No! Consider the following discussion about the MYTH of exploiting
dominant cycles.
It is true that the market does have predictable cycles due to its
"structural" or physical nature. For example, quarterly earning cycles, triple witching cycles, Federal
Reserve meetings, weekly cycles, political election year cycles, the annual end-of-year stock dumping cycle, sunspot
cycles, and the slow Kitchin (3-5 years), Juglar (7-11 years), Kuznet (15-25 years) and Kondratieff (45-60 years)
cycles. They are very predictable and the markets readily discount their presence as far ahead in time as is
reasonable. So there's not much left with regard to those cycles for you to exploit.
What traders see as cycles on an hourly chart, for example, is a different matter.
The big, obvious cycles you see on price charts are actually the result of a combination of many weak cyclic forces
that sometimes line up in phase to produce APPARENT dominant cycles that suggest the presence of a strong structural
cycle that, in fact, does not exist. The slightest shifting in phase of any one component (due to crowd psychology,
unscheduled events, etc.) will significantly alter the structure of the apparent dominant wave. This may drive the
cycle into a "null" or random period, then reappear, completely out of phase. Now you see it ... and now you
don't.
The transitory nature of these apparent dominant cycles makes their automated
detection difficult and forecast unreliable. Sometimes cycle forecasting tools appear accurate and other times they are
totally off mark. The reason is that tools designed to spot dominant cycles will announce whatever they find, even if
they are only apparent (not structural) and transitory. For example, such tools would have no problem detecting cycles
in the six charts below. But there is just one problem --- the slow cyclic price action in the six charts below is
*impossible* to project into the future with any reasonable accuracy!
.
Why? Because we produced these six charts by simply adding consecutive random
price changes. That's right!! These charts are nothing more than RANDOM WALKS. And by definition, they cannot be
forecasted, no matter how impressive their apparent cyclic behavior may be!
The chart above does not "prove" market cycles are non-existent. Indeed,
discretionary traders can learn to spot and use periodic price events, and take time to "understand" their
causes, in order to verify whether the relevant triggers have actually occurred.
This demonstration does show, however, that cycle-finding tools like FFT, MESA and
periodigrams, which have no understanding of market cause-effect relationships, can be easily fooled into seeing
ghosts. In contrast, our CFB tool was designed to measure market trending action without assuming the existance of
cycles. This makes CFB more reliable.