S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 Forecast - July 26, 2016

The S&P 500 went back and forth during the course of the day on Monday, as we continue to see quite a bit of volatility. Ultimately though, I do see that every time we pullback there seems to be buyers below.

S&P 500

The S&P 500 went back and forth during the course of the day on Monday, as we continue to see quite a bit of volatility. Ultimately though, I do see that every time we pullback there seems to be buyers below. Ultimately, I think that we also have a massive “floor” below at the 2125 handle. With this, every time we pullback I think that sooner or later we will form a supportive candle that we can start buying at that point. If we break above the top of the candle for the session on Monday, I believe that the market continues to go much higher. Ultimately, I don’t have an interest in selling this market, because there is more than enough bullish pressure underneath and I believe that interest-rate expectations must be fairly low coming out of the Federal Reserve now.

(Click on image to enlarge)

Nasdaq 100

The Nasdaq 100 went back and forth during the day on Monday, forming a relatively neutral candle. With this, the market looks as if it should continue to go higher, continuing the uptrend from the longer-term perspective. If we break down below the bottom of the candle for the day, we very well could drop all the way down to the 4600 level, but I think there’s more than enough buying pressure in that general vicinity to continue to pushes market higher. Sure, we have climbed a little bit to quickly in this market, so pulling back could very well be what’s needed in order to continue to build up momentum to the upside. Ultimately, I do think that this market probably reaches towards the 5000 level, but at this point in time we will continue to see quite a bit of volatility as people will have a lot to worry about, but ultimately it looks as if the stock markets do continue to go much higher.

(Click on image to enlarge)

Disclosure:

None.

STOCKS IN THIS ARTICLE

Comments