Upwards movement was favoured as more likely for Thursday’s session. This is what has happened.
Some upwards movement was expected from last analysis. An inside day neither fits expectations nor invalidates the Elliott wave count. A new alternate is provided today.
The activity of buyers is required for price to rise sustainably. This is indicated by increasing volume on upwards days.
The opposite isn’t necessarily true for a falling market. Price can fall due to an absence of buyers, just as it can with increasing activity of sellers. Rising volume with falling price is good to see as it supports the trend, but it is not necessary.
Does Gold’s price and volume conform to this basic principal of technical analysis?
1. This first rise in price is close to textbook perfect. The trend is well supported by volume. Volume does not increase in a straight line each day; some days are lighter than the prior day, but overall there is an increase.
2. This next rise is not so clear, but there is still overall an increase in volume as price rises. Volume is lighter than the prior stronger trend though, so the deep pullback that followed should not have been entirely unexpected.
3. As price falls initially volume declines and then shows some steady increase. The fall in price has support from increasing selling activity.
4 & 5. As price rises volume is not clearly rising. Sometimes the market can drift higher on light volume, so this type of rise is suspicious. The following deep decline again should not have been entirely unexpected.
6 & 7. As price falls volume declines. The market is falling of its own weight.
8. At the end of the fall volume begins to increase.
9. The start of the next rise has some support from volume by day 5. This shows an increase. However, the fifth day volume spike may also be a blow off top signalling an end to the rise temporarily. Blow off tops are not usually the very end; they usually signal a period of consolidation before the trend has a final rise.
The area between 9 and 10 is very unclear, with choppy overlapping price action generally trending higher and mostly flat volume.
10 & 11. As price falls volume declines. The market is mostly falling of its own weight.
When volume clearly supports a trend, then more confidence may be had in it. When volume does not support a trend, it is suspicious. Lack of support from volume will not tell when price will change direction, but it can warn that price may likely change direction and not just consolidate.
This analysis is published @ 03:51 a.m. EST.
Further downwards movement was expected from the Elliott wave count. The target remains the same.
Occasionally, members and visitors to this website make a statement along the lines of “market X is doing this, so how come you think Gold is going to go up / down?”.
Such statements are based upon unacknowledged assumptions that the markets have a correlation. The problem with assumptions is they can be wrong. So is there a simple mathematical technique to determine if two sets of data are correlated, either positively or negatively?
Yes, there is: by looking at the correlation co-efficient range between two sets of data.
Correlation co-efficient ranges from -1 to +1. A perfect positive correlation will have a correlation co-efficient of +1. A perfect negative correlation will have a correlation co-efficient of -1.
Two sets of data which have a positive correlation will have a correlation co-efficient between +0.5 to +1. Two sets of data which have a negative correlation will have a correlation co-efficient between -0.5 to -1.
Any two sets of data which have a correlation co-efficient between +0.5 and -0.5 are not correlated.
Any two sets of data which have a correlation co-efficient that spends any time between +0.5 and -0.5 does not have a correlation which is reliable. This area of unreliability is shaded in the chart above for several markets which are often assumed to have a correlation to Gold price.
GDX, US Bonds, US Crude Oil, the US dollar index and even Silver do not have a reliable correlation with Gold price. All of these markets have correlation co-efficients which spend time in the shaded areas.
Even if these markets do sometimes exhibit a correlation with Gold, the point is that because this is not always true that when it is so it cannot be assumed to continue. The math shows that it does not.
To base an analysis of Gold on an assumption that another market is moving in a particular direction, and therefore Gold must move in a particular direction, is to base the analysis on assumptions and not data. Such assumptions are unreliable, and why you will not find then in my analyses.
To base an analysis of Gold on actual data and math is more likely to lead to accurate predictions and profitable trading. This does not mean the analysis will always be right, but it does mean the analysis will be based on facts and not assumptions.
This analysis is published @ 04:13 a.m. EST.
A little sideways movement was expected to be followed by more downwards movement. This is mostly what happened, although price did not move any higher first.
Upwards movement was limited to no higher than 1,266.43. A small inside day had its high at 1,257.12.
“The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index rates the relative level of current and future economic conditions. There are two versions of this data released two weeks apart, preliminary and revised. The preliminary data tends to have a greater impact.” 
US Consumer Sentiment data release will be at 10 a.m. EST on the 16th of June, 2017. The release will be for preliminary June data.
The sentiment data is very likely to affect equities and indices. It may also affect Gold, but any effect should be short term.
A look at an hourly chart with a simple Elliott wave count and Fibonacci retracement levels may yield clues as to what direction Gold may take after the release:
If US Consumer Sentiment data does have an influence on the Gold price, then Gold may see a short sharp upwards thrust to end about either 1,257 or 1,261 followed by very strong downwards movement to new lows. The target at 1,221 is some days away.
To see how the bigger picture supports this view, see my current Elliott wave count.
This analysis is published @ 09:26 p.m. EST.
Overall more downwards movement was expected and did happen, but a small bounce was expected to end about 1,270 first and that did not happen.
A bounce was expected to end about 1,281. The high for Wednesday’s session fell just 1.94 short of this target to reach 1,279.06. Strong downwards movement was expected following the bounce.
Technical analysis chart of Gold with Volume and On Balance Volume indicators, and support and resistance lines, may give guidance as to the direction Gold may take after FED Interest rate decision.
Click chart to enlarge. Chart courtesy of StockCharts.com.
The recent fall in price over the last three days does not have support from volume and this suggests a bounce should be expected here or very soon. Additionally, there is strong, bullish support for Gold’s price at about 1,260. These support the idea of upwards movement after the FED Interest rate decision.
However, the latest and now most important signal comes from On Balance Volume breaking below support. This is bearish.
Given that a technical analysis approach would expect Gold to move mostly in the direction of least resistance and away from greatest support, the expectation is for Gold to breakout upwards. But because of On Balance Volume’s bearish signal, any upside movement is expected to be relatively short lived.
Also, On Balance Volume supports my current Elliott wave count.
This analysis is published @ 03:30 a.m. EST.
Downwards movement continues a little lower, which was not what was expected for Tuesday’s session.
A slight new low followed by some sideways movement fits mostly with expectations for the hourly Elliott wave count.