#ITC futures on daily timeframe - medium term. #BREAKOUTSTOCKS #onemanarmy
More from DTBhat
#TataPower on daily charts - a breakout above 126 will be very interesting. It is bullish on higher boxsizes and has given a reversal after a pullback on lower boxsize. Price charts and RS charts self-explanatory pic.twitter.com/9ulYjvBVza
— DTBhat (@dtbhat) July 12, 2021
More from Itc
You May Also Like
Covering one of the most unique set ups: Extended moves & Reversal plays
Time for a 🧵 to learn the above from @iManasArora
What qualifies for an extended move?
30-40% move in just 5-6 days is one example of extended move
How Manas used this info to book
The stock exploded & went up as much as 63% from my price.
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) June 22, 2020
Closed my position entirely today!#BroTip pic.twitter.com/CRbQh3kvMM
Post that the plight of the
What an extended (away from averages) move looks like!!
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) June 24, 2020
If you don't learn to sell into strength, be ready to give away the majority of your gains.#GLENMARK pic.twitter.com/5DsRTUaGO2
Example 2: Booking profits when the stock is extended from 10WMA
10WMA =
#HIKAL
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) July 2, 2021
Closed remaining at 560
Reason: It is 40+% from 10wma. Super extended
Total revenue: 11R * 0.25 (size) = 2.75% on portfolio
Trade closed pic.twitter.com/YDDvhz8swT
Another hack to identify extended move in a stock:
Too many green days!
Read
When you see 15 green weeks in a row, that's the end of the move. *Extended*
— Manas Arora (@iManasArora) August 26, 2019
Simple price action analysis.#Seamecltd https://t.co/gR9xzgeb9K
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
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?