DXY and commodities usually don't move in the same direction.

One of them has to give-in.

My money (not literally) is on commodities reversal in near future.

Even in the past, whenever the inverse relationship appeared to be broken, it always resolved in the favour of USD.

More from Mayank Narula

#Nifty

So now that Nifty has undergone ABC correction in the expected manner, what to expect next?

I think we have started larger degree wave 3, once 16800 was crossed.

16800 is the reference level now. We will get more sense by end of next week/ month. https://t.co/KsziuUpZxU


#NIFTY

If 17445 is taken out, then may be we are heading to fresh new all time on Nifty.

Things may pan out way faster than expected.


#NIFTY

Zoomed in cross-section of the chart above.

Wave 3 of 1 should have started today, which can take Nifty to fresh all time highs.


#NIFTY

So now Nifty is moving more clearly on the expected path, what's next?

Nifty has started longer term wave 3 advancement, pending final confirmation of HH by crossing 17800.

In Wave 1 of 3, can expect a move to 20k+.


In terms of longer term wave structure:

Wave 1: 7500 to 18600
Wave 3: 15700 to 35000+

And this can pan out over next 2 years or so.

Since wave 2 was a shallow correction, wave 4 can potentially be a deeper correction.
I did this comparison between Aarti Drugs and Tata Elxsi back in Oct when Tata Elxsi was at 1200-1300. Now it is 4200+.

Here is one more stock displaying similar characteristics: Mayur Uniquoters.


#MayurUniq

Coming out of 7 years consolidation.

Weekly and monthly RSI crossing over 70.

Can it do what Aarti Drugs and Tata Elxsi did in last 1 year?


#MayurUniq

Monthly RSI crossed over 70 in Sep'09 and stayed till Sep'11.

Stock did 5x in that time.
#Ethereum

CMP: 1006

Will be a buyer under 500

More from Screeners

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?