www.amanita.at
Introduction The
Bradley siderograph was developed in the 40ies by Donald
Bradley to forecast the stock markets. Bradley assigned numerical values
to certain planetary constellations for every day, and the sum is the siderograph. It was originally intended to predict the
stock markets. The noted technical analyst William Eng singled out the
Bradley as the only 'excellent' Timing Indicator in his book, "Technical
Analysis of Stocks, Options, and Futures" (source:
Astrikos). It
is crucial to understand what the siderograph is
about since almost all traders (and even financial astrologers!)
misunderstand it. Over the decades it has been observed that the siderograph can NOT (!!!) reliably predict the
direction but only turning points in the financial markets (stocks,
bonds, bonds, commodities) within a time window of +/- 4 calendar days
(in a few cases up to +/- 7 days). Inversions (i.e. a high instead of a low
and vice versa) are quite common. Also, it is not a timing tool for
short-term trends but rather for intermediate-term to longer-term trends
because the turning window is rather wide. Bradley Siderograph 2012
This is the Bradley standard model (original formula
according to Donald Bradley) from December 2011 through January 2013: |
|
2006 |
Below
please find the Bradley siderograph (original formula) for December 2005 -
January 2007:
2006 we have 11 major
turning dates
in the standard model (window: +/- 4 days, sometimes +/- 7 days):
- 1/15/06
- 1/29/06
- 2/19/06
- 3/8/06
- April 3-11, 06
- 5/20/06 (important)
- 6/20/06
- 7/23/06
- 9/15/06
- 10/11/06
- 11/28/06 (important)
The other 3 siderograph models (reserved for Amanita subscribers)
differ from the shown standard model considerably.
|
More Details |
Perhaps you want to know now
which one is the "correct" siderograph -
the answer is easy: none. Since Bradley's time dozens of similar models with different
parameters have been created, partly optimized with the aid of artificial
intelligence and for specific markets (oil, currencies etc.). A date which
occurs in several different models is probably important.
The older Bradley charts can
be found here. How to receive the raw data: as a subscriber of Amanita
Market Forecasting you get the raw data of all four Bradley models from 1990-2010
as a .txt-file (click here
to subscribe).
Another possibility: you
calculate the data yourself with the aid of a financial
astrology software, please go to the software-page
(I use the Market Trader von Alphee Lavoie).
By including declinations,
Donald Bradley has (probably unwittingly) created the formula so that it
mirrors the usual seasonal pattern ("sell in May and go") - but for
this purpose you rather use the seasonal charts and not the siderograph.
In my opinion the only way
to construct a successful astrological bullish/bearish model would be either
to use the planetary longitudes and synodic cycles
of the planets (as researched by
|
10/9/05 |
The last Bradley commentary
(introduction) was sent out in April, so what has happened in the
meantime? The closing S&P 500 (SPX) produced with major reversals in 3
out of the 5 turning points of the siderograph):
- June 2/3: no major reversal
- June 10: intermediate-term top
- July 13: no major reversal (except if you count 7/7
intraday low)
- July 28: yearly top (to the day) - double-top with
8/3
- August 30: important low 8/26 (deviation: 4 days)
This
chart shows the reversals of the S&P:
I always stress that only
the date of the turn is meaningful but not if it's the high or a low
in the chart of the siderograph. It's interesting
to analyze the polarities (top or bottom): so far in 2005 the
hits (significant reversals both in the Bradley and the SPX) were in 4 out of
the 5 cases "inversions", i.e. the only 1/25-26 marked a low both
in the chart of the Bradley and the S&P, all other 4 big turns (3/4/05,
6/10/05, 7/28/05, 8/30/05) were just opposite, e.g. 3/4/05 was a low in the siderograph but a high in the stock markets. It seems
that some colleagues continue to use the siderograph
as an indicator for rising or falling markets despite this claim can't pass
an empirical test.
Until year-end there is only
one major reversal in store:
|
|
Every
few months I send out an update on the Bradley siderograph,
below please find today's comments.
This
is the Bradley siderograph (standard model)
for 2005 (explanation Bradley siderograph):
important note: This analysis is
based on the standard model only that is available in the free area, the
other models are reserved for subscribers. Whether a date is a top or a
bottom in the Bradley chart is meaningless (even if that is claimed to be the
case by some sources), i.e. a Bradley top can be a market bottom and vice versa.
This is a list of the turning
dates 2005 so far with the deviation to the corresponding turns in the
benchmark SPX (S&P 500 close, window: usually +/- 4 calendar days):
- 1/25-26 (as already mentioned a couple of months ago,
this date is together with
As this review shows, you
can certainly be very satisfied with the performance of the Bradley as an
isolated indicator, in the CSQN model the siderograph
is a "positioning factor" and thus among the 3 highest-weighted
(out of 2 dozens). This year the turning points have even been exceptionally
precise, with 3 of the 4 turns coming within +/- 1 calendar day (which is not
the norm but rather the exception).
|
|
The last discussion of the
Bradley siderograph dates back to Sep 20 so it's now
time for an update of this cosmic indicator whose significance is
overestimated by light years.
So what was the effect of
the Bradley turn dates as measured by the S&P 500 close?
- 9/28.-10/2/04 (strong, in all 3 models):
short- to intermediate-term low
- 10/24.-10/30/04 (average, in 2 models):
intermediate-term low
- 12/1-12/3/04 (average, in 2 models):
short-term high
- 12/8-12/10/04 (average, in 2 models):
short-term low
- 12/15-12/18/04 (average, in 2 models):
short-term high
The next major date in the
standard model is 1/25-26.
|
|
Below please find the
Bradley siderograph (original formula) for the
year 2005, for a better visual interpretation I added the last month of 2004
and the first month of 2006:
There are 3 outstanding
dates in 2005 that have the highest probability for a major reversal within
+/ - 4 days:
In addition, there are 6
other turning point of lesser significance:
- Mar 29 -
The other 3
siderograph models (reserved for Amanita subscribers) differ from the shown
standard model in many cases and do fill the gap from September until
mid-December 2005 where the standard model leaves a void.
|
|
Due to
questions and misunderstandings a preliminary note: My timing
method are the Amanita pivots where
the Bradley is just one of more than 2 dozen indicators taken into
consideration. This describes the role of the Bradley in my work, it certainly is an important indicator, still just
one of many. With the aid of the Amanita pivots you can usually predict market
turns with an accuracy of +/- 1 trading day
(sometimes +/- 2).
In early May I singled out
May 9-17, June 17-24, and July 30 - August 2
as the next 3-fold confirmed Bradley dates that are frequently good
candidates for major turning points in the stock markets. Two of the three
dates are already history, let's examine how they did work out:
(1) On
(2) On
This is a chart of the SPX
with the Bradley turning dates (red arrows), the
significance of the Bradley is self-evident.
7/30 through 8/2 is the next reversal zone,
I believe this will be a special case with the actual turn outside the
central window and no straightforward interpretation, i.e.
the most obvious interpretation might not be correct (details of current
position reserved for subscribers).
The next turning points are
(charts):
(1) 8/11-14: visible
in both geocentric models, possibly until 8/20 if the heliocentric model is
included. Probably a weak turning point as it's not close to an Amanita
pivot
(2) 9/12-13: present
in both geocentric models. This date is not confirmed by other methods so it
should only be a minor turn.
(3) 9/28-10/2: This
one shows up in all three models so it has the potential to be more
important, even if the exact timing is somewhat out of the central window.
(4) 10/11: Only
visible in the heliocentric (the weakest) siderograph,
without further confirmation it won't be able to have a strong effect
|
|
A review of the past 6
months:
(1) On 11/24/ 03 there
was a turn in the heliocentric model which timed the intermediate-term low on
11/20 (deviation: 4 days).
(2) From 1/19-26
there was a short bounce with a small amplitude in
the standard model which coincided with the
(3) It is crucial to factor
in clusters, i.e. turning points that are present in more than one model,
ideally in all three. We had such a cluster from 2/26 until 3/5 this year
that nailed the intermediate-term top on 3/1 (double-top with 2/11). Similar
to a bounce within a model you often to have turns
in the central band of the cluster.
(4) The heliocentric siderograph had a turning point on
(5) In both geocentric
models
By the way, I have found
that the importance of a turning point in the Bradley model correlates with
the importance of a turn in the markets. Even if this correlation is not too
strong it's still useful. This is also the main reason why I still do sent the chart and not just the turning dates, even if
many readers are misinterpreting it as a predictor of trend direction.
Now to the outlook for the
future: May 9-17, June 17-24 and July 30 - August 2 are the next
clusters confirmed by all models and thus candidates for intermediate-term
reversals in the stock markets. The May turn has the weakest amplitude and is
thus of lesser importance.
|
|
I have uploaded the Bradley siderograph for 2004 (see here for all models and the explanation), this
is the standard model:
It's time now for a review
of
It seems that since July the
siderograph is in the inversion mode since July,
and I believe that will be continue about 2/3 of the
year 2004. Other timing methods suggest that this model will be rather weak
in 2004, certainly not as accurate as in 2002 and the first half of 2003.
|
|
The "Bradley hype"
has cooled down remarkably the past weeks, apparently caused by the
perception that the siderograph has ceased to work
in July. I really don't share this opinion since the S&P 500 still hasn't
taken out the July 8 closing high which was a double-top just
0.4% lower than the June 17 intermediate-term top (only a higher close would
have triggered a rally). To re-iterate, three points are important for a
reliable Bradley analysis:
1. According to my research,
the S&P 500 is the only representative index for the
Western (US and European) stock markets the Bradley model is optimized for.
Indices with only 30 stocks like the Dow Jones Industrials certainly do not fulfil the index breadth criterion and are mostly not a
good starting point for astrological and cyclical studies (only when precise
timing is not important or a long-term price history is needed). Also, sector
indices like the Nasdaq 100 are not eligible, still they may provide some additional insights
at times.
2. The S&P 500 close
matters, not the intraday highs or lows - this is logical and consistent with
the standard Bradley being calculated only once a day.
3. The time window for turns
is not just 1 or 2 days but usually +/- 4 days and sometimes up to +/- 6
days (as in this case).
To summarize, the current
situation demonstrates how crucial the knowledge of the precise rules
is. After making a significant (>1%) new closing low since the 6/30 bottom
the market has now fully confirmed that the July 2 Bradley turn indeed marked
a top and not a bottom as suggested by other commentators.
|
|
The Bradley still is the big
magnet on amanita.at, so I have prepared another
update, this time with an analysis of the past to convey a deeper
understanding of the underlying patterns. A strange but rather consistent
feature of the siderograph is that after times of a
good predictive quality it suddenly drops out, only to shine again after some
time. I want to demonstrate this phenomenon with the aid of the charts of the
past 3 years.
Let's start with 2001
(always based on the S&P 500 close and the standard model):
- The medium-term high on
--- - The bottom on
--- - Then we had one of these drop-outs, the
medium-term reversals on
In short, 3 of the 5
intermediate-term reversals were predicted but all three with the wrong
polarity (high/low).
(charts
created with the program "Market Trader")
Now let's move on to the
year 2002:
- The inversion mode apparently continued to
work, the double top 3/11/02-3/19/02 coincided with a Bradley low on
--- - The bottom on
--- - The
--- - And the same was observed at the
--- - The "winning streak" continued at
the 11/27/02 top, the Bradley top came a little bit early on 11/24/02
(inaccuracy: 3 days).
Now back to the present, the
year 2003:
- The
--- - The Bradley high on
(1) In my preferred interpretation the
(2) The market exceeding the
Indeed, the pretty high inaccuracy
of 6 resp. 15 days can be interpreted as a sign of an approaching drop-out or
inversion, like in 2001 and 2002 (Initially, I expected the correlation already
to invert in May, but surprisingly the market kept on rising in June).
Another comment: I see
several Bradley commentators insert dates just some days apart (e.g. one turn
on 6/23, the next on 6/26 etc.) which is not serious in my opinion because it
pretends a time accuracy that by no means withstands an empirical testing.
The normal time window is +/- 4 days, it may extent to +/- 6 days or
more in some cases, so by definition it can't be applied to short-term
swings.
Best
viewed at a screen resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels