NFTRH+; COMPQ & SPX

This is an NFTRH+ update sent to the entire list because it is more of a market commentary than a specific trade.

Using the Fidelity’s ONEQ (there may be other ETFs out there, but this one was a commission-free offering from my broker) I decided to buy the greater tech sector.  I also took the profit on GOOGL and have decided to try to do less with the erratic nature of individual stocks and more with index and sector ETFs.  In this regard I also bought SPY due to the clearly measurable SPX target of 2410.

Each of these items (COMPQ and SPX) have very well defined charts and if I am still targeting 2410 on the SPX for example, why not reduce stock risk and go more with the indexes for this year-end phase?

The COMP has a better looking chart than the Nasdaq 100, which stands to reason since the large cap tech stocks that populate the NDX have under performed, post-election.  Both the COMP and SPX have well defined targets (assuming we stay bullish).  We have covered the SPX enough, but let’s look at the COMPQ from both daily and weekly perspectives.

5250 (+/-) is the key support area on the COMPQ.  Above that level it is bullish.

compq

On the weekly we have a neat little (at least temportary) ‘stop loss’ to this thinking at the 5250 area because a decent correction could bring the COMP to around 5000.  The pattern measures, very roughly, to 5800.  Caveat: I do not like the MACD here until/unless it crosses up.

compq weekly chart

A reminder that chart based NFTRH+ updates are technical trade setup ideas, which may not be revisited as the buy, sell, stop parameters are already noted. They are meant as a starting point for further research if interested. I will not personally buy every item highlighted and will sometimes sell – without prior notice (because this takes time and resource away from NFTRH’s main functions) – any item that I do buy, below target, which is something I often do as a trader. Also please be aware that I am not a fundamental stock analyst. Due diligence is your responsibility.

Gary

NFTRH.com