Monday, June 29, 2026

25-0 S&P 500 Setup for June 26 to July 15 | Wayne Whaley

After the S&P 500 fell 1.95% in the week of June 19-26, historical analysis identified the 25 closest matching weeks from the past 50 years, where that same period declined between 0.1% and 3.8%. 


In every one of those 25 cases, the index rose over the following 19 days (June 26–July 15), averaging +3.33% gains. Most showed only minor pullbacks, and in 12 cases the June 26 low held as the bottom. 

This pattern suggests a strong bullish tendency for the next couple of weeks based on history. 

 
See also:

Hurst Cycles Update: SPX, NDX, ASX, Gold, and Bitcoin | David Hickson

This market update focuses on the danger of symmetry in cycle analysis. Across all markets analyzed—S&P 500, NASDAQ, ASX, Gold, and Bitcoin—the central theme is consistent: the risk of symmetrical M shapes forming within a larger bearish cycle context. While not yet confirmed, multiple signals—failed targets, breakdowns below FLDs, and weaker second peaks—suggest increasing downside risk. Confirmation will depend on upcoming price interactions with key FLD levels.

S&P 500: The analysis builds on a major cycle trough at the end of March. In the prior update, the 80-day cycle trough was identified as likely complete. Cycles typically generate M-shaped price structures: an initial rise to a peak, a decline to a mid-cycle trough (e.g., 40-day), followed by a second peak and eventual decline into the larger cycle trough. The recent structure formed a distorted, bullish M shape, where the second peak was not symmetrical but elevated.
 
Topping in symmetrical 20-week M structure, likely heading into 18-month trough around August. 

[current average cycle periods in stacked, color-coded boxes at bottom right.
 
Attention now shifts to the larger 20-week cycle, which is also forming an M shape. The first leg ran from the late-March trough to a peak, followed by a decline into the mid-June 80-day trough. A key analytical risk is symmetry: a perfectly symmetrical M shape typically indicates a neutral market. However, the presence of an upcoming 18-month cycle trough—expected around August—implies a bearish context. When a cycle concludes into a higher-magnitude trough, the resulting M shape is typically bearish, characterized by a lower second peak and a stronger decline.


Following the June 80-day trough, price should rise before eventually turning down into the 18-month trough. The concern is that the current price action may be forming a symmetrical structure, signaling weakness. Price has struggled to rally, reinforcing this risk.
 
Examining interactions with the 20-day FLD (Future Line of Demarcation), price crossed above it after the 80-day trough (an A-category signal), but failed to reach its projected target—a first bearish sign. Subsequently, during formation of the 20-day cycle trough, price broke below the FLD instead of finding support, marking a second bearish signal. While not conclusive, this raises the probability of a bearish cycle. The next confirmation would be a failed attempt to reclaim the FLD. 
 

The thick red dashed composite model line, which reconstructs price behavior based solely on cycle inputs, illustrates the symmetry risk clearly: a period of compression followed by a breakdown into the 18-month trough. This model is not predictive but conditional—if cycles persist as analyzed, this is the expected trajectory. The broader context includes a 54-month trough in October 2023 and an 18-month trough in April 2025, with the next 18-month trough projected for August.

The NASDAQ mirrors this structure. Its 80-day trough formed slightly earlier in June, followed by a move above the 20-day FLD that failed to meet its target and then reversed below it—again producing two bearish signals. A symmetrical M shape is also forming here, with similar downside risk into the 18-month trough.
 
Mirroring S&P with a failed FLD sequence, rolling over toward an August 18-month trough.
 
A remote bullish alternative exists: a triangular consolidation could represent a final base, with price breaking upward and shifting the 80-day trough forward. However, this would imply an extended cycle length (around 87 days vs. the typical 68), weakening the analysis. Confirmation would require a strong upward move through the FLD with target achievement.

The Australian ASX provides confirming evidence through Hurst’s principle of commonality, which observes that global markets tend to form troughs synchronously. The ASX identified the 20-week trough earlier than US markets and also formed its 80-day trough earlier. It now shows a similar setup: a potential bearish M shape with a lower second peak and a projected decline into an 18-month trough around late July or early August.
 
Late-stage M structure with residual strength, direction unresolved but biased down into late July–early August.
 

However, the ASX differs in that it successfully achieved certain FLD targets and even exceeded one, indicating residual bullish strength. Despite this, it later broke below the FLD again, signaling vulnerability. The next expected interaction (E-category) will determine direction: success implies continued strength; failure reinforces bearish symmetry. Notably, the composite model underestimated the recent peak, suggesting more bullishness than expected and raising the possibility of misidentified longer cycles.


In Gold, a major peak earlier in the year has maintained bearish pressure. A potential 80-day trough was identified, but price failed to confirm it by crossing above the FLD. Instead, price repeatedly found resistance at the FLD (GH interactions), leaving the trough unconfirmed.
 
Unconfirmed 80-day trough with repeated FLD rejection, likely weak bounce before continuing lower over the near term.
 
If a trough is forming, it would imply an unusually long cycle (~93 days), which is plausible for Gold. Confirmation requires a clean break above the FLD and target achievement. The composite model suggests a near-term bounce followed by renewed decline.

Bitcoin presents a more complex case. The prior analysis suggested a 20-week trough may have formed in early June, but this remains uncertain due to subsequent lower lows. If that trough is valid, the current 20-day cycle is exceptionally bearish—an early warning of broader weakness. Price initially crossed above the FLD (A-category), but failed to reach its target and then broke below the FLD, producing two bearish signals.

Structurally weakening; either already in a bearish 20-week cycle or still topping, with downside 
pressure building into the next few weeks to months within the current 18-month cycle.
 
Alternatively, the 20-week trough may still be forming, in which case the earlier FLD signal was anomalous. Cycle timing supports this ambiguity, as current price action aligns with expected trough timing based on average cycle length (~19.6 weeks).

Zooming out, Bitcoin has followed Hurst cycle rhythms closely. A 54-month trough formed in late 2022, followed by an 18-month trough in August 2024 (~593 days, slightly extended) and another candidate in February (~547 days, near ideal length). If this structure holds, Bitcoin is now in the final 18-month cycle of the current 54-month cycle. The first 18-month cycle was strongly bullish, the second moderately bullish, and the current one is showing early bearish characteristics—raising concern that the broader trend is turning down into the next major trough expected in 2027.
 
 

Silver Outlook 2026: 40-Week Cycle Low and $48–$49 Retest | Namzes

The August 2025 projection is pointing to a low forming around now, with the pink area representing the out-of-sample forecast. Concurrently, a 40-week cycle low is due now (see bottom panel), though it could result in a choppy bottom. Given the current dollar strength and its potential for a breakout, any upward move in precious metals might turn out to be a short-lived counter-rally. This setup could lead to new lows around October, where the next 20-week cycle low is scheduled to drop.


On the positive side, seasonality (middle panel) turns favorable next week, as July is historically a bullish month for the metals sector. 
 
Silver, Midterm Year Seasonal Pattern (1973-2024).
 
Silver is currently in an intermediate downtrend, with a likely retest of the $48–$49 former all-time high serving as the final destination.


On the hourly chart, price is basing. I want to see acceptance above 59, which could allow it to retrace toward 63 at the 200-hour moving average, and then eventually up to around 70 near the 200-day moving average. Ultimately, the 73–77 zone remains the golden pocket.

The dollar (DXY) is currently driving the metals complex, meaning a pullback would be highly constructive for precious metals. My main thesis for 2026 is that the dollar should put in an 18-month cycle low in Q1 and start a sharp rally lasting into early fall (see bottom panel). That low formed right on time on January 27, and we are now in the peaking phase of the second 80-day cycle. Following the next 80-day cycle low, I expect a powerful upward move into the fall toward the 105 area.
 


From a structural standpoint, the Wyckoff accumulation pattern suggests a consolidation and retest of the 100 area is ahead, acting as a Last Point of Support (LPS) before the next leg higher. Because persistent dollar strength has been a major headwind for metals, if the USD weakens over the next few weeks, it should trigger a solid counter-rally across the metals sector.
 

Sunday, June 28, 2026

Oil Outlook 2026: Navigating the Upcoming 40-Week Cycle Low | Namzes

18-Month Cycle & Major Lows: The 18-month cycle low that I was anticipating for mid-December 2025 arrived right on schedule (see middle panel). We likely also have a major 4-to-5-year cycle low in place, meaning we are in the very early stages of a new macro up-cycle.


Impending 40-Week Cycle Low: We are currently due for a 40-week cycle low, which historically carries a wide range but averages around 228 days. Over the next few weeks, we could see the market retest or slightly undercut recent lows, potentially filling the $67.83 gap on WTI futures (note that the Brent gap has already been filled).
 
 
Next Leg Higher: Once this low is firmly established, I expect the next leg higher to carry into the fall, aligning with typical seasonal strength through roughly October.
 

Short-Term vs. Long-Term Technicals: Price is currently trading within the 20-week projection range—the half-cycle offset is illustrated in blue and purple (h/t Peter Eliades for bringing his excellent service to TradingView). To trigger the upside projections, price needs to reclaim its 200-day moving average (DMA), represented by the white line. Reclaiming this level is crucial to repairing the otherwise weak short-term technical picture.


Path to $150+: While the long-term structure looks like a textbook bullish breakout and retest, short-term momentum remains firmly to the downside. We need to see price recapture the 200 DMA and ultimately break above the diagonal resistance levels in the $80s, establishing a constructive structure of higher lows and higher highs on both the daily and weekly charts. The $120 level remains a massive overhead resistance; however, a clean close above it unlocks a move toward $150–$160, which remains our primary target for the coming months.


Speculator Capitulation: Speculative positioning has dropped significantly across both Brent and WTI (green line in bottom panel). This washout in positioning strongly supports the idea that a bottoming process is underway. There is a massive amount of dry powder in terms of financial barrels that can be aggressively added back the momentum shifts to the upside.
 

 
 
China Import Anomaly: The most critical variable to watch—and the primary reason oil prices haven't surged higher—is Chinese oil imports. China has essentially cut its imports in half, a reduction that effectively neutralized about 50% of the lost production and supply disruptions in the Gulf. They achieved this either by cutting refinery runs or aggressively drawing down their underground inventories (though without full data visibility, the exact mix remains speculative).

Macro Inventory Gamble: How long can China sustain a drawdown of 5 to 6 million barrels per day (MBD)? That is above my pay grade, but the global market is clearly continuing to deplete its inventories. The market is essentially betting on a normalization of the Strait of Hormuz and a return to regular production levels, which would theoretically allow countries to refill their Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) at lower prices.
 
 
Trump-Xi Geopolitical Quid Pro Quo? This massive inventory drawdown directly coincided with the recent Trump-Xi summit. It raises an interesting geopolitical question: Did the Trump administration quietly trade a policy of non-intervention regarding a China-Taiwan reunification in exchange for Beijing drawing down its inventories to suppress oil prices during this crisis? Given that China appears poised to move on Taiwan in the next few years anyway, Washington may have decided to extract a major economic concession while they still could.
 
The most important thing to watch, and the reason oil prices never went higher, is China's oil imports. They essentially cut imports in half, neutralizing about half of all lost Gulf production and supply. They did this either by reducing refinery runs or drawing down underground inventories (which remains speculation due to a lack of visibility).

How long can they continue drawing 5–6 MBD? That is beyond my pay grade, but the world is clearly depleting inventories—effectively betting on Hormuz normalization and a return to normal production levels that would allow SPR refills at lower prices.

This also coincided with the Trump-Xi summit. Did Trump trade non-intervention in a China-Taiwan reunification for China drawing down inventories during this crisis to keep oil prices lower? China will take Taiwan in the next few years anyway, so they might as well get something out of China in exchange.
 
With the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) running at maximum levels in June and China cutting its imports in half, trapped tankers are now trying to exit the Strait of Hormuz simultaneously, putting heavy downward pressure on the spot market. However, looking a few months out, the picture becomes far less rosy.
 
 
First, the current SPR release will stop shortly, and those borrowed barrels must be returned with interest. Second, while Gulf production needs to ramp up, Iran is actively trying to control and slow down traffic; recognizing that the Strait of Hormuz is their primary leverage, they are attempting to restrict shipping lanes to their side of the strait, as shown in the chart above. Third, China will eventually have to normalize its imports, which will reintroduce 5 to 6 MBD of incremental demand to the market. Finally, the world has drawn down over 1 billion barrels of inventory that must be replenished, leaving nations with very little cushion for further emergency SPR releases in the event of any future escalation.
 
Is the grand TACO real? Iran won the war and Trump capitulated, giving Iran everything they asked for. Knowing Trump, it is very possible he signed an MOU just to open the strait and lower oil prices, without any intent to keep his side of the agreement.

Iran will try to keep Hormuz traffic constrained to avoid giving up their oil card, so expect periodic escalations. Furthermore, Israel doesn’t want this deal to be signed, so they will continue escalations in Lebanon; since Lebanon was included in the agreement, this undermines any long-term peace deal. If escalations continue, Iran would be inclined to seek nuclear weapons as the only long-term deterrent against the US and Israel. Ultimately, we should expect more back-and-forth escalations rather than one grand deal or reopening.

 
Bottom line: There is no easy solution and no fast path to normalization. Iran holds the cards and won’t give them up at this stage. Oil trading sub-70 is a function of short-term flows of trapped barrels out of Hormuz, SPR releases, the China import boycott, and a speculator positioning unwind. Looking a couple of months out, the risk-reward is heavily skewed to the upside.

 

Thursday, June 25, 2026

Cosmic Cluster Days | July 2026

Heliocentric Cosmic Cluster Days (CCDs) do not exhibit a consistent polarity or directional bias in financial markets. The 'noise channel' functions as a signal filter, with its upper and lower bounds defined empirically. However, swing highs and lows that form within the noise channel may still correlate with short-term market trends and reversals.
 
Cosmic Cluster Days
  |   Composite Line  |  Noise Channel
   
Jun 28 (Sun) | Jul 1-2 (Wed-Thu) | Jul 7 (Tue) | Jul10 (Fri) | Jul 12 (Sun) | Jul 17 (Fri) | Jul 19 (Sun) | Jul 26 (Sun) | Jul 30 (Thu) | Aug 01 (Sat) | Aug 05 (Wed)

  For previous CCDs, click [HERE]. For background on the concept, click [HERE].
 
 Jun 26 (Fri) = helio | Jul 04 (Sat) = geo | Jul 13 (Mon) = helio | Jul 14 (Tue) = geo + helio | Jul 16 (Thu) = geo | Jul 19 (Sun) = helio | Jul 21 (Tue) = geo | Jul 26 (Sun) = helio | Jul 27 (Mon) = geo | Jul 28 (Tue) = helio | Jul 31 (Fri) = geo | Aug 08 (Sat) = helio (H)
 
All 2026 Turning Points in the Geocentric and Heliocentric Bradley Indices [HERE]

July Stock Market Performance in Midterm Election Years | Jeff Hirsch

Historically one of the market's stronger months, July typically sees a consistent upward trend across all major indexes (solid lines), often driven by optimism ahead of second-quarter earnings. Over the last 21 years (2005–2025), gains have built from a strong first trading day, with the NASDAQ leading at an average gain of just over 3%. While the S&P 500, DJIA, and Russell indexes also show robust positive trends, their momentum generally slows after mid-month.

Historically strong and earnings-driven, July favors broad index gains—especially the NASDAQ—
but midterm election years routinely trigger underperformance and small-cap volatility.

However, midterm election years tell a different story (dashed lines). Performance during these periods is notably weaker and more volatile: the DJIA and S&P 500 manage only modest gains, while small-caps (Russell 2000) historically struggle the most, often finishing July in negative territory. Ultimately, while seasonal trends favor equities, the midterm backdrop warns that volatility can emerge unexpectedly.
 
Reference:

July Seasonal Stock Market Performance (2000-2020).
 
 
 July is historically one of the year's strongest months, ranking third since 1950 for both the
DJIA and S&P 500 during midterm election years with average gains of 1.6% and 1.3%.
 
NASDAQ's 12-Day Midyear Rally—last 3 days of June through first 9 of July—
has gained an avg 2.5% since 1985, hitting in 32 of 41 years (78%).
 
In US midterm years (2006, 2010, 2014, 2018, 2022), July delivers the broadest
market strength of the second half, with every major sector posting positive
average returns (S&P 500 +3.65%), led by Technology (+4.11%),
 Energy (+4.26%), and Consumer Discretionary (+4.10%).  

See also:

Tuesday, June 23, 2026

Important Solar and Lunar Degrees for Trading US Stock Indices | Jack Gillen

According to Jack Gillen in "AstroStats for the New York Stock Exchange" (2002), the transit of the Sun through 13°–22° Cancer is one of only two Sun-related market statistics that reached his highest reliability category, defined as the 70–100% accuracy group: 
"There are only two statistics related to the Sun falling into the group of the 70–100 percent accuracy. They were both activated in the United States chart on July 4, 1776, and the natal Sun is at 13-degrees of Cancer. On July 5th of every year the Sun transits 13-degrees of Cancer. This cycle has an orb of 13–22 degrees of Cancer, and the transit dates would be from July 7–15 each year. The price of the Dow Jones Industrial Average will be higher on the 15th than on the 7th..." 
Gillen associated this pattern with the natal chart of the United States, dated July 4, 1776, in which the Sun is positioned at 13° Cancer. Based on his research, the period from July 7 to July 15 each year—when the transiting Sun moves through 13°–22° Cancer—has historically shown a bullish tendency in the stock market. 
 
His rule states that the closing value of the Dow Jones Industrial Average on July 15 is expected to be higher than its closing value on July 7. Gillen reported an overall historical accuracy rate of 72.8% across the full sample he analyzed, while the period from 1987 to 2001 produced an even stronger accuracy rate of 86.6%. As a result, he regarded this as one of the most significant Sun-based market indicators in his work, interpreting it as a recurring mid-July bullish pattern linked to the activation of the US Sun degree. About other sensitive degrees of the Sun, he writes (1979):
"The Sun's position by itself in relation to the stock market can show you trends that are more or less active for each year, as the Sun degrees are generally fixed. They fall on about the same date every year. So this is why some periods of the year would be more of a pattern. 

Jun 29 (Mon) 17:44 = SUN @ 8 CAN = 98 degrees = positive = should reach a low and turn up
Jul 04 (Sat) 23:37 = SUN @ 13 CAN = 103 degrees = negative = should reach a high and turn down
Jul 08 (Wed) 03:08 = SUN @ 16 CAN = 106 degrees = positive
Jul 10 (Fri) 05:28 = SUN @ 18 CAN = 108 degrees = negative
Jul 24 (Fri) 21:30 = SUN @ 2 LEO = 122 degrees = negative
Jul 29 (Wed) 01:59 = SUN @ 6 LEO = 126 degrees = positive
Aug 09 (Sun) 13:46 = SUN @ 17 LEO = 137 degrees = negative
[more HERE]
The market will always be influenced by the Sun pattern, and it will happen year after year. You will find from January to the last two weeks in July the market prices will be upwards, and in the latter part of the year, after the influence of Leo, the market will be down in price. This is the average trend that will always occur. This affects volume as well as price itself."

The solar cycle is a highly reliable annual cycle based on the Sun's direct, unvarying motion, allowing market turning points and seasonal patterns to be tracked to the exact day year after year. Acting as a market almanac of observed price behaviors, this cycle maps market responses to the Sun's passage through the zodiac signs, providing investors with a predictable annual road map. 

 
Key Turning Dates of the Solar Cycle vs. the DJIA, 1885-2015.
 
Because the United States was founded on July 4, 1776, under the cardinal sign of Cancer, American financial markets are also exceptionally sensitive to planets transiting cardinal points or forming key harmonic angles to them. Consequently, the market consistently establishes major lows as the Sun enters the four cardinal signs: Aries, Cancer, Libra, and Capricorn (blue thick verticals in the chart above: March 20–21, June 20–21, September 22–23, December 21–22). Chronologically, the annual cycle of the Sun versus the DJIA unfolds through these cardinal alignments and their corresponding market seasonals:
■  January / Capricorn (Opposition): The Sun’s opposition in Capricorn marks an extreme bottom point, which immediately triggers a strong January Effect (bullish December 20 to January 7) rally.
■  March / Aries (Square): The Sun enters Aries, creating the first challenging square to the US natal sign, often coinciding with the volatile Ides of March (bearish February 2 to March 28).
■  April: As the Sun advances, market momentum shifts into the April Earnings Rally (bullish March 28 to April 16).
■  May: This upward momentum stalls, prompting the classic "Sell in May and Go Away" (bearish April 16 to June 26) defensive strategy.
■  June/July / Cancer (Conjunction): The Sun’s conjunction in Cancer creates a distinct market bottom that directly sets the stage for the subsequent Summer Rally (bullish June 26 to September 4).
■  October/November / Libra (Square): The Sun enters Libra, forming a second, highly disruptive square to the US sign; these combined October–November squares present the market’s greatest systemic challenges, historically triggering the Fall Crash Cycle (bearish September 4 to October 27) and major market meltdowns.
■  December: Following the autumn lows, the cycle concludes as the market recovers into the year-end Santa Claus Rally (bullish October 27 to December 8), resetting the annual pattern.

 Seasonal Dates of the Solar Cycle vs. the DJIA.
 

Moon from Virgo to Pisces = Go Long | Moon from Pisces to Virgo = Go Short
His lunar statistics were detailed primarily in "AstroStats for the New York Stock Exchange" (2002), with related discussion in the revised "The Key to Speculation on the New York Stock Exchange" (2009). He analyzed historical NYSE/DJIA data against Moon transits, assigning reliability percentages. Individual Moon signs rarely reach his high-confidence threshold (70–100% accuracy), but specific patterns and directional cycles do. 
"There is a Moon statistic that falls into the 70–100 percent group but is closer to the 70 percent group, and that’s the Moon’s transit from Virgo to Pisces. Therefore, if you are looking to go long with a stock it’s best to start during this period. [...] If you have a stock you want to short, your best chance would be from the sign of Pisces to Virgo." 
On average, the Moon spends 2.46 days transiting through each zodiac sign.
Times and Dates for New York (ET).
 
 Reference:

Monday, June 22, 2026

NASDAQ's 12-Day Midyear Rally from June 25 to July 14, 2026 | Jeff Hirsch

As July approaches, attention turns to NASDAQ’s 12-Day Midyear Rally, a seasonal pattern running from the close of the fourth-to-last trading day of June (Thursday, June 25) through the ninth trading day of July (Tuesday, July 14). 

Since 1985, the rally has averaged a 2.5% gain (2.9% median) and finished higher in 32 of 41 years, a 78% success rate. Its strongest performances include gains of 10.4% in 1999, 10.0% in 2000, and 9.6% in 2016, while recent advances reached 4.7% in 2020, 4.1% in 2023, 3.8% in 2024, and 3.3% last year. 
The pattern has persisted through bull and bear markets, recessions, and recoveries, likely reflecting quarter-end rebalancing, new-quarter capital inflows, and improving sentiment ahead of earnings season. Although it has failed nine times since 1985, its four-decade record makes it one of NASDAQ’s most durable and reliable seasonal tendencies.

 

Tuesday, June 16, 2026

Whom God Wishes to Destroy, He First Drives Mad | Giorgio Agamben

It is worth reflecting upon a fact so incredible that we attempt to repress it at all costs: namely, that the state which claims to be the most powerful in the world has been governed for years by men who are technically demented. This is not to give an extreme form to a political judgment. That Trump—like Biden before him—must be considered demented in the pathological sense of the term is an evident fact now shared by many psychiatrists, and one that anyone observing his mode of expression cannot fail to endorse.


It goes without saying that what interests us here is not the clinical case of the individuals named Trump and Biden; rather, the question we cannot fail to ask ourselves is: what is the historical significance of the fact that a country like the United States—which stands in some way at the helm of the entire West—is governed by a mentally ill person? What radical spiritual and moral decline, even before a political one, could have led to such an extreme consequence?

That the destiny of the West was marked by nihilism is something Nietzsche had already diagnosed more than a century ago, alongside the death of God. Yet, it was by no means a given that nihilism would take the form of dementia. Perhaps it is out of some measure of compassion and mercy that the God who wishes to destroy the West leads it to its end not through awareness and accountability, but through oblivion and madness.