Archive

2024

Browsing

A California-based group linked to Democrats is getting involved in a Pennsylvania congressional primary by boosting a Republican against a Republican incumbent in the latest example of liberal funds being directed toward a GOP primary.

True Patriots PA, a liberal group linked to California Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell, sent out mailers to Pennsylvania voters to slam GOP Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick and say he is not conservative enough, in essence boosting his primary opponent, Mark Houck, Politico first reported this week.

Fox News Digital obtained some of those mailers that framed Fitzpatrick as a ‘RINO’ (‘Republican in name only’) and implied he wasn’t conservative enough for the base that supports former President Trump.

‘MAGA is ready to bag the biggest RINO in Congress,’ reads one of the mailers along with a photo of Fitzpatrick photoshopped onto a rhinoceros body. ‘We sent Brian Fitzpatrick to D.C. to represent our values, instead, he became best friends with Kamala Harris and the Democrats,’ another mailer said.

FEC records show True Patriots PA spent roughly $26,000 on the mailer.

Meagan Olson is listed as treasurer for both True Patriots PA and the Swalwell campaign.

‘I consider Brian a friend and someone who has bravely defied his party to help secure Ukraine aid,’ Rep. Swalwell told Fox News Digital in a statement. ‘I have never heard of his primary opponent and am not involved or support any effort to defeat Brian in the primary. My office uses a professional compliance firm that serves as treasurer for dozens of campaigns.’

When reached for comment, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) directed Fox News Digital to a Washington Post article in January 2024 in which DCCC Chair Rep. Suzan DelBene said her group no longer supports the strategy of propping up ‘far-right’ candidates in swing districts.

‘It should come as no surprise that a group connected to Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat who is so dumb that he was tricked into sleeping with a Chinese spy, would be propping up self-described chronic masturbator Mark Houck in the Republican Primary against Brian Fitzpatrick,’ Defending America PAC’s Chris Pack told Fox News Digital.

‘Even Democrats as intellectually challenged as Eric Swalwell know that their best chance at flipping the one seat needed to take back Democrat control of the House of Representatives is if Mark Houck beats Brian Fitzpatrick in the primary next Tuesday.’ 

Houck, a pro-life activist, has made previous acknowledgments that he ‘had a pornography problem’ as a young man and spoke openly at a church conference about talking to his son about masturbation and erections.

‘I struggled with pornography, and of course that leads to sexual sin, masturbation and stuff. That was a chronic habit,’ Houck said in a 2010 interview, which Defending America PAC included in an ad titled ‘Beat it.’

In a recent statement, Houck said he ‘fell victim to the dehumanizing effects of the pornography industry’ over ‘two decades ago.’ He also defended the conversation about his son, saying the clips circulating online ‘seizes on de-contextualized comments I made with my son present in public pursuit of this transformative ministry’ meant to steer people away from pornography.

The Democrat group boosting Houck is the latest example of a recent trend in which liberal funds have been used to back Republican challengers in an effort to sink candidates who support or are supported by former President Trump.

PACs linked to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer have spent millions meddling in GOP primaries this cycle, including in swing state Senate races in Ohio and Montana.

Duty and Country PAC, affiliated with Schumer, ran ads during the Ohio GOP Senate primary that accused Trump-backed businessman Bernie Moreno of being ‘too conservative for Ohio.’ That effort proved unsuccessful in the primary as Moreno won every county in the Buckeye State, beating his nearest challenger by almost 20 points.

In 2022, Democrats spent more than $40 million to boost six pro-Trump candidates in Republican primaries, and all six of those Republicans lost their general election races to Democrats.

Fitzpatrick, who has so far declined to say if he will endorse Trump, voted against impeaching Trump twice and won re-election in 2022 by almost 10 points, despite Biden carrying the 1st Congressional district.

‘After years of brutal losses, the far-left has finally figured out they have no chance of beating Congressman Fitzpatrick, so they’ve now tagged California left-wing extremists to meddle in his primary using the same violent political rhetoric they claim to stand against,’ Fitzpatrick campaign spokesperson Ben Trundy told Fox News Digital in statement.

‘This lame attempt to prop up Mark Houck, an admitted porn addict and serial grifter who believes in complete abortion bans with no exceptions, shows just how desperate they are to force their extreme policies on Bucks and Montgomery County voters.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Republicans in the Senate are accusing the Democratic Party, including President Biden and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., of emboldening Iran prior to the country’s recent attack on U.S. ally Israel.

‘Instead of standing with our ally, Israel, Democrats are focused on appealing to their radical left base, which hates Israel and is actively supporting Hamas and Iran,’ Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital.

‘To appease his base, Joe Biden allowed over $100 billion to flow to Iran. Iran then used that money to make drones and cruise missiles to attack Israel,’ Cruz said. ‘In a very real sense, Joe Biden funded Iran’s attack on Israel. The Democrat position on Israel and Iran is as illogical as it is indefensible.’

Iran attacked Israel directly over the weekend, launching hundreds of drone strikes as well as a barrage of ballistic and cruise missiles. With the help of the U.S. military, Israel managed to intercept almost all the incoming drone and missile attacks. 

Iran’s previous involvement in attacks against Israel has been through proxies in countries such as Syria and Yemen. Launching an assault from within its own country marks a major escalation from a proxy fight to a direct attack.

‘Since October 7, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer have tried to undermine Israel at every turn,’ Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said in a statement to Fox News Digital. ‘Whether it’s on the battlefield, at the UN, or in Congress, they are more interested in pleasing the pro-Hamas wing of their party than they are in helping our greatest ally in the Middle East.’

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., pointed to the Democratic Party’s shift on Israel, saying in a statement Saturday, ‘Tehran and its proxies are emboldened when they see divisions between the US and Israel.’

Prior to the attack, Biden hardened his posture toward Israel as it fights Hamas in Gaza. Biden warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a call this month ‘that U.S. policy with respect to Gaza will be determined by our assessment of Israel’s immediate action on these steps’ to address civilian casualties and ensure safety for humanitarian aid workers, according to the White House. The call followed an Israeli strike that led to the deaths of seven aid workers from World Central Kitchen.

Last month, Schumer sparked outrage from Republicans after calling on Israel in a floor speech to hold elections to replace Netanyahu, who he said ‘has put himself in coalition with far-right extremists’ and ‘has been too willing to tolerate the civilian toll in Gaza.’

‘If Prime Minister Netanyahu’s current coalition remains in power after the war begins to wind down and continues to pursue dangerous and inflammatory policies that test existing U.S. standards for assistance, then the United States will have no choice but to play a more active role in shaping Israeli policy by using our leverage to change the present course,’ Schumer said.

Prior to his floor speech, Schumer requested a classified intelligence briefing, which he routinely receives, on the status of hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas. The briefing revealed that there would be no disruptions to ongoing hostage negotiations if Schumer gave his speech, according to a source familiar.

However, the source was unable to say whether any implications regarding Iran were relayed during the briefing.

Schumer’s office also hit back at the claims, with spokesperson Allison Biasotti saying in a statement, ‘Leader Schumer has been clear that the United States’ commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad, and that the best way to deter enemies of Israel, like Iran, is for the House to promptly pass the bipartisan supplemental bill, with over $17 billion urgently needed for Israel’s defense and U.S. operations against Iranian-backed aggression in the Red Sea, which Schumer already passed in the Senate.’

The majority leader’s office said the attack on Israel was a response to the recent Israeli strike on Iran’s consulate in Damascus, Syria, adding that Iran and Israel have been engaged in a lengthy conflict for years.

But according to one Democrat aide, there are senators in the party who are concerned about a growing number of Democrats’ posture on Israel potentially giving Iran the sense that American support is wavering for its ally.

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., accused Biden of trying to ‘walk a tightrope of appeasing an increasingly radical base of his party while upholding the mainstream American position of support for Israel.’

‘The problem is the president isn’t walking a tightrope. He’s trying to straddle the Grand Canyon,’ he said in a statement.

White House spokesperson Andrew Bates pushed back on criticism of Biden’s posture toward Israel, and he rejected claims he emboldened Iran to attack, in a statement to Fox News Digital.

‘Former Trump Administration officials and Fox News’ own reporting have debunked those lies,’ he said.

‘President Biden is the only American President to have directly defended Israel, as he ordered the American military to do last weekend,’ Bates said. ‘He is also the only American President to have set foot in Israel during wartime, in support of our ironclad commitment to their security. Unlike others, he did not rail against Israel in the days after October 7th, nor has he ever praised Hezbollah.’

Meanwhile, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., pointed to a recent effort to force votes on a stand-alone Israel aid bill in the Senate as she criticized her Democrat counterparts.

‘This week, Senate Democrats again blocked immediate aid to Israel after Senator [Roger] Marshall and I demanded a vote to support our ally. The Left would rather play politics to appease their socialist base,’ she told Fox News Digital in a statement.

‘It’s clear that the Biden administration and Leader Chuck Schumer refuse to back our most important ally in the Middle East,’ Blackburn continued.

Two Democrat congressional aides told Fox News Digital that the attack by Iran was expected. They said intelligence suggested it was in response to the consulate strike on April 1 that killed Iranian commanders.

Nevertheless, the scale of the Iranian attack and its direct targeting of Israel shocked many observers.

Democrats in the upper chamber objected to two requests for unanimous consent to vote on different versions of stand-alone Israel aid. However, most Democrats maintained support for a foreign aid package that ties Israel aid to Ukraine aid.

McConnell said last month that Schumer’s call for new Israeli elections was both hypocritical and grotesque as well as ‘unprecedented.’

‘Make no mistake, the Democratic Party doesn’t have an anti-[Netanyahu] problem. It has an anti-Israel problem,’ the Republican leader said in floor remarks at the time.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Israel carried out limited strikes in Iran early Friday in retaliation for Tehran firing a barrage of missiles and drones at Israel last Saturday.

A well-placed military source has told Fox News that the strike was ‘limited.’ Sources familiar said the U.S. was not involved and there was pre-notification to the U.S. from the Israelis.

Fox News confirmed there have been explosions in Iran’s Isfahan province, which is where Natanz, one of Iran’s nuclear facilities, is located. 

Though it was initially unclear if the facility was hit, state television described all sites in the area as ‘fully safe’ and the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed on X Friday morning that there is no damage.

Details surrounding the intended target of the strike – if there was one – were not immediately available, but Fox News was able to confirm the target was ‘not nuclear or civilian.’

As of early Friday morning, Pentagon officials have not confirmed the strike and the White House and the National Security Council (NSC) have declined to comment on the unfolding situation.

The semiofficial Fars news agency reported on the sound of explosions over Isfahan near its international airport. It offered no explanation for the blast. However, Isfahan is home to a major airbase for the Iranian military, as well as sites associated with its nuclear program.

A senior Iranian official allegedly told Reuters that Iran has no plans to immediately respond to the Israeli strike, which was described differently on Iranian state media. The explosions heard in Isfahan were allegedly a result of the country’s air defense systems activating and not a missile attack, the official told Reuters.

Former Israel Defense Forces spokesman Jonathan Conricus wrote on X while Iran appears to downplay the strike, he ‘think[s] they’ve gotten the message.’

Iran temporarily grounded commercial flights in Tehran and across areas of its western and central regions in response to the attack. Restrictions have since been lifted on flights to and from Khomeini and Mehrabad international airports in Tehran, according to Iranian news agency Tasnim.

Dubai-based carriers Emirates and FlyDubai began diverting around western Iran at 4:30 a.m. local time.

In a statement to Fox News Digital, FlyDubai said flight FZ 1929 from Dubai to Tehran on Friday morning returned to Dubai because the Imam Khomeini International Airport was closed. The airline also said all of its flights to Iran on Friday have been canceled.

‘The safety of our passengers and crew is our priority. We are monitoring the situation closely and will make changes to our flight paths in consultation with the relevant authorities,’ a FlyDubai spokesperson said. ‘We will share any further updates once more information becomes available.’

In response to Israel’s reported strike on Iran, the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem issued a security notice Friday morning ‘out of an abundance of caution’ restricting U.S. government employees and their family members from personal travel outside the greater Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Be’er Sheva areas until further notice.

Iran attacked Israel over the weekend in retaliation for a deadly strike on Iran’s consulate in Syria earlier this month that killed a dozen people, including a top general. Israel has not publicly claimed responsibility for the attack.

The weekend attack by Iran marked a major escalation of violence. Despite decades of hostilities between the two nations, Iran has never directly attacked Israel, instead relying on proxy forces in Iraq, Lebanon and elsewhere. 

This is a developing story. Check back for updates. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A meeting to advance Speaker Mike Johnson’s latest border security bill abruptly ended on Wednesday night without a vote on whether the measure will hit the House floor.

‘Sorry, not sorry, for opposing a cr—y rule that is a show vote / cover vote for funding Ukraine instead of border security,’ Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, wrote on X after the meeting imploded.

He’s one of three Republican foreign aid hawks on the House Rules Committee, which is the final barrier before a piece of legislation hits the House floor.

It comes as conservative rebels in the House GOP conference criticize the speaker’s decision not to link border security measures to his $95 billion foreign aid plan. 

Johnson told lawmakers on Wednesday that the House would consider separate foreign aid bills on Ukraine, Israel, the Indo-Pacific and a fourth bill including various foreign policy provisions. If passed, they would be sent to the Senate in a combined package.

To appease Republicans concerned about not using it as an opportunity to crack down on the border crisis, he also unveiled a separate bill similar to H.R.2, the comprehensive immigration and border enforcement bill House Republicans passed last year but which the Democrat-controlled Senate refused to take up. He said that bill would go through procedural hurdles parallel to the foreign aid bills, rather than alongside them.

In a remarkable moment toward the end of the meeting, Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., the top Democrat on the committee, acknowledged that the bill has no support from Democrats and likely no future in Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s Senate. He also pointed out that the three conservative rebels on the panel would likely vote against the bill as well – meaning it would not even survive their committee.

‘We’ve been here. We’ve done this already. We know what the Senate is going to do. And my three colleagues, who I know have been expressing some discontent about what’s going on here, I mean, maybe we can end this hearing. I mean, I think if the three of you vote ‘no’ on this rule, we’re done,’ McGovern said.

He pointed out that Roy called it a ‘watered-down, dangerous cover vote’ and asked him, along with Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ralph Norman, R-S.C., if they planned to vote in favor of advancing the bill. 

Massie and Roy would not say, with Roy adding, ‘I think I’m pretty well publicly not in favor of what’s going here.’ Norman said he would oppose the bill.

The hearing soon recessed without a conclusion.

Foreign aid and aid to Ukraine, specifically, have proven to be politically fraught topics for Johnson as he navigates a historically slim House majority and new threats from fellow Republicans to trigger a vote on his ouster.

Johnson has argued that tying U.S. border measures to foreign aid, especially Ukraine, would kill its chances of passing .’We want the border to be part of every single thing we do here,’ he told reporters on Thursday morning, adding, ‘We don’t have the votes. If you put Ukraine in any package, you can’t also do the border because I lose Republican votes on that rule. My friends don’t get it.’

He was initially aiming for a Saturday vote on the foreign aid bills as well as the measure on border security. It’s not clear how the Wednesday evening chaos will affect that schedule.

Fox News’ Chad Pergram contributed to this report

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

More than a dozen House Democrats voted against a resolution condemning Iran’s airstrikes on Israel Thursday.

The resolution, which also affirms U.S. support for Israel responding to the attack however it deems necessary, overwhelmingly passed 404 to 14. Just one House Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., voted against the bill. 

Fox News Digital reached out to Massie for comment.

Massie was joined by 13 Democrats, including ‘Squad’ member Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.; Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.; Cori Bush, D-Mo.; Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.; Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y.; and Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass. Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., was also among those opposing the bill.

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., the No. 3 House GOP leader, tore into the Democrats who voted against condemning Iran in a statement to Fox News Digital after the vote. 

‘House Democrats’ hatred for Israel runs so deep they would rather defend terrorists than support our strongest ally in the Middle East. Vote after vote, the Democrat Party continues to cement their position as the pro-terrorist party,’ Emmer said.

Iran fired a barrage of rockets at Israel over the weekend, 99% of which were intercepted, in retaliation for an Israeli attack on an Iranian diplomatic facility in Syria. It was a marked escalation of tensions in the region as the first attack on Israel directly from Iranian soil.

The 13 progressives who voted against the measure are among a growing faction of the Democratic Party who are critical of the U.S.’s strong ties to Israel, particularly in the wake of Israel’s invasion of Gaza. 

Israel’s war on Hamas began after militants from the pro-Palestinian terror group invaded southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 and killed more than 1,000 people. The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between fighters and civilians, has said over 30,000 Palestinians have died in the months since.

House Republicans have seized on the Democratic divides over Israel, distancing themselves from that fight by standing firm with the long-standing relationship. In response to the Iran attack, House GOP leadership lined up 17 bills for a vote this week affirming U.S. support for Israel and against Iran.

Ocasio-Cortez criticized that effort earlier this week in a statement, saying ‘Following last weekend’s unprecedented response by Iran to Israel’s attack on its consulate, the Republican Majority is explicitly leveraging a series of bills to further escalate tensions in the Middle East.’

‘This is a blatant attempt to distract from their own incompetence. The country and the world need real leadership from the House of Representatives in this moment, not resolutions designed purposefully to increase the likelihood of a deadly regional war or worse. I will oppose any cynical effort to further inflame tensions, destroy a path to peace in the region, and further divide the American people,’ she said.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A new well publicized poll from Harvard University is the latest to indicate rising support for former President Trump among the nation’s youngest voters, who traditionally are a key part of the Democratic Party’s base.

President Biden leads his Republican challenger 45%-37% among people ages 18 to 29 in a Harvard Youth Poll released early Thursday by the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics. Sixteen percent of those questioned were undecided.

However, Biden’s 8-point advantage over the former president is much smaller than his 23-point lead over Trump at the same point four years ago in the 2020 election cycle.

The president’s lead over Trump widens to 50%-37% among registered voters under age 30, and to 56%-37% among those likely to cast a ballot in the November election. 

However, even Biden’s 19-point margin among likely voters under age 30 is much smaller than his 30-point lead over Trump four years ago.

Additionally, the poll indicates that the president’s 19-point lead over Trump among likely voters shrinks to 13-points when third party and independent candidates are added to the mix.

According to the survey, Biden stands at 43%, Trump 30%, Democrat turned independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at 8%, Green Party candidate Jill Stein at 4% and independent Cornel West at 2%.

The poll suggests Trump’s made major gains among young male voters.

‘Democrats have lost significant ground with young men,’ the poll’s release highlighted.

The president leads among women by 33 points in the poll, but his advantage among men is just six points. While Biden’s lead among women is nearly identical to four years ago, his advantage among men has plummeted 20 points from this point in the 2020 election cycle.

‘The gap between young men’s and young women’s political preferences is pronounced,’ polling director for the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics John Della Volpe emphasized.

He also cautioned to ‘make no mistake, this is a different youth electorate than we saw in 2020 and 2022.’

The poll also indicated that younger voters supporting Trump are much more enthusiastic about the former president than Biden voters are about the current president. More than three-quarters of those backing Trump said they were enthusiastic about their support, compared to just 44% of Biden backers who said the same thing.

The poll is the latest to indicate an erosion in support for Biden among younger voters. Also alarming for the president is his approval rating among those under 30, standing at just 31% in the new survey.

The Harvard Youth poll of 2,010 Americans ages 18-29 was conducted March 14-21, with an overall sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Note to the reader: This is the seventeenth in a series of articles I’m publishing here taken from my book, “Investing with the Trend.” Hopefully, you will find this content useful. Market myths are generally perpetuated by repetition, misleading symbolic connections, and the complete ignorance of facts. The world of finance is full of such tendencies, and here, you’ll see some examples. Please keep in mind that not all of these examples are totally misleading — they are sometimes valid — but have too many holes in them to be worthwhile as investment concepts. And not all are directly related to investing and finance. Enjoy! – Greg

To begin Part III: Rules-Based Money Management, we need to review a few basic technical indicators that are referenced frequently. Their concepts are used throughout this part of the book. Remember, Part III is the creating of the weight of the evidence to identify trends in the overall market, a ranking and selection process for finding securities to buy based on their individual and relative momentum, a set of rules and guidelines to provide you with a checklist on how to trade the information, and the results of my rules-based trend following strategy, called Dance with the Trend.

Moving Averages and Smoothing

Most times, daily stock market data is too volatile to analyze properly. What’s needed is a way of removing much of this daily volatility. There is such a method, and that is the subject of this section on smoothing techniques.

Smoothing refers to the act of making the time series data smoother to remove oscillations, but keeping the general trend. It is a better adverb to use than always trying to explain that you take a moving average of it or take the exponential average of it; just say you are smoothing it. Some of the advantages of doing this are:

Reducing day-to-day fluctuations.Making it easier to identify trends.Making it easier to see changes in trend.Providing initial support and resistance levels.Much better for trend following.

One of the simplest market systems created, the moving average, works almost as well as the best of the complicated smoothing techniques. A moving average is exactly the same as a regular average (mean), except that it “moves” because it is continuously updated as new data become available. Each data point in a moving average is given equal weight in the computation; hence, the term arithmetic, or simple, is sometimes used when referring to a moving average.

A moving average smooths a sequence of numbers so that the effects of short-term fluctuations are reduced, while those of longer-term fluctuations remain relatively unchanged. Obviously, the time span of the moving average will alter its characteristics.

J. M. Hurst, in The Profit Magic of Stock Transaction Timing (1970), explained these alterations with three general rules:

A moving average of any given time span exactly reduces the magnitude of the fluctuations of durations equal to that time span to zero.The same moving average also greatly reduces (but does not eliminate) the magnitude of all fluctuations of duration less than the time span of the moving average.All fluctuations that are greater than the time span of the average “come through,” or are present in the resulting moving average line. Those with durations just a little greater than the span of the average are greatly reduced in magnitude, but the effect lessens as periodicity duration increases. Very long duration periodicities come through nearly unscathed.

Simple or Arithmetic Moving Average

To take an average of just about any set of numbers or prices, you add up the numbers, then divide by the number of items. For example, if you have 4+6+2, the sum is 12, and the average is 12/3 = 4. A moving average does exactly this, but as a new number is added, the oldest number is removed. In the previous example, let’s say that 8 is the new number, so the new sequence would be 6+2+8. The original first number (4) was removed because we are only adding the most recent three numbers. In this case, the new average would be 16/3 = 5.33. So by adding an 8 and removing a 4, we increased the average by 1.33 in this example. For those so inclined, here’s the math: 8-4=4, and 4/3 =1.33.

Another feature of the simple moving average is that each component is treated equally — that is, it carries an equal weight in the calculation of the average. This is shown graphically in Figure 12.1. Note that it does not matter how many data points you are averaging; they each carry an equal contribution to the value of the average.

Because of the equal weighting of the data components in a simple moving average, the larger the average, the slower it will react to changes in price.

Let me share a little story about price charts and moving averages. Back in the 1980s, we had one of the original online services, called Prodigy. At one point, they started to provide some simple stock charts with a single moving average on them. I kept looking at it and knew something was wrong, because I had studied and created these types of charts for years. I finally discovered that they were using separate scales for the price and the price’s moving average. Although the values would be correct, the display was not because the average was using its isolated price scale. I wrote (yes, there was no e-mail then) them and explained. The first response was denial that they could be doing it wrong. I mailed them some charts showing their way and the proper way to display moving averages over price by sharing the same vertical scale. It took a long time and many letters before I finally convinced someone that they had it wrong. In appreciation, they sent me a small digital clock worth about $1.25 (battery not included).

Exponential Moving Average

This method of averaging was developed by scientists, such as Pete Haurlan, in an attempt to assist and improve the tracking of missile guidance systems. More weight is given to the most recent data, and it is therefore much faster to change direction and respond to changes in price. It is sometimes represented as a percentage (trend percent) instead of by the more familiar periods. For example, to calculate a 5% exponential average, you would take the last closing price and multiply it by 5%, then add this result to the value of the previous period’s exponential average value multiplied by the complement, which in this case is 1 –.05 =.95. Here is a formula that will help you convert between the two:

    K=2/(N + 1) where K is the smoothing constant (trend percent) and N is the number of periods.

    Algebraically solving for N: N =(2/K)-1.

For example, if you wanted to know the smoothing constant of a 19-period exponential average, you could do the math, K=2/(19 +1)=2/20=0.10 (smoothing constant), or 10% trend as it is many times expressed. In the example previously that used a 5% exponential average, the math is as follows:

    5% Exp Avg=(Current price x 0.05) + (Previous Exp Avg x 0.95)

Figure 12.2 shows how the weight of each component affects the average. The most recent data is represented by the far right on the graph.

Now for the really important piece of knowledge about the difference between the simple moving average and the exponential moving average. Notice in Figure 12.3 how long it takes the simple average (dashed) to reverse direction to the upside. From the time the price line climbs through the dashed line, it takes five to six days before the dashed line begins to rise in this example (upward arrow—SMA). In fact, immediately after the price goes below the dashed line, the dashed line is still falling. Both averages used the same number of periods.

Now note how quickly the darker exponential average changes direction when the price line moves through it (upward arrow—EMA). Immediately! Yes, because of the mathematics, the exponential average will always change direction as soon as the price line moves through it. That is why the exponential average is used, because it hugs the data tighter and eliminates much of the lag that is present in the simple average.

Now, when it comes to the question as to which is better, the answer is always that it depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Sometimes the simple average is better because of its lag, and sometimes not. The same goes for the exponential average; sometimes it is better, sometimes not. Personally, I have found that the exponential average is better for longer-term analysis, say, more than 65 periods (days). However, that becomes a personal preference as you build experience.

Stochastics

George Lane promoted it and Ralph Dystant probably created it; however, I know that Tim Slater, the creator of CompuTrac software in 1978, was probably the one that coined the name Stochastics. This is an odd name, as stochastic is a mathematical term that refers to the evolution of a random variable over time. Stochastics is a range-based indicator that normalizes price data over a selected period of time, usually 14 periods or days. It basically shows where the most recent price is relative to the full range of prices over the selected number of periods. This display of price location within a range of prices is scaled between 0 and 100. Usually there are two versions, one called %K, which is the raw calculation, and the other %D, which is just a three-period moving average of %K. Don’t get me started why there are two names for a calculation and its smoothed value. I met George Lane a number of times and found him to be a delightful gentleman; George passed away in 2008.

Personally, this is about my favorite price-based indicator. It seems that almost everyone uses Stochastics as an overbought/oversold indicator. While it is good in a trading range or sideways market, it does not work well in a trending market when used this way. However, it is also an excellent trend measure. This is good because many stocks and markets trend more than they go sideways.

So how does it work as a trend measure? If you think about the formula and realize that as long as prices are rising, then %K is going to remain at or near its highest level, say over 80. Therefore, as long as %K is over 80, you can assume you are in an uptrending market. Likewise, when %K is below 20 for a period of time, you are in a downtrending market. Personally, I like to use %D instead of %K for trend analysis, as it is smoother with less false signals.

Figure 12.4 shows a 14-day Stochastic with the S&P 500 Index above. The three horizontal lines on the Stochastic are at 20, 50, and 80.

If you use Stochastics as an overbought/oversold indicator, it will work better if you only take signals that are aligned with a longer-term trend. For example, if the general trend of the market is up, then only adhere to the buy signals from Stochastics. Finally, you are not restricted to the 80 and 20 levels to determine overbought and oversold, you can use any levels you feel comfortable with. In fact, if using %D for trend following, also using 30 and 70 will help eliminate whipsaws.

One of the really unique properties of this indicator is that it can be used to normalize data. Let me explain. If you wanted to see data prices that were contained within a range between 0 and 100, then this formula would do that. For example if you had a year’s worth of data, which is about 252 trading days, all you need is to merely set the number of periods for %K to 252 and you would be able to see where prices moved over the last year. This becomes especially valuable when comparing two different stocks or indices.

It should also be noted that Stochastics was designed to be used with data that contains the High, Low, and Close price. It can work with close-only data, but the formula must be adjusted accordingly.

RSI (Relative Strength Index)

RSI was one of the first truly original momentum oscillator indicators that was created prior to desktop or personal computers. Welles Wilder laid out the concept on a columnar pad. Basically, RSI takes a weighted average of the last 14 days’ (if using 14 for the number of periods) up closes and divides by the last 14 days’ down closes. It is then normalized so that the indicator always reads between 0 and 100. Parameters often associated with RSI for overbought are when RSI is over 70, and oversold when it is below 30.

The Relative Strength Index (RSI) can be used a number of different ways. Probably the most common is to use it the same as Stochastics in an overbought/oversold manner. Whenever RSI rises above 70 and then reverses direction and drops below 70, it is a sign that the down closes have increased relative to the up close and the market is declining. Although this method seems to always be popular, using RSI as a trend measure and one to help spot divergences with price seems like two better uses for RSI. Figure 12.5 shows RSI with the S&P 500 Index above. The horizontal lines on RSI are at 30, 50, and 70.

RSI is probably one of the most popular indicators ever developed. I think that is because most could not generate the formula themselves if it were not a mainstay in almost every technical analysis software package. Wilder developed it using a columnar pad and had to come up with a way to do a weighted average of the up and down closes. It is not a true weighted average, but gets the job done.

One of the really big problems that I see with RSI is that in long continuous trends, it can be using some relatively old data as part of its calculation. For an example, let’s say the stock is in an uptrend and has been for a while. The denominator is the average of the down closes in the last 14 days. If the uptrend is strong, there might not be any down closes for a period of time. If there were not any in the last 14 days, without the Wilder smoothing technique, the denominator would be equal to zero, and that would render the indicator useless. Because of this situation, the calculation for RSI can use relatively old data. That is why RSI seems to work well as a divergence indicator, because of the old data. This is generally caused by the fact that the previous up trend keeps the denominator, which uses down closes, fairly inactive, but once the down closes started hitting again, it has a strong effect on RSI.

Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD)

MACD is a concept using two exponential averages developed by Gerald Appel. It was originally developed as the difference between the 12- and 26-day exponential averages; the same as a moving average crossover system, with the periods of the two averages being 12 and 26. The resulting difference, called the MACD line, is then smoothed with a nine-day exponential average, which is referred to as the signal line. Gerald Appel originally designed this indicator using different parameters for buy and sell signals, but that seems to have faded away and almost everyone now uses the 12–26–9 combination for both buy and sell. The movement of the MACD line is the measurement of the difference between the two moving averages. When MACD is at its highest point, it just means that the two averages are at their greatest distance apart (with short above long). And when the MACD is at its lowest level, it just means the two averages are at their greatest distance apart when the short average is below the long average. It really is a simple concept and is a wonderful example of the benefits of charting, because it is so easy to see.

MACD, and in particular, the concept behind it, is an excellent technical indicator for trend determination. Not only that, but it also shows some information that can be used to determine overbought and oversold, as well as divergence. You could say it does almost everything.

Figure 12.6 shows the MACD with the S&P 500 Index above. The solid line is the 12–26 MACD line and the dotted line is the nine period average.

Please keep this in mind: Although MACD is a valuable indicator for trend analysis, it is only the difference between two exponential moving averages. In fact, if you used price and one moving average, it would be similar in that one of the moving averages was using a period of one. This is not rocket science! Figure 12.6 is an example of MACD with its signal line.

A Word of Caution

Technical indicators generally deal with price and volume. Price involves the open, high, low, and close values. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of technical indicators that utilize these price components. These indicators use various parameters to make the indicator useful in analyzing the market.

Generally, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) is considered an overbought/oversold indicator, while Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) is considered a trend indicator. With an intentional reworking of the parameters used in each, Figure 12.7 shows both the RSI and MACD of the S&P 500 Index.

Notice that they both look almost exactly the same. When you are working with only price or its components, you must be careful to not overanalyze or over-optimize the indicator or you will just be looking at the same information. See the section on Multicollinearity in previous articles for more evidence of this potential problem.

There are a host of money management techniques that have surfaced in the investment community. Each has its merits and each has its shortcomings. This section is provided to complement the book’s completeness, and does not dwell into the details.

The Binary Indicator

This part of the book also shows many charts of market data and indicators. Many will include what is called a binary measure. Binary means that it only gives two signals; it is either on or off, similar to a simple digital signal.

Figure 12.8 is a chart of an index in the top plot and an indicator in the bottom plot. The signals generated by the indicator are whenever it crosses the zero line shown on the lower plot. Whenever the indicator is above the line, it means the trend is up, and whenever the indicator is below the line, it means the trend is down (not up). To further simplify that concept, the tooth-like pattern, called the binary and overlaid on the indicator, gives the exact same information without all the volatility of the indicator. Notice that when the indicator is above the horizontal signal line that the binary is also above the line, and whenever the indicator is below the horizontal line, so is the binary. With that, we can then plot the binary directly on top of the index in the top plot and see the signals. In fact, with this knowledge, the entire bottom plot could be removed and no essential information would be lost.

Other conventions adapted to Part III of this book that you need to know are that, when discussing indicators or market measures, there are parameters used to give them specific values based on periods. A period can be any measure of time, hourly, daily, weekly, and so on. Here we will always stick to using daily analysis unless addressed locally. The terms issue and security are often used; I will stick to using ETFs as the investment vehicle.

When showing many measures that are in the same category, such as ranking measures, I attempt to show them individually, but over the same period of time using the same ETF, such as the SPY.

How Compound Measures Work

Before moving on, a concept needs to be explained. Figure 12.9 will help you understand how a compound measure works. First, you need to know that this is not a complex system; whenever two of the three indicators are in agreement, the compound measure moves in the same direction. This means that all three could be signaling, but it only takes two to accomplish the goal.

In Figure 12.9 the top plot is the Nasdaq Composite. The next three plots contain the binary indicators for the three components; in this example, they are called 1, 2, and 3. There are four instances of signals from those three components, labeled in the top plot as A, B, C, and D. Let’s go through them, starting with signal A. Notice that there are two vertical lines, with the first one being created by indicator 3. Then notice how indicator 3 dropped from its high position to its low position; that is a binary signal from indicator 3. The next vertical line shows up when indicator 2 drops to its low position. We now have two of the three indicators dropping to their low position, which means the compound binary indicator overlaid on the Nasdaq Composite in the top plot now drops to its low position.

The second signal, at B, occurs when both indicator 2 and 3 both drop to their low position at the same time; once again, this is a signal for the compound binary in the top plot to drop to its low position. Moving over to signal C, you can see that indicator 3 rose to its top position followed a few days later by indicator 2 rising to its top position, which in turn causes the compound binary in the top plot to rise to its top position.

Example D below shows indicator 2 dropping to its low position. This has caused the compound binary to drop because, if you will notice, indicator 3 had already dropped to its low position many days prior to that of indicator 2. In example D, notice that both indicator 2 and 3 both rose on the same day and indicated by the rightmost vertical line, which of course caused the compound binary to also rise. The concept is simple; it only takes two of the three indicators to control the compound binary in the top plot. It does not matter which two it is or in what combination. As you can hopefully see, the process could be expanded to using five indicators and using the best three of the five.

Now try to figure out the compound measure below without any visual or verbal assistance. In Figure 12.10, the top plot contains the Nasdaq Composite and the compound binary. There are binaries for three indicators below and they work just like the example above, any two that are on is a signal for the compound binary to move in the same direction. Good luck.

Thanks for reading this far. I intend to publish one article in this series every week. Can’t wait? The book is for sale here.

On this week’s edition of Stock Talk with Joe Rabil, Joe details a trade setup in the QQQ that demonstrates how he uses MACD and ADX in multiple timeframes for his trading. He gives detail on the entry and exit for this trade. Joe then covers the stock requests that came through this week, including Ethereum, Meta, Apple and Advanced Micro Devices.

This video was originally published on April 18, 2024. Click this link to watch on StockCharts TV.

Archived episodes of the show are available at this link. Send symbol requests to stocktalk@stockcharts.com; you can also submit a request in the comments section below the video on YouTube. Symbol Requests can be sent in throughout the week prior to the next show.

The S&P500 trend conditions have reversed into “NoGo” and strengthened to purple bars. Alex Cole and Tyler Wood, CMT identify intermarket forces including rising rates ($TNX) and a strong US Dollar (UUP) that can provide headwinds to risk assets. A strong “Go” trend in the volatility index ($VIX), though still hovering around 20 also correlates to the new risk off characteristics on this environment.

This week we again take a closer look at GoNoGo Trend® conditions across a diverse array of the commodities markets including precious and industrial metals ($GOLD, $COPPER), softs ($COCOA, $COFFEE) and energy ($OIL) all trending in “Go” conditions and outperforming US equities ($SPY) on a relative basis. To express this thesis, Alex and Tyler look at a few equities that stand to benefit from these trends including: Freeport McMoran (FCX), Harmony Mining Inc (HMY) and Marathon Oil (MRO).

The rotation of market leadership into cyclical sectors held up this week as shown in the GoNoGo Sector RelMap®. Energy ($XLE), industrials ($XLI), and materials ($XLB) maintain their trend of outperformance against the S&P 500 index. Interestingly, Communications ($XLC) and Utilities ($XLU) have also joined the leadership group. Alex and Tyler dig deeper into the industry group level within the materials sector (XLB) to see aluminum, non-ferrous metals, and mining groups leading relative outperformance. On an absolute basis, materials have corrected to neutral amber bars as the GoNoGo Oscillator® rests at zero. Finally, Alex and Tyler review a similar risk-off condition in the cryptocurrency space as Bitcoin ($BTCUSD) reverses to “NoGo” trend conditions and what to watch for next in terms of trend continuation and opportunities to enter on pullbacks.

Follow: https://twitter.com/ChartsGonogo

Connect: https://www.linkedin.com/company/gonogo-charts-llc

Learn More: https://www.gonogocharts.com/

Rocks over Stocks | GoNoGo Show April 18, 2024

In this edition of StockCharts TV‘s The Final Bar, Dave welcomes guest Tyler Wood, CMT of GoNoGo Charts. Tyler walks through their proprietary momentum model which confirms a bearish rotation for the major equity benchmarks yet a bullish rotation for the commodity space. David walks through key earnings names including LVS, NFLX, and more.

This video originally premiered on April 17, 2024. Watch on our dedicated Final Bar page on StockCharts TV!

New episodes of The Final Bar premiere every weekday afternoon. You can view all previously recorded episodes at this link.