Mid-day Update

Morning AND noon hour surges maintained.

The first hour’s follow-through of the overnight rally had touched 2389.25. Its 4-1/2 point pullback was recovered to 2394.25 before noon. And then a surge at noon touched 2398.75.

Flat-to-lower since then hasn’t even threatened to reverse the noon surge.Back under 2394.25 would start to signal a deeper dip targeting 2387.25-2388.25.

A fresh high of some sort is likely tomorrow. So, a pullback today would be a compelling long-entry. Otherwise, breaking back above 2398.00 would be compelling, too, but also more subject to whipsaw.

Another singular steep intraday dip.

Last week’s sessions each included a singular, steep dip. Nothing is odd about there being one here and there. Little is odd about retracing it entirely. But each of the four sessions dipped, and each session was recovered entirely. (Almost all — one was recovered almost all the way.)

Monday’s breakout skipped the pattern, but didn’t break it. At least, not insofar as the dip, since the noon hour has plunged 9 points down to 2357.50. But its reaction up to 2363.75 is still several points short of a complete recovery.

A recovery wouldn’t necessarily be bullish. It would have to become a reversal and close well into positive territory to confirm yesterday’s breakout. Which wasn’t the likeliest scenario, anyway.

Meanwhile, a test of this morning’s 2372.25 bias-up signal became “unfinished business above”. Plunging just 30 minutes earlier could have invalidated the objective, but now it requires a test. Which is likely today or tomorrow so long as 2361.00 holds as support.

Fresh session highs attacking overnight highs.

This morning’s 2268.25 high is under last night’s highs. but it’s a new intraday high. Not unlike the overnight high — not at all unlike it, not in the least bit — entering a new timing window back under a relative low would reverse the trend down.

Okay, it’s a little unlike the overnight high. Reversing down could leave outstanding the requirement to retest the overnight high. But the door has re-opened for launching a multi-session trend reversal down. That doesn’t make it likely — in fact, failing to exploit a similar setup at the open suggests that this opportunity won’t be exploited either.

Meanwhile, this afternoon’s 2368.25 bias-up signal didn’t trigger, and is only now being touched. Probing above it during the no-bias environment would be “no-bias trending” and doomed to failure. Doomed to failure, from 2272.00-2274.00? Only if bias-up signal is probed.

Still fluctuating around the bias signal.

Will this morning’s 2352.25 bias-down target be retested? Gapping down to it had recovered to probe the 2357.00 bias-down signal, at one point attacking 2360.00. Bias-down triggered anyway, but 2352.25 was never retested.

Ranging choppily flat-to-higher since then has held two more tests of 2360.00, each time reacting back down under 2357.00.

Now this afternoon’s 2359.25 bias-up signal has held to trigger no-bias. Its 2352.25 bias-down signal could be attacked without trending. Otherwise, Friday afternoons are difficult to generate sponsorship for any move.

Another sell-off absorbed?

Holding a test of the 2362.75 bias-up signal had put into play an offsetting test of the 2354.25 bias-down signal. Fulfilling it had no particular timing, and could have taken longer than yesterday’s morning’s 2366.00 objective that was met pre-open.

But a dive to 2353.00 fulfilled the objective during this morning’s bias environment, and held it. It was only overlapped, and its RSIs made higher lows or diverged positively, so no lower objective was put into play. Testing this morning’s 2348.25 bias-down target was only potential, and still is.

Now a bounce has tested this afternoon’s 2362.00 bias-up signal to 2363.50. The signal held, triggering another no-bias. A drift or drop could test the 2353.50 bias down signal, and lower after the bias environment lapses.

Not yet resuming the decline coming out of the bias environment would be likelier to retest today’s high. Another attempt to sell-off wouldn’t have as much potential for holding and recovering.