout from the downtrend resistant levels . Right now the stock is flirting around the 20 days moving average. One might want to place some protective bet at current level (in case of sharp upside movement with overnight news), or wait for the following 2 key level for turnaround confirmation: 5.4-5.8 : 50 days moving average and May-3 spike 6.75 : Rebound peak from March market plummet For the bearish trend to continue, the stock must go through the 2 recent troughs. According to the trader’s conviction to the rebound stock, one might choose to scale in (i.e. average down the position cost) or scale out (i.e. partial cut loss) the position at these levels: 4.1 : May-12 bottom 3.3 : Mar-16 bottom, lowest price made in march market plummet In terms of trading vehicle selection, apart from holding the stock outright, good news is that Country Garden (HKEX:2007) also has stock options available for trade. By using call option one can be immune from sharp drawdown in case of overnight bearish news, also better cash management for the natural leveraged nature of options. Note that Hong Kong listed stock options are less liquid compared to those in the US, I would recommend to choose expiration less than 3-4 months for narrower spread and more active quotation .
HKEX:2007Long
by geoffreyip523
DJIA vs. DJTA Divergence Supporting Diverging DJIA Price and RSIAs pointed out in a separate comment, the current price/indicator setup increasingly resembles that of 2000 and 2007, immediately before indices' pronounced price declines. A look at the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Dow Jones Transportation Average confirms that pessimistic view. Beginning in mid-2007, the DJTA started to trend downwards, while the DJIA remained caught in a relatively narrow trading range over the course of 2007 until early 2008. This pattern is currently being repeated, as the DJTA finds itself in a downward trend which started in late 2014, while the DJIA has been flat over the same time period. Even more significant, in my view, is the divergence between the recent DJIA' price movement and the Relative Strength Index. It should be pointed out that the longer a divergence persists, the stronger its explanatory power - and eventually the correction it calls for. Having lasted for more than two years, the current discrepancy has persisted significantly longer than the divergence in 2007, which remained for about half a year, before indices fell by about 50%.
DJ:DJIShort
by thsumlauft
DJIA vs. DJTA Divergence Supporting Diverging DJIA Price and RSIAs pointed out in a separate comment, the current price/indicator setup increasingly resembles that of 2000 and 2007, immediately before indices' pronounced price declines. See the following chart for the parallels between 2000, 2007 and now, as previously posted: A look at the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Dow Jones Transportation Average confirms that pessimistic view. Beginning in mid-2007, the DJTA started to trend downwards, while the DJIA remained caught in a relatively narrow trading range over the course of 2007 until early 2008. This pattern is currently being repeated, as the DJTA finds itself in a downward trend which started in late 2014, while the DJIA has been flat over the same time period. Even more signficant, in my view, is the divergence between DJIA's price movement and the RSI, which is apparent since early 2013. It is worthwhile to point out that the longer such a divergence lasts, the stronger is its explanatory power - and eventually the correction it calls for. With the current divergence between price and RSI having started more than two years ago, this is substantially longer than the roughly half year discrepancy we experienced in 2007, before prices corrected about 50%.
DJ:DJIShort
by thsumlauft