kelvinchase wrote: Tue Dec 02, 2025 12:04 pm A very useful indicator.See the image below.Thanks to Cagliostro's, kvak, and DmitrySCLP.SMC moves—it’s not fixed.That’s something I never thought of before.Loading SMC might give some psychological comfort.Maybe I haven’t grasped its essence yet.

hi could you share the rsi inditor

Lenovo wrote: Wed Dec 03, 2025 2:42 am hi could you share the rsi inditor

post1295577064.html#p1295577064

Trinity System Case Studies: NASDAQ (Fail) vs. GOLD (Success)

​Hey everyone, I'm sharing two key charts from the Trinity System to illustrate the core principle: Convergence is EVERYTHING. I've tried to analyze why one was a perfect trade and the other was a perfect AVOID, but I’d love your expert feedback to confirm my interpretation of the system's rules.

​1. Case Study 1: NASDAQ ($US100) - The Structural Veto (Seeking Validation)
​This chart shows a major point of confusion for me: we had a strong bullish reaction—a swing low that led to a massive bounce, green Oracles, and a CHOCH/EMA cross. But Azimuth's MTF BIAS box stayed RED (Bearish).
​ Is my analysis correct on why we should have avoided this LONG?
​I believe this is the ultimate test of the system's hierarchy:
​Pillar 2 (Momentum) was Lying: The three Oracles were green, signaling a huge momentum spike on the current TF. But momentum can be deceptive during a pullback.
​Pillar 3 (Location) Failed: Even if it was a Demand Zone, the Bearish Veto from Azimuth meant that the Higher Time Frame (HTF) structure didn't respect it.
​The L4/HTF Veto (Azimuth Structure): My conclusion is that the MTF BIAS box staying RED (Bearish) was the sole reason to stay out. This signal comes from the L4 ZigZag (Primary Trend) or the higher time frames, indicating: "This bullish move is just a deep pullback toward my L4 swing high, DON'T LONG HERE!"

​ TRINITY LESSON: Azimuth (Structure) VETOES Momentum (Oracles). If the L4/HTF structure hasn't flipped, ALL SIX BOXES cannot be checked for a Long. Am I right that the failure to flip L4/HTF is the dealbreaker here?

​2. Case Study 2: GOLD (M1) - The Perfect SHORT (Seeking Validation)
​This chart is the textbook example of the Trinity System working flawlessly, showing the market perfectly aligning for a high-probability SHORT entry right at the top of the Bullish run.
​ Is this a flawless analysis of the successful SHORT?
​I believe this trade checked ALL SIX BOXES for a high-probability convergence:
​1 & 2. Azimuth Structure Flip: We hit the structural high. Azimuth generated the Short setup signal, and the candles immediately turned RED (closing below the MA/AVWAP). The MTF Bias flipped to Bearish Expanding.
​3, 4, 5. Oracle Convergence: All three Oracles (Current TF + 2 HTFs) flipped to a unanimous BEARISH consensus, confirming institutional momentum.
​6. Black Zone Location: The reversal happened right at a Supply Zone (Resistance), confirming the institutional rejection.

​ TRINITY LESSON: When Structure (Azimuth), Momentum (Oracles), and Location (Black Zones) all agree across multiple time frames, the probability shifts heavily in your favor. This is why we hit that huge drop. Do you guys agree that this Gold trade represents perfect convergence?

I'm keen to hear your thoughts on these two examples. Did I nail the Azimuth L4 veto, or do you see a different reason for the NASDAQ failure? Drop your feedback below!
​Thanks for your time and happy trading!

JCCTREND wrote: Wed Dec 03, 2025 6:16 am Trinity System Case Studies: NASDAQ (Fail) vs. GOLD (Success)
...
​I'm keen to hear your thoughts on these two examples. Did I nail the Azimuth L4 veto, or do you see a different reason for the NASDAQ failure? Drop your feedback below!
​Thanks for your time and happy trading!

Hello there!

Let me share my thoughts, which might not be correct. If my assumption is wrong, please correct me, and I will edit my post. (Don't want to share here false assumptions)
First and foremost, it is always easy to be "smart" in hindsight. (Pick any random support & resistance YouTube video course as an example... )

On the NASDAQ, the Azimuth dashboard showed MTF Bearish trends. If I am correct, this means we had a new L3/L4 Swing High (seen at the end of the major ZigZag line). This point can serve as a pivot, and a downtrend shift may occur, but it has not yet been confirmed. (by L1/L2/L3 LH points)
It could still be just a pullback. (if later a HH is formed). When you made the image, we could not be sure about the structure. I would not use the "bearish" filter from the Azimuth dashboard at that moment in the decision-making.

The GOLD image was a bit different. Because we had more bars after the L3/L4 High formed. We see a "confirmed downtrend" with a LH and a ChoCh.
But the main difference: If it were similar to the NASDAQ, you should see BULLISH bias on the Azimuth dashboard. But if you go from the current price to the left, we can see that there are lower points, so the current price is not (yet) a Swing Low -> Azimuth will show "Bearish".

So my point here is that we should always check what is behind the "bearish" and "bullish" label, because it do not tell the complete story.
I hope this is helpful.