Stock Market Sell-Off: Nasdaq Breaks Down as Traders Watch Critical Support Levels

Trading the Close Market Review | October 22, 2026

The technology sell-off on Thursday exposed a problem that extends beyond one difficult trading session. The S&P 500 lost an important rising trendline, the Nasdaq slipped back toward a long-term technical channel, and semiconductor stocks began testing levels that could determine whether buyers are ready to defend the market's recent leaders.

The late-session bounce offered some relief, but it did not repair the technical damage. That was the central message from Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek during Thursday's Trading the Close. The immediate question is no longer whether stocks are oversold. It is whether the market can establish support before another round of selling develops.

There is an important difference between a market that is pulling back within an established uptrend and one that is beginning to lose its underlying structure. Thursday's price action brought that distinction into focus. At the same time, weakness in Treasury yields and precious metals suggested that the selling was not confined to technology.

For traders, the opportunity is not in predicting the exact bottom. It is in identifying where the charts offer a defined setup, where the downside risk remains, and what price action would confirm that buyers are regaining control.

S&P 500 Technical Analysis: A Broken Trendline Changes the Near-Term Outlook

The S&P 500 entered Thursday attempting to maintain an ascending trendline that had provided support during recent sessions. Buyers initially defended the area, but the index ultimately broke below it and failed to reclaim the line on a subsequent rally.

Drew described the sequence as an attempted recovery that turned into bearish consolidation. Price moved back toward the broken trendline, encountered sellers, and spent much of the afternoon struggling to regain momentum.

That failed recovery matters more than the initial break. A trendline violation can produce a temporary shakeout, particularly when markets are already stretched to the downside. But when former support begins acting as resistance, it suggests that sellers are becoming more aggressive on rallies.

The next level Drew highlighted was 760.40 on the S&P 500 tracking chart, followed by a lower rising trendline near 748.45. These levels provide a framework for evaluating whether the decline remains controlled or begins developing into a more significant correction.

A sustained move below the first support area would leave the lower trendline as the next technical reference. Conversely, reclaiming the broken trendline and holding above it would weaken the immediate bearish interpretation.

The key is confirmation. A brief move below support is not necessarily a breakdown, just as a late-session bounce does not automatically signal a reversal. Traders need to see how price behaves around these levels before assigning greater conviction to either outcome.

Nasdaq Composite Breakdown: Why the Long-Term Channel Matters

The Nasdaq Composite showed greater relative weakness, falling approximately 2.6% during Thursday's session. Technology stocks had already been struggling to maintain a breakout above a declining trendline, and the latest selling pushed the index back toward its longer-term rising channel.

Drew compared the failed breakout to someone pulling themselves above a bar only to run out of strength. The index managed to clear resistance, but the buying pressure was not sufficient to sustain the move.

That analogy captures an important technical principle. Breaking resistance is only the first step. A successful breakout also requires buyers to defend the former resistance area when price returns to test it.

When that defense fails, the breakout can become a trap for traders who entered late, creating additional selling pressure as those positions are unwound.

The Nasdaq's rising parallel channel, which Drew traced back to April 2016, now becomes an important structural reference. If the index moves decisively back inside that channel, the next significant support identified in the analysis sits near 25,036.

That does not mean the index must trade directly to that level. Intermediate bounces remain possible, particularly after a sharp decline. However, the failure to hold above the descending trendline shifts the near-term burden of proof back to buyers.

For the broader market, this is significant because technology leadership has been an important component of the advance. If the Nasdaq cannot stabilize, a sustained recovery in the major indices becomes more difficult.

Semiconductor ETF SMH: A Potential Bounce at Fibonacci Support

While the Nasdaq breakdown reflects broader weakness, the semiconductor sector offers a more nuanced setup.

The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has been among the important vehicles for tracking the strength of artificial intelligence infrastructure and semiconductor-related stocks. Thursday's selling brought the ETF back toward a technical area that Drew considers worth monitoring for a possible reaction.

The setup combines three factors: a 50% Fibonacci retracement measured from the March 2026 pivot low, a retest of a previously broken declining trendline, and an oversold reading on the daily Relative Strength Index.

Each factor carries information on its own, but the overlap is what makes the area interesting.

A Fibonacci retracement identifies a potential reaction zone based on the size of the preceding move. A trendline retest provides a structural reference, while an oversold RSI suggests that the recent selling has been unusually persistent.

Together, these conditions create a location where traders can look for evidence of buying interest. They do not establish that a bounce is inevitable.

Drew emphasized that technical patterns are useful because they provide repeatable frameworks, not guarantees. The next step is to determine whether price actually responds.

An initial move lower followed by a recovery back above support could strengthen the case for a short-term bounce. Continued selling through the confluence area, particularly without a meaningful intraday recovery, would suggest that the weakness has not yet run its course.

This is where trader discipline becomes important. Buying simply because an asset is oversold is different from entering after the market demonstrates that a support level is attracting buyers.

The SMH setup is worth watching precisely because it offers a way to evaluate that difference.

10-Year Treasury Yield and Gold: A Warning From Intermarket Divergence

One of the more important developments in Thursday's session came from outside the equity market.

The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield moved sharply lower, slipping beneath the 5.21% area and testing a declining trendline associated with a longer-term historical pivot. Drew also identified 5.289% as an important overhead reference, while the 5.021% region remains relevant to the broader technical structure.

The decline in yields would ordinarily be expected to provide some support for precious metals, particularly gold, because lower yields can reduce the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets.

That relationship did not hold during Thursday's session.

Gold and silver weakened alongside Treasury yields and equities, creating an intermarket divergence that deserves attention.

Drew raised the possibility that this combination could become part of a broader discussion about slowing economic growth. The interpretation requires caution, however. Falling yields can reflect changing growth expectations, increased demand for Treasuries, or a reassessment of monetary policy. Weakness in precious metals can also reflect positioning, profit-taking, or a demand for liquidity.

The important signal is not that a recession has been confirmed. It is that the usual relationships between assets were not providing the expected defensive behavior.

If yields continue declining while equities and precious metals remain under pressure, traders should watch whether the pattern reflects temporary liquidation or a more persistent shift in market expectations.

That distinction could matter considerably for the next phase of the equity market.

Gold and Silver Price Analysis: Support Levels to Watch After the Sell-Off

The weakness in precious metals has also changed the technical outlook for both gold and silver.

Gold broke below the \$4,100 area and traded toward \$4,021, leaving a bearish consolidation pattern on the chart. Drew identified the \$3,900 to \$3,950 region as the next meaningful support zone.

Below that, the \$3,885 pivot area and broader support extending toward \$3,800 become relevant. A larger continuation of the bearish pattern could eventually bring deeper levels into consideration, including the \$3,600 to \$3,500 region.

Those lower figures are potential chart objectives, not predictions that price must reach them.

For traders looking to establish long exposure, the important question is whether gold begins stabilizing at support or continues producing lower highs and lower lows.

Silver faces a similar challenge, although its chart structure is different.

After a substantial advance earlier in the year, silver has developed a potential head-and-shoulders topping formation. The neckline is now being tested, raising the possibility of a deeper retracement if the breakdown is confirmed.

Drew identified the area between \$53.26 and \$50 as an important region to monitor, partly because of historical price structure around the \$50 level. A more extensive decline could eventually bring the lower boundary of the broader channel, near \$36, into focus.

The lesson across both metals is the same. A significant decline can improve the location of a potential long-term entry, but price reaching support does not eliminate the possibility of further downside.

The strongest setups develop when a meaningful level is accompanied by evidence that selling pressure is beginning to exhaust itself.

Crude Oil and Natural Gas: Different Technical Setups in Energy Markets

Energy markets presented a different picture from technology and precious metals.

Crude oil maintained relative strength during Thursday's session, advancing approximately 1.4% despite weakness across several other asset classes.

Drew discussed geopolitical supply concerns as an important consideration for oil, particularly the potential impact of disruptions affecting Middle Eastern production and transportation routes.

On the chart, crude continues to display a larger inverse head-and-shoulders structure. The immediate resistance area sits near \$104, while the broader measured-move objective remains around \$116.12 if the bullish pattern confirms.

A sustained breakout above resistance would strengthen that technical case. Failure to clear the level could leave oil consolidating despite the geopolitical risk premium.

Natural gas, meanwhile, remains sensitive to weather expectations and seasonal demand.

Forecasts suggesting a milder beginning to November have contributed to weakness, leaving natural gas trading within a narrowing technical structure. Drew highlighted the \$3.20 area as an important lower reference and \$3.65 as a level to monitor for a potential recovery.

Rather than assuming that winter demand will automatically push prices higher, traders should watch whether natural gas can stabilize and begin reclaiming resistance.

The contrast between crude oil and natural gas illustrates why the energy sector cannot be treated as a single trade. Different supply dynamics, demand expectations, and chart structures can produce very different outcomes.

Technology Stocks vs. Defensive Stocks: What Market Rotation Reveals

The contrast between technology weakness and defensive strength was particularly visible in Procter & Gamble (PG).

Following its earnings report, PG broke above a declining parallel channel that had been in place since March 2025. That move stood out against the selling across technology and other growth-oriented areas.

However, the breakout also pushed the stock into an overbought condition, with Drew identifying a daily RSI near 74.46.

An overbought reading does not automatically mean a stock must decline. Strong stocks can remain overbought during sustained advances. But when that condition develops near historical resistance, traders have reason to be more selective about new entries.

For PG, the next confirmation would be a daily close above Thursday's high, followed by an ability to defend the breakout area on a pullback. The broader resistance region between \$180 and \$190 remains relevant if momentum continues.

The larger lesson is that defensive strength does not make every defensive stock an attractive entry at any price.

Meanwhile, several individual stocks illustrated how quickly market leadership can deteriorate.

GE Vernova (GEV) suffered a sharp decline after failing to reclaim a broken technical structure. The sequence of breakdown, retest, and rejection provided a clear example of former support becoming resistance.

Sandisk (SNDK) also closed beneath its rising parallel channel after an unsuccessful attempt to recover the broken boundary. That places greater importance on the next support test and whether buyers can prevent additional downside.

Western Digital (WDC) showed significant volatility around its earnings release. Drew highlighted a potential support cluster around \$320, \$312, and the \$307 to \$301 region. These overlapping references become more useful if selling continues and price begins approaching them.

Bloom Energy (BE) was another example of weakening structure. After testing support around \$200 to \$201.79, the stock struggled to sustain its recovery. A confirmed break below the channel would shift attention toward the \$188.37 Fibonacci reference.

These individual setups reinforce the broader market message. When momentum deteriorates, the quality of the entry matters more than the size of the preceding decline.

Bitcoin Technical Analysis: \$80,500 Support and the Risk of \$75,000

Bitcoin also reflected the broader pressure on risk assets.

The cryptocurrency has been developing a bearish consolidation pattern while repeatedly testing support around \$80,500. Attempts to recover the upper portion of its recent trading range have not produced a sustained reversal.

Drew used a simple analogy to explain the significance of repeated support tests: the more often price knocks on the same door, the greater the concern that the level may eventually give way.

Repeated tests are not automatically bearish. Strong support can absorb selling pressure multiple times. However, when each recovery becomes weaker and price repeatedly returns to the same floor, the balance between buyers and sellers can begin to shift.

For Bitcoin, a confirmed break below \$80,500 would bring the \$75,000 region into focus as the next major technical reference.

Conversely, holding support and reclaiming the upper half of the recent trading range would provide evidence that buyers are regaining control.

The connection to equities also deserves attention. If technology stocks remain under pressure and risk appetite continues weakening, Bitcoin may struggle to establish an independent recovery.

That relationship is not permanent, but it is relevant to the current market environment.

Stock Market Outlook: What Traders Should Watch Next

Thursday's selling created several important tests for the next trading session.

The first is whether the S&P 500 and Nasdaq can reclaim their broken technical levels. A recovery that holds above former support would suggest that the recent breakdown may have been temporary. Another failed retest would reinforce the bearish near-term structure.

The second is whether semiconductor stocks can attract buyers around the SMH Fibonacci confluence area. Because semiconductors have been important market leaders, their response could provide useful information about the strength of any broader rebound.

The third is the behavior of Treasury yields and precious metals. Continued weakness across these markets would deserve attention, particularly if the normal relationships between defensive assets and equities remain disrupted.

Finally, traders should remain aware of geopolitical developments and the potential for price gaps between sessions. Such events can change the market's technical picture before traders have an opportunity to react.

Drew's approach throughout the show was consistent: identify the level, understand the setup, and wait for the market to provide evidence.

That framework becomes especially valuable when volatility increases.

Trading the Close: Why Patience Matters More Than Predicting the Bottom

The most important takeaway from Thursday's Trading the Close is not that every chart has turned bearish or that another major decline is inevitable.

It is that the market has entered a period where confirmation matters more than anticipation.

The Nasdaq's failed breakout, the S&P 500 trendline violation, and the pressure on semiconductor leadership all suggest that buyers have work to do. At the same time, oversold conditions and approaching support levels could create opportunities for technical rebounds.

Both possibilities can exist simultaneously.

For traders, that means avoiding two common mistakes: assuming every bounce marks the beginning of a new rally and assuming every sharp decline will continue without interruption.

Drew's emphasis on patience is particularly relevant here. Waiting for a stock or index to reach a predetermined support zone is only part of the process. The next step is assessing how price behaves once it arrives.

A disciplined trader does not need to catch the exact low to participate in a recovery. Nor does a trader need to chase a breakdown after the majority of the initial move has already occurred.

The market will provide another setup. The priority is making sure the risk is defined when that opportunity appears.

Bottom line: The technical damage from Thursday's sell-off should not be ignored, but neither should the potential for a rebound as important support levels approach. The next move will be determined by whether buyers can defend those levels and reclaim lost ground. Until then, patience and confirmation remain more useful than conviction without evidence.

Disclaimer: Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the possible loss of principal. This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security, commodity, or cryptocurrency. Technical patterns and price targets are not guarantees of future performance. Conduct your own research and consider your financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making trading decisions.

The crypto market is not collapsing, but it is sitting in a position that deserves attention. Across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Dogecoin, and BNB, price is consolidating directly on top of support rather than building a base above it. Consolidation that repeatedly presses against support without producing a meaningful bounce can signal weakening buying interest. That is the concern developing across several major crypto charts.

Bitcoin is the clearest example, and because it sets the direction for the rest of the space, it is where the analysis has to start. The horizontal level near $80,524 is the line in the sand. Above it, the broader structure holds. Below it, the chart can turn bearish quickly, and selling pressure in crypto rarely unfolds slowly.

The core thesis is straightforward: every additional test of Bitcoin's support raises the probability that it eventually gives way. Until price moves decisively away from that level, the near-term risk leans to the downside.

Why Repeated Tests Weaken Bitcoin Support

The horizontal support on Bitcoin traces back to a low pivot from November 2025. When price traded beneath that line earlier, every attempt to push higher was rejected. Only recently did Bitcoin break above it and begin consolidating on top, which turned former resistance into support.

That flip was constructive. The problem is what has happened since. Over the past couple of weeks, price has repeatedly pressed into the bottom of that support range, and today's session added a firm sell candle that pushed price lower again.

Support is not a fixed wall. Each test absorbs buying interest that may not be there the next time. A level that holds once is meaningful. A level that is hit again and again without a strong move away from it is a level being worn down. That is why the brief push higher earlier in the week was significant: it was the kind of move Bitcoin needs to repeat and extend.

Bitcoin's Rising Trend Line Flashes a Warning

A second signal reinforces the caution. An inclining trend line drawn from one consolidation low pivot to the next shows a clear shift in character. Everything to the left of the most recent dip was bullish consolidation, stepping higher. The latest pullback interrupted that progression, with near-term bearish consolidation developing around the rising trend line. For Drew, that shift is an early warning that Bitcoin's bullish structure is losing momentum.

This is a useful tool for anyone managing an open position. When a rising market forms consolidation pivots, connecting them shows where the bullish structure is defined. When price starts consolidating bearishly around that line instead of bouncing cleanly from it, the bullish structure is losing momentum in the near term.

Taken together, the repeated horizontal tests and the shift in character at the trend line point in the same direction.

Bitcoin Price Levels: The $86,000 Reclaim vs. the $75,000 Target

The bullish path requires Bitcoin to get away from support and begin consolidating above $86,000. That would give it room to build momentum toward the next level on the chart.

The bearish path is defined just as clearly. A sustained break below $80,524 opens the door to roughly $75,000, where selling could halt or produce a near-term bounce to retest the broken level from below.

Altcoins Are Following Bitcoin's Structure

The broader concern is how similar the altcoin charts look. When several assets show the same pattern at once, it usually reflects a common driver, and in crypto that driver is Bitcoin.

Ethereum remains in its bullish breakout from the June lows, with trend line support from the June and August pivots near $2,327 to $2,332. A Bitcoin recovery toward $86,000 could help Ethereum regain its prior consolidation range and potentially challenge the January pivot near $3,041. Drew views that area as a likely near-term ceiling, with an intermediate rising trend line adding another layer of resistance. A break of the trend line, however, points to the next shelf near $2,138.

Solana broke out above a trend line that capped price in August and September but is now consolidating right on top of that line. It needs to reclaim $120 quickly. A developing head and shoulders pattern, if confirmed, projects toward the $83 to $88 range.

Dogecoin drew a large inflow of capital over the past week, according to Drew, yet its near-term bullish weekly consolidation has failed. Bounces are likely to meet rejection near 9.3 cents, and the next support is 7.3 cents rather than the 7.5-cent pivot low.

BNB is pulling back toward a zone where an inclining trend line and a Fibonacci retracement overlap. Because that zone was tested recently, it is more likely to give way on a return visit, possibly after a few days of sideways chop. Below the initial support zone, Drew is watching the 50% Fibonacci retracement. A second rising trend line could intersect that retracement around November 24, creating a potential two-factor support area if the timing of the decline aligns.

Key Crypto Support and Resistance Levels

What to Watch Next

Bitcoin's behavior around $80,524 is the deciding signal. A move away from that level and consolidation above $86,000 would invalidate the near-term bearish view and likely lift the altcoins with it. Continued tests, especially with closes below the level, would confirm the breakdown setup and shift attention to $75,000 on Bitcoin and the corresponding downside levels across the altcoins.

Conclusion: Trade the Level, Not the Hope

Nothing here is a prediction that crypto must fall. It is an assessment of where the probabilities currently sit. Support that is tested repeatedly without a strong reaction becomes less reliable, and the alignment of that pattern across multiple charts raises the stakes.

The practical step is simple: mark these levels, track them daily, and let price confirm the direction before acting. A breakdown could create discounted entries. A reclaim would restore the bullish structure. Either way, the chart will show which outcome is unfolding.

Watch on YouTube

Oil Near \$100 Pressures Stocks as Treasury Yields Fall, Tech Earnings Disappoint

The NASDAQ is down nearly 2% this morning, while the S&P 500 is trading approximately 1% lower following earnings reactions from major technology companies. The selling comes as oil remains near \$100 per barrel and Treasury yields continue to decline, creating a difficult backdrop for equities. In today's My Trading Game Plan Revealed, Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, focused on the growing economic pressure from sustained energy costs and the technical levels that could offer trading opportunities during the pullback.

The broader concern centers on how long consumers and businesses can absorb elevated energy prices before economic growth begins to weaken more noticeably. Falling bond yields suggest that investors are increasingly weighing that possibility, even as oil remains high enough to sustain inflationary pressure. Gareth's framework still allows for another move higher in the S&P 500, potentially toward 8,000, but the path becomes more difficult if energy costs remain elevated. Against that backdrop, earnings volatility is creating specific technical setups in Meta, Tesla, Lam Research, and other heavily traded stocks.

Oil Near \$100 Becomes a Growing Risk for the S&P 500

Crude oil continues to trade near \$100 per barrel, holding elevated levels despite relatively limited movement over the past several sessions. Gareth emphasized that the duration of this price environment is becoming increasingly important for the economy. A brief geopolitical spike can be absorbed more easily than several months of sustained pressure, particularly when higher fuel and transportation costs begin working their way through household budgets and business expenses.

Gareth noted that oil has averaged approximately \$95 per barrel since its initial surge in February. That sustained average carries consequences beyond the daily movement in crude futures. Higher diesel prices increase transportation and distribution costs, while expensive gasoline reduces the money consumers have available for other purchases. Each additional week at these levels adds pressure, creating the cumulative economic damage Gareth described as "death by 1,000 cuts." The longer this continues, the greater the risk that consumer spending slows and corporate margins come under pressure.

For the S&P 500, the technical picture still leaves room for a move toward the 8,000 level. A decline of approximately 1% brings the index back toward prices seen earlier in the week, so the current pullback alone does not establish a larger bearish reversal. However, Gareth sees a meaningful reduction in oil prices, potentially toward \$70 to \$80 per barrel, as an important development that could improve the outlook for equities. If crude remains near \$100 for an extended period, recession risks increase and the bullish scenario faces a more challenging economic backdrop.

Falling 10-Year Treasury Yields Signal Economic Growth Concerns

One of the more important developments in Gareth's analysis is the divergence between crude oil and the 10-year Treasury yield. Elevated oil prices can contribute to inflation expectations and upward pressure on yields. Yet the 10-year yield is moving lower even as energy costs remain stubbornly high. That relationship suggests the bond market may be placing greater weight on the possibility of slowing economic growth and weaker demand.

The technical chart reinforces that interpretation. Gareth previously identified a bear flag and a potential head and shoulders pattern in the 10-year yield, both suggesting vulnerability to further downside. With yields now breaking lower, the price action supports the view that growth concerns are becoming more influential. Investors may be anticipating an environment where weaker economic activity eventually increases pressure on the Federal Reserve to ease monetary policy.

The implications for equities are important. Lower Treasury yields can sometimes support stock valuations by reducing borrowing costs and discount rates. However, when yields decline because investors expect economic conditions to deteriorate, the benefit can be offset by concerns about earnings and consumer demand. Gareth's focus is on that developing relationship. Continued weakness in yields alongside elevated oil prices would strengthen the case that the market is beginning to price in economic damage from prolonged energy costs.

Meta Stock: Earnings Reaction Puts \$666 and \$650 Support in Focus

Meta Platforms (META) is trading lower following its earnings report, with shares indicated around \$680 during Gareth's morning analysis. Although the company's results were reasonably strong, investors appear concerned about the financial demands of its artificial intelligence expansion. Significant infrastructure spending, additional borrowing, and pressure on near-term cash flow are changing how the market evaluates a business historically associated with substantial cash generation.

The concern reflects the growing cost of competing in artificial intelligence. Companies are committing large amounts of capital to data centers, computing infrastructure, and related technology, while the timing of future returns remains uncertain. For Meta, that creates additional scrutiny around spending and cash flow even when the underlying business continues to perform. Gareth approached the earnings reaction through the technical chart, identifying levels where selling pressure could begin to encounter support.

The first area sits near \$666, where a gap fill creates a potential technical reaction point. If shares continue lower, a descending trend line near \$650 provides another area of interest. These levels offer a framework for evaluating a possible day trading bounce, with the quality of the reaction determining whether buyers are willing to defend support. A sustained break below either level would weaken the corresponding setup and shift attention toward lower prices.

Tesla Stock: Parallel Channel Rejection Points Toward \$350 Support

Tesla (TSLA) initially moved higher following its earnings release before reversing during overnight trading. Gareth highlighted the technical structure behind that reaction, particularly the stock's approach to the upper boundary of an established parallel channel. Price reached that resistance area heading into earnings, leaving the stock vulnerable to selling if the announcement failed to generate enough buying demand to support a breakout.

The rejection illustrates how technical resistance can influence price action around major catalysts. Earnings releases often produce significant volatility, but a stock approaching a well-established resistance level may already reflect considerable optimism. When price fails to clear that area, traders who bought ahead of the event can begin exiting positions, adding to the selling pressure. In Tesla's case, the parallel channel provided a useful reference for understanding the reversal.

Gareth identified a potential support area around \$353 to \$350, based on a trend line drawn from a recent pivot low. That zone sits roughly \$20 below the price area discussed during the broadcast, a distance that remains relevant given Tesla's typical trading volatility. If shares decline toward support, Gareth's framework calls for evaluating the price reaction rather than assuming the level will automatically hold. A decisive break below the zone would reduce the appeal of the initial bounce setup.

Lam Research Stock: Earnings Selloff Brings \$224 Gap Fill Into View

Lam Research (LRCX) is experiencing a substantial decline despite reporting strong earnings and revenue. The semiconductor equipment manufacturer faced elevated expectations tied to artificial intelligence spending, leaving investors focused on whether forward guidance could support the stock's valuation. Although the reported results were strong, the outlook appears to have fallen short of the higher expectations embedded in the share price.

The reaction highlights the role of unofficial earnings expectations, commonly described as the "whisper number." When a stock has already experienced a significant rally, investors may expect results that exceed published estimates by a wide margin. Meeting or modestly exceeding consensus forecasts can still produce selling if the outlook fails to justify those expectations. Gareth noted that Lam Research had fallen from approximately \$350 on October 2 to around \$234, representing a decline of roughly one-third in less than a month.

From a technical perspective, Gareth identified a significant gap fill near \$224, approximately \$10 below the price discussed during the show. That level offers a potential day trading long setup if additional selling brings shares into the area. The size of the preceding decline could create conditions for a short-term rebound, particularly if selling begins to exhaust itself near support. However, a sharp decline can also continue through an established level, making confirmation and disciplined risk management important parts of the setup.

Spotify Stock Shows Relative Strength With \$576 Resistance Ahead

Spotify (SPOT) stands out against the weakness affecting many technology stocks. Shares closed the previous session near \$525 before moving toward \$563 following earnings, demonstrating relative strength while the broader market traded lower. Gareth highlighted this divergence because stocks that hold up during market weakness can attract additional buying interest if overall conditions stabilize.

Relative strength can provide useful information about institutional demand and investor positioning. A stock that advances while major indexes decline is demonstrating that buyers are willing to commit capital despite the broader selling pressure. If the market subsequently rebounds, that existing demand can support additional upside. However, the strength of the initial move also creates the possibility that traders buying late encounter nearby resistance.

For Spotify, Gareth identified \$576 as an important pivot-high resistance level. That area could produce a short-term trading opportunity if shares continue higher and begin showing signs of rejection. The preferred approach is to let price reach the technical level and evaluate the reaction. Chasing a large earnings gap before resistance is tested can leave traders exposed to a reversal, particularly when broader market conditions remain unsettled.

Gold Breaks \$4,065 Support as Silver Approaches \$50 Buy Zone

Precious metals are also showing technical weakness, with gold and silver extending their recent declines despite concerns about the economic outlook. Gareth highlighted gold's confirmed breakdown below the \$4,065 to \$4,066 support area, a development that changes the near-term chart structure. Once an established support level fails, traders often begin evaluating lower areas where buyers previously demonstrated interest.

The next significant support for gold sits near \$3,950. Gareth sees that area as an important potential reaction point following the breakdown. If selling continues and \$3,950 fails to hold, the chart leaves room for a deeper decline toward approximately \$3,500. These are conditional downside reference points rather than guaranteed targets, with price behavior at each support area determining whether the bearish structure remains intact.

Silver has also weakened, confirming a wedge breakdown followed by a bear flag pattern. With prices retreating toward \$55, Gareth continues to favor patience for traders looking for a larger support area. His preferred zone sits around \$50, including the possibility of a brief move below that level before buyers emerge. The attraction of that area comes from the potential relationship between entry price, nearby support, and downside risk. A sustained failure to reclaim \$50 after a breakdown would require reassessing the setup.

Natural Gas Reaches Trend Line Support After Sharp Decline

Natural gas is beginning to rebound after a prolonged period of selling pressure, providing a contrast to crude oil's sustained strength. Gareth noted that prices have reached a significant technical trend line, creating the possibility of a short-term reaction. The bounce comes as traders also evaluate inventory data, which can influence near-term supply expectations and volatility.

The trend line is the primary reference point for the setup. If natural gas holds support and begins establishing higher lows, the rebound could develop into a broader mean-reversion move. If the initial bounce fades and price breaks below the trend line, the technical picture would remain weak. Gareth's analysis centers on whether buyers can defend the area after the recent decline, with subsequent price action providing the confirmation.

Bitcoin Price Outlook: \$81,000 Support and \$87,200 Resistance

Bitcoin (BTC) has returned to choppy trading after showing strength over the previous two sessions. Gareth described the current environment as difficult for short-term traders because repeated moves in both directions have failed to establish a sustained trend. This type of range-bound price action can produce false breakouts and rapid reversals, particularly when leveraged positions are concentrated around obvious technical levels.

The chart provides two boundaries that define the next meaningful directional opportunity. On the downside, a daily close below \$81,000 would strengthen the bearish case and open the possibility of a decline toward \$75,500. On the upside, a confirmed breakout above \$87,200 would improve the bullish structure and bring \$95,000 into focus as a potential target. Gareth emphasized the importance of waiting for confirmation because brief moves beyond support or resistance can quickly reverse.

Between those levels, Bitcoin remains vulnerable to the same back-and-forth trading that has frustrated participants during the recent consolidation. Traders attempting to capture every move inside the range face greater exposure to whipsaws and repeated losses. Waiting for a confirmed break offers a clearer directional framework, although even confirmed moves can fail. For Gareth, preserving capital during uncertain conditions remains an important part of the trading process.

BitFunded Trading Competition Begins October 23

Verified Investing is also preparing for a three-week trading competition with BitFunded, scheduled to begin October 23 in connection with the Crypto Combat show. The event is designed around competitive trading, with participants able to compare performance on a public leaderboard while applying technical analysis and risk-management principles.

According to the competition details discussed in the supplied recap, the entry fee is \$79 and participation includes access to a \$10,000 trading account and a separate \$5,000 practice account. The announced prizes include funded-account awards, cash prizes, and an iPhone 18 Pro for the top finisher. Participants should review the official competition rules, account conditions, payout requirements, eligibility restrictions, and applicable fees before entering. Funded-account awards should not be interpreted as cash prizes or guaranteed withdrawable balances, and trading results do not guarantee profits.

Trading Game Plan: Key Support Levels and Confirmation

The broader market decline is creating potential short-term trading setups, but Gareth's approach remains centered on waiting for price to reach predefined technical areas. Meta's \$666 gap fill, Tesla's \$350 to \$353 support zone, and Lam Research's \$224 gap fill are examples of locations where traders can begin evaluating the balance between buyers and sellers. Each setup depends on how price behaves when the level is tested, especially during a session where market-wide selling pressure can overwhelm individual support areas.

At the macro level, crude oil near \$100 and declining Treasury yields remain central to Gareth's outlook. A meaningful retreat in oil prices could ease some of the pressure on consumers and improve the environment for equities. Continued strength in crude alongside weakening growth expectations would increase the risk of a broader market adjustment. Meanwhile, gold's breakdown and Bitcoin's established range provide additional confirmation levels to monitor across asset classes.

The trading advantage in this environment comes from preparation and selectivity. Volatile markets can create sharp rebounds, but a large decline alone does not establish a buying opportunity. Gareth's framework favors identifying support and resistance in advance, allowing price to reach those areas, and using the subsequent reaction to assess whether a trade offers a reasonable balance of risk and potential reward. With earnings volatility elevated and macroeconomic pressures building, patience remains as important as identifying the right chart.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the potential loss of principal. Technical levels and price targets are conditional, may not be reached, and do not guarantee future performance. Always conduct your own research and consider your financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making trading decisions.

Natural gas is under steady selling pressure. On the daily chart, price is testing the lower boundary of its parallel channel, and intraday action continues to lean bearish, raising the possibility of a breakdown.

The weakness stands out because the backdrop is not uniformly negative. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects U.S. natural gas exports to keep climbing. Yet that longer-term support has not been enough to stop the current decline.

Nick Valdez sees the quiet hurricane season as an important reason why. And as natural gas slides, the United States Natural Gas Fund (UNG) is approaching a set of support levels where the selloff could turn into a trading opportunity, though that opportunity has not arrived yet.

Why Natural Gas Is Falling Despite Stronger Export Expectations

A significant share of U.S. natural gas infrastructure is concentrated along the Gulf Coast, which leaves the market sensitive to hurricane-related disruptions. In a typical season, the possibility of storm damage to production and export facilities can help support prices through supply concerns.

This season, the storms have not delivered that kind of disruption. The hurricane that did strike hit the Florida Panhandle and left natural gas facilities largely unaffected. With Gulf Coast infrastructure spared, the supply concerns that might otherwise have supported prices have faded.

The result is a market where favorable export projections and falling prices coexist. Exports remain part of the longer-term picture, but in the near term, the absence of weather-driven supply risk is carrying more weight.

The more immediate question is how far that weakness can run before a technical opportunity develops.

UNG's Falling Wedge Puts Three Support Levels in Focus

UNG is developing a falling wedge, with two descending trend lines converging as price makes lower highs and lower lows inside a narrowing range.

Nick favors an eventual upside resolution because of the falling-wedge structure, while acknowledging that a breakdown remains possible. That creates a useful tension: the trend is bearish, but the shape of the decline leaves room for a reversal.

UNG does not necessarily need to reach the lower wedge boundary before buyers begin responding. The more relevant areas are the prior swing lows.

Nick is watching UNG for a potential options trade if the fund continues falling toward that support. The $9.60–$9.70 zone is his first area of interest, with $9.25 and potentially $9.00 becoming increasingly attractive if the decline extends. He has traded UNG before and is interested in another opportunity at lower prices, but the setup has not yet reached his preferred entry area.

Waiting for UNG to approach established support offers a more disciplined framework for evaluating the trade than chasing price during an active selloff. For options traders, strike selection and expiration also matter, particularly if the anticipated reversal takes longer to develop. A purchased option has a defined maximum loss, but it can still expire worthless even if the underlying eventually moves in the expected direction.

What to Watch Next for Natural Gas and UNG

Early sign of support: An initial reaction around $9.60–$9.70 would be the first indication that buyers are responding to support.

Strengthening the reversal case: A subsequent break above the upper falling-wedge trend line would strengthen the bullish case. Until then, the broader decline remains intact, and a move toward $9.25 or $9.00 is still possible.

Risk to the view: A decisive break below the lower wedge boundary would signal that sellers remain in control. On the underlying futures, a clean break below the daily channel would likely push UNG toward the deeper levels first.

Wildcard: Any renewed weather threat to Gulf Coast infrastructure could quickly reintroduce supply concerns and change the timing of the setup.

Silver, Wheat, and Gold: Patience Around Predefined Levels

Natural gas is not the only commodity moving toward levels worth watching.

Silver is approaching the roughly $54 double-top area that Verified Investing has been watching for some time. Nick sees that zone as a potential opportunity to add physical silver to his own holdings, provided dealer premiums remain reasonable.

The Teucrium Wheat Fund (WEAT) has pulled back toward the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement of its multi-month advance, briefly wicking below the level. Nick sees that technical support as interesting enough to consider a small initial options position, although he has not confirmed an entry.

Gold is the case for waiting. It continues to chop along an ascending trend line dating back to July 2025, and the structure is beginning to resemble a bear flag. A measured move from a breakdown points toward the prior pivot low and a possible retest below $4,000, a level gold briefly broke in June. Nick remains bullish on gold over the long term, pointing to continued money printing and steady Chinese gold buying as reserves shift away from U.S. Treasuries. The near-term chart, however, does not yet offer a clean entry.

Bottom Line: The Selloff Is Creating a Setup, Not a Signal Yet

Natural gas remains under pressure, and the lack of major hurricane-related supply disruptions is an important part of the explanation for the decline.

UNG, however, is approaching levels that could make the selloff increasingly interesting from a trading standpoint. The setup provides clear levels to monitor and a technical framework for evaluating a potential reversal, without assuming the falling wedge must resolve higher. It becomes more compelling if buyers respond around support; a continued breakdown would keep the bearish trend in control.

For now, the approach is straightforward: let natural gas continue to come down, and watch how UNG behaves when it reaches the levels that matter.

Watch on YouTube

Nasdaq Reclaims Key Level as Earnings Volatility Tests Market Resistance

Trading the Close Market Recap | October 21, 2026

The stock market moved higher Wednesday, but the more important development was where the major indexes finished relative to their technical levels. The S&P 500 gained 0.53%, while the Nasdaq recovered a key area that had challenged buyers for several sessions. That improvement gives bulls something to work with heading into Thursday, although the next session will determine whether the recovery has staying power.

During Wednesday's Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek examined the improving index structure, the hesitation in semiconductors, and several individual stocks approaching important technical levels. His central message was that a strong session can improve a chart without resolving every risk. With earnings producing sharp moves in individual names, the advantage comes from identifying where price is likely to encounter buyers or sellers before the next catalyst arrives.

That framework becomes particularly important when the major indexes look stronger than some of the sectors supporting them. The Nasdaq has made progress, but semiconductor consolidation and overhead resistance in major technology stocks suggest traders still need confirmation before treating the recovery as a broader breakout.

S&P 500 and Nasdaq Technical Analysis: Bulls Regain Control of Key Levels

The S&P 500's 0.53% advance carried more technical significance than the percentage alone suggests. For four consecutive sessions, the index had been pressing against an inclining support trend line. Repeated tests of support can weaken a level, particularly when buyers struggle to generate meaningful separation from it.

Wednesday's advance finally created some distance between price and that trend line. That gives the bullish structure additional room, although the next test will come if sellers return. A successful retest would strengthen the case that buyers remain in control. A decisive move back below support would put the recent recovery in question.

The Nasdaq offered an even clearer example of this shift. Drew compared Monday's and Tuesday's candles to someone hanging from a pull-up bar, struggling to get back above an important level. Wednesday's action finally pushed the index back over that technical barrier.

The recovery is constructive, but the confirmation still lies ahead. Drew identified 26,786 as the level the Nasdaq needs to close above to strengthen the bullish case. On the downside, a break below 26,582 would undermine Wednesday's improvement and bring renewed selling pressure into focus.

The lesson is straightforward: reclaiming a level is the first step. Holding it and building on that recovery is what gives the move greater significance.

Semiconductor ETF SMH: Bear Flag Risk Beneath the Nasdaq Rally

One reason to remain selective is the semiconductor sector. The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) gained 1.89% Wednesday, but that advance has not yet resolved the larger technical structure.

SMH has spent approximately five sessions consolidating after a sharp decline. That combination raises the possibility of a developing bear flag, a continuation pattern that can point to additional weakness if price breaks below its lower boundary. Drew noted that another couple of sessions of sideways movement could further develop the pattern.

If sellers regain control and confirm a breakdown, the lower boundary of an inclining parallel channel near $529.26 becomes an important downside reference. A deeper declining trend line would come into focus if that support fails.

However, the bearish interpretation remains conditional. A sustained move above the consolidation range would weaken the bear flag scenario and suggest buyers are regaining control.

This is the divergence traders should watch. The Nasdaq's recovery is encouraging, but a stronger advance would carry more weight if semiconductor stocks begin confirming the move rather than simply recovering within a potentially bearish structure.

10-Year Treasury Yield: Historical Resistance Adds Another Market Variable

The bond market provides another piece of the broader technical picture. The 10-year Treasury yield has been relatively flat after approaching a historical resistance area associated with pivot highs from June 2007.

Drew highlighted a developing candlestick structure he describes as a "sleeper hold," where momentum begins to stall near an important technical level. The significance is not that yields must reverse, but that buyers have encountered an area where previous price action suggests resistance may develop.

When historical resistance, candlestick behavior, and a mature time count begin aligning, the potential for a directional turn deserves attention. That is particularly relevant for technology stocks, where changes in Treasury yields can influence valuation expectations and risk appetite.

A confirmed retreat in yields could provide a more supportive backdrop for growth stocks. A sustained breakout through resistance, on the other hand, would require traders to reassess that assumption.

Drew's broader point was about recognizing turning points before the move becomes obvious. The opportunity is not in predicting every top or bottom. It is in identifying a defined technical area, waiting for confirmation, and managing the risk if price moves in the opposite direction.

Tesla Stock Technical Analysis: Four Resistance Levels Converge Near $400

Tesla (TSLA) presents one of the clearest examples of why multiple technical factors matter more than any single resistance line.

Drew identified a cluster of four barriers concentrated around the psychologically important $400 level. These include a declining trend line from December 2025 near $394.24, a 50% Fibonacci retracement at $398.11, a broken inclining trend line near $399.04, and another inclining trend line approaching $400.

Individually, each level represents potential resistance. Together, they create a relatively narrow area where sellers may become more active, particularly if price approaches the zone following a strong advance.

The next important upside reference is $403.78. A sustained move above that level would suggest Tesla has cleared the immediate resistance cluster and could bring $421.88 into focus.

If price fails to break through, the stock may need additional consolidation before attempting another advance. A rejection would also raise the possibility of a pullback as traders respond to the concentrated overhead resistance.

The important distinction is that the resistance cluster identifies where the next decision may occur. It does not establish the outcome in advance.

IBM and Meta Earnings: Why Price Levels Matter More Than the Initial Reaction

Earnings season has introduced another layer of uncertainty, with individual stocks experiencing sharp moves outside regular trading hours.

IBM closed the regular session near $251 before trading substantially higher after hours, reaching a reported high of $271.29. Drew also identified an unusual intraday price spike toward $310 ahead of the earnings release.

That isolated move warrants closer examination, but it does not, by itself, establish that information leaked or that improper trading occurred. Unusual prints can also reflect liquidity conditions, reporting errors, or other market mechanics.

From a technical perspective, IBM's more immediate issue is the resistance surrounding the 50% Fibonacci retracement at $265.83. If the stock opens below that level, the area becomes an important test for buyers attempting to sustain the earnings-driven advance.

A move above resistance would shift attention toward the 61.8% retracement at $281.55. Failure to hold the initial breakout area could instead produce a retracement of the after-hours move.

Meta Platforms (META) offers a different setup. The stock closed near $697.52 before trading around $737 after hours, following several sessions in which buyers appeared to defend support within an inclining parallel channel.

The October 19 and 20 candles showed pronounced lower wicks around the channel's midpoint. Those wicks suggest that selling pressure was met with buying interest near an established technical area. The October 20 candle also closed within the previous day's body, reinforcing the importance of the support zone.

The subsequent recovery is consistent with a successful support test. Looking higher, Drew identified previous pivot resistance near $771, followed by $780.

IBM and Meta illustrate two sides of the same earnings environment. One is approaching resistance following a sharp move, while the other is recovering from a technically significant support area. In both cases, the next reaction at a predetermined level matters more than the initial excitement surrounding the earnings move.

Gold and Silver Price Analysis: Short-Term Weakness Meets Longer-Term Support

Precious metals are showing why timeframe selection matters when evaluating a technical setup.

Gold remains in a short-term consolidation pattern that resembles a bear flag. Buyers have repeatedly defended the $4,100 area, leaving lower candle wicks that suggest demand is present near support. However, the broader short-term pattern still carries downside risk if that level breaks.

Drew identified $3,950 as the next downside reference following a confirmed breakdown. On a larger timeframe, an inclining trend line near $3,650 represents another potential support area, while $3,500 is a longer-term level worth monitoring.

These levels are not automatic buying signals. They identify areas where traders and longer-term investors can evaluate whether price begins stabilizing, whether momentum is improving, and whether the risk relative to potential upside becomes more favorable.

Silver presents a similar timeframe conflict. A shorter-term bull flag has developed within a larger bearish structure, creating competing signals depending on which chart is being evaluated.

The larger pattern continues to point toward a potential head-and-shoulders measured move near $53.26. Drew also highlighted the $50 area as a longer-term reference for evaluating physical silver accumulation.

The takeaway is not that gold or silver must decline to these levels. It is that a short-term bounce can occur within a larger correction, and traders need to know which timeframe governs their decision.

Crude Oil and Natural Gas: Support Levels Face Fundamental Catalysts

Crude oil has paused near its September 18 pivot high after an extended advance. That hesitation does not necessarily invalidate the bullish structure.

Drew compared the move to climbing a mountain. A climber may stop to recover before attempting the next section, and markets can behave similarly after a sustained rally. Consolidation near resistance can allow price to absorb selling pressure before the next directional move.

An inverse head-and-shoulders formation remains part of the bullish technical case, with a measured move objective near $116. However, that target depends on the pattern remaining intact and price confirming the necessary breakout.

Geopolitical developments in the Middle East remain an important variable for crude oil. Any escalation affecting supply expectations could influence prices, although the timing and direction of such developments cannot be assumed from the chart alone.

Natural gas faces a different set of catalysts. The market declined Wednesday amid discussion of milder weather expectations and their potential effect on heating demand. Price has moved back toward a support area formed by a previous pivot high and an inclining trend line.

That confluence gives traders a defined area to monitor, particularly with the next inventory report approaching. A successful defense of support could preserve the recent breakout structure, while a decisive breakdown would weaken the bullish setup.

Natural gas has earned its reputation as the "Widow Maker" because of its capacity for sharp, unpredictable moves. Drew emphasized the importance of keeping position sizes manageable so traders can respond to volatility without becoming overextended.

The point applies well beyond natural gas. A technically attractive setup is only useful when the potential loss remains manageable if the analysis proves wrong.

Baidu Stock Analysis: Multiple Support Factors Converge Near $75

Baidu (BIDU) was among the more interesting individual stock setups discussed Wednesday, not because its chart has already turned bullish, but because the decline is approaching an unusually concentrated support area.

According to Drew's chart, Baidu has fallen from approximately $152 in May 2026 to $78.82, a decline of roughly 48%. That move has brought the stock toward several technical references that could influence the next directional decision.

The first is a gap-fill area near $78.47. Below that sits a multi-year inclining trend line connecting the October 2022 and April 2025 lows, currently near $75.86. Additional historical pivot support appears around $74.71 and $73.58.

The weekly Relative Strength Index (RSI) is near 32.32, indicating weakened momentum and a market approaching traditionally oversold territory. Drew also identified a mature count of consecutive declining weekly candles.

Together, these factors create a potential support zone extending from approximately $78.47 into the low $73 area. The importance lies in the convergence of different technical references rather than any guarantee that buyers will appear.

A stabilization pattern or bullish reversal from this region could bring an initial recovery toward $89 into focus. Conversely, a sustained break below the support cluster would weaken the bounce thesis and require a fresh assessment of downside risk.

This is an example of how professional traders approach a falling stock. A large decline alone is not a reason to buy. The stronger setup develops when price reaches a planned support area and begins showing evidence that selling pressure is losing control.

Bitcoin Technical Analysis: $85,000 Support and $89,900 Resistance

Bitcoin gained approximately 1.88% Wednesday, but its next technical challenge remains clearly defined.

Drew identified $85,000 as an important level for the cryptocurrency to reclaim and hold. A period of consolidation between $85,000 and $86,500 would help establish a stronger base for another potential advance.

If buyers can maintain that area, attention shifts toward $89,900, where an inclining trend line intersects the neckline region of an earlier head-and-shoulders formation.

A sustained move above that neckline would weaken the bearish interpretation of the previous pattern. It would also suggest buyers are regaining control of an area that had previously carried technical significance.

Failure to hold the $85,000 region would produce a different conclusion, leaving the recovery vulnerable to renewed selling.

The important lesson is that technical patterns evolve. A bearish setup can lose validity when price reclaims its critical levels, just as a bullish setup can fail when support breaks. Traders need to respond to those changes rather than remain committed to an outdated directional bias.

Trading Risk Management: Why Patience Matters More Than Predicting the Turn

Across Wednesday's charts, the same principle kept appearing: the strongest potential opportunities often develop where several technical factors converge, but identifying those areas is only the beginning.

Tesla is approaching concentrated resistance. Baidu is approaching concentrated support. The Nasdaq has reclaimed an important level, while semiconductors have not yet confirmed the broader recovery. Gold and silver are balancing short-term patterns against longer-term technical structures.

These are different markets, but the decision-making process remains consistent. Identify the level, understand the conditions that support the thesis, determine what would invalidate it, and manage exposure accordingly.

Drew also discussed the upcoming BitFunded Crypto Combat competition, which will allow participants to compare their trading decisions with Verified Investing's Pro Traders. The competition provides another setting in which discipline, position sizing, and consistency can be evaluated under defined rules. Participants should review the entry costs, account structure, eligibility requirements, and trading restrictions before taking part.

Whether trading a competition account or personal capital, the same risk-management principles apply. A well-defined technical setup does not eliminate losses, and no single opportunity should be large enough to compromise the ability to trade another day.

Market Outlook for October 22: Key Levels Traders Should Watch

Thursday's session will help determine whether Wednesday's improvement develops into a more convincing market recovery.

For the Nasdaq, a close above 26,786 would strengthen the bullish technical case, while a move below 26,582 would challenge it. Semiconductor performance will be particularly important in evaluating whether the recovery is broadening or remains concentrated in a narrower group of stocks.

In individual equities, Tesla's resistance cluster around $394 to $404 and IBM's $265.83 Fibonacci level provide clearly defined decision areas. Baidu's support region between approximately $73 and $78 remains a potential area to monitor for signs of stabilization.

Outside equities, gold's $4,100 support, the next natural gas inventory report, and Bitcoin's ability to hold above $85,000 will provide additional information about market direction and risk appetite.

The broader takeaway from Wednesday's Trading the Close is that the market has improved, but confirmation remains uneven. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq have taken constructive steps, while semiconductor hesitation and significant overhead resistance in individual stocks continue to warrant caution.

The next opportunity is not necessarily the next breakout. It is the next well-defined setup where price, confirmation, and risk align.

SpaceX and Netflix delivered two very different reactions to earnings on Wednesday. SpaceX surged after beating expectations, while Netflix sold off despite reporting better-than-expected earnings. The contrast shows why the headline numbers alone are rarely enough to trade an earnings reaction.

For SpaceX, strong results and an expanding business have buyers pushing the stock higher. Netflix faces a different problem. Revenue is still growing, but its slowing pace and weaker outlook have given investors a reason to reassess the stock.

Lawton Ho sees opportunities developing in both charts, but not necessarily in the direction of the initial earnings reaction. SpaceX is approaching a two-factor resistance zone near $185, where he sees potential for a swing short. Netflix has already sold off sharply, but Lawton would prefer another move lower before considering a bounce trade.

Meanwhile, the S&P 500 remains confined to a relatively tight trading range, with Meta and Tesla earnings potentially providing the catalyst for its next meaningful move.

S&P 500 Technical Analysis: SPY Holds Between $760 and $780

The S&P 500, tracked through SPY, continues to trade in a narrow range between approximately $760 and $780.

That $20 spread represents roughly 2.6%, leaving the index within striking distance of the all-time highs established earlier this month. Wednesday's session showed some early strength before sellers stepped in, but the broader trading structure remains intact.

Lawton sees the possibility of another push toward those highs. Whether the market can sustain that move will depend in part on how investors respond to the remaining earnings reports this week.

Meta and Tesla are scheduled to report after Wednesday's closing bell, alongside other major corporate reports. Additional earnings on Thursday will keep the market focused on individual company results.

For SPY, the immediate technical framework is straightforward. The $780 area marks the upper boundary of the range and the level bulls need to clear to strengthen the case for another move toward record highs. The $760 area remains the lower boundary and an important near-term support reference.

Until price breaks decisively in either direction, the index remains range-bound.

Nasdaq 100 (QQQ): A Potential Head-and-Shoulders Pattern Is Developing

While the S&P 500 is consolidating, Lawton is watching a potentially bearish formation develop in the Nasdaq 100, tracked through QQQ.

On the larger timeframe, he sees the possibility of a head-and-shoulders top. However, the pattern is not complete, and he is not looking to short QQQ at its current level.

Instead, Lawton wants to see the Nasdaq push higher first, potentially forming the right shoulder of the pattern. That would create a more developed structure to evaluate for a subsequent downside move.

The key confirmation would come if QQQ breaks below the July lows and the rising trend line supporting the broader advance.

Should that breakdown occur, Lawton's estimated measured-move projection points toward approximately $662, depending on where the eventual trend-line break develops.

The distinction is important. A potential head-and-shoulders formation is not the same as a confirmed bearish reversal. Continued strength could delay or prevent the setup from developing, while a confirmed breakdown would give the bearish scenario considerably more technical weight.

For now, Lawton is watching the structure form rather than anticipating a completed reversal.

SpaceX (SPCX) Stock: Earnings Rally Approaches $185 Resistance

SpaceX delivered a strong third-quarter earnings report, beating expectations for both earnings per share and revenue. The results marked a sharp improvement from its previous report and helped fuel another advance in the stock.

The company reported revenue growth of approximately 161% year over year, supported by expansion in its connectivity and artificial intelligence businesses.

The strong fundamental backdrop helps explain the enthusiasm surrounding the stock. Lawton also notes that SpaceX has become a favorite among retail traders, adding another source of attention to its earnings reaction.

But a strong earnings report does not mean the stock has unlimited upside in the near term.

On the chart, Lawton identifies a potential resistance zone around $185, where two separate technical factors could converge.

The first is an ascending trend line connecting two previous pivot highs. Extending that line forward creates a potential overhead resistance reference.

The second is an open gap-fill level in the same general area.

If SpaceX continues higher and reaches that confluence, the combination of the rising trend line and gap fill would create a two-factor resistance zone.

That is where Lawton becomes interested in the possibility of a short-term reversal.

Although he remains bullish on the company's longer-term prospects, he sees the potential for a multi-day to multi-week swing trade to the downside if price rallies into the $185 area and begins showing signs of rejection.

Timing matters because the ascending trend line continues to move higher. The precise location of the confluence will depend on when the stock reaches it.

A decisive move through the resistance zone would weaken the immediate rejection thesis. Until then, the $185 area remains Lawton's primary upside watchpoint.

Netflix (NFLX) Earnings: Why the Stock Fell Despite an Earnings Beat

Netflix delivered quarterly earnings that exceeded Wall Street's expectations, with revenue broadly in line with forecasts. Yet the stock sold off sharply following the report.

The problem was not that Netflix had stopped growing. Investors were responding to concerns about the pace of growth and the company's forward outlook.

Third-quarter revenue increased approximately 12% year over year, its slowest growth rate in nearly three years. Netflix also reduced its full-year advertising revenue forecast, adding pressure to investor expectations.

Lawton points to the increasingly competitive streaming landscape as part of the broader challenge. Netflix competes with Apple TV, Amazon Prime Video, HBO, Hulu, Paramount and other entertainment platforms for viewers' time and subscription spending.

The company has also pursued live sports programming as a way to expand its offerings and attract audiences beyond traditional streaming entertainment.

The technical chart, however, is where Lawton sees a more interesting opportunity developing.

Netflix has fallen toward $64, returning to a price area last seen in 2024. That decline has also brought the stock into a prior gap-fill zone, where Lawton sees signs of an initial bounce.

That reaction raises the possibility of a developing bottom, but he is not convinced the selling has finished.

His preferred area for a potential buy setup sits below $60, which would require another meaningful decline from current levels.

A move into that lower zone could provide a more attractive location to evaluate a bounce, particularly if selling pressure begins to fade.

Lawton also emphasizes the importance of allowing post-earnings volatility to settle. His general preference is to give a stock two to three trading days after earnings before making a decision, rather than reacting immediately to the first large move.

For Netflix, the initial bounce near $64 is worth monitoring. A further decline below $60, followed by evidence of buyers returning, would bring Lawton's preferred setup into focus.

Meta (META) Earnings: Double-Top Resistance and $640 Support

Meta is another major stock Lawton is watching ahead of Wednesday's after-hours earnings release.

The stock has rallied approximately 27% from its early-September levels, although it remains roughly 10% below the highs established later that month.

That leaves Meta between two technically important areas.

On the upside, a strong earnings reaction could send the stock back toward its September highs. Lawton views that area as potential double-top resistance, where sellers may become more active if price retests the previous peak.

On the downside, he identifies support around $640, where a prior gap fill and pivot low create a technical reference.

Lawton notes that Meta has experienced post-earnings moves in the general range of 7% to 10%. Rather than attempting to forecast the direction of the next reaction, he is using the chart to identify where price could encounter meaningful support or resistance.

A rally into the September highs would test the overhead supply zone. A decline toward $640 would put the lower support area in focus.

The earnings reaction will determine which side of that range becomes relevant first.

Tesla (TSLA) Earnings: Support Near $346 and Resistance at $434

Tesla enters its earnings report following a sharp rally of approximately 10% since Friday.

Lawton attributes part of that enthusiasm to renewed attention surrounding the company's Roadster plans. However, he is not assuming that the upcoming earnings report will produce another large move.

Tesla's recent earnings reactions have varied considerably. Lawton notes moves of approximately 9%, 3%, and 1% across its previous three reports.

That history makes the size of the next reaction difficult to anticipate, particularly without a major announcement or unexpected development.

The technical levels offer a clearer framework.

Initial support sits near Friday's pivot low, an area that could attract buyers if the stock gives back part of its recent rally.

Below that, Lawton identifies additional support around $346.

On the upside, his primary resistance objective sits near $434, which he views as a potential upper boundary for a strong earnings-driven advance.

These are reference levels rather than guaranteed destinations. A surprisingly strong report or unexpected corporate announcement could change the technical picture.

For now, Lawton is watching whether Tesla can sustain its recent gains and how the stock reacts if it approaches either support or resistance following earnings.

Key Stock Market Support and Resistance Levels for October 21

Levels reflect Lawton Ho's October 21 technical analysis and are subject to change as price develops.

What SpaceX, Netflix, Meta and Tesla Could Signal Next

The most immediate market test comes from Meta and Tesla earnings.

SPY remains confined between $760 and $780, and a strong or weak reaction across major technology stocks could help determine whether the index challenges its recent highs or retreats toward the bottom of its range.

For QQQ, Lawton is watching a different timeframe. He wants to see whether the Nasdaq can complete a potential right shoulder before considering a bearish breakdown scenario. Until that happens, the head-and-shoulders setup remains unconfirmed.

The two clearest individual stock levels are SpaceX near $185 and Netflix below $60.

SpaceX is the potential fade setup, where Lawton would watch for resistance after an extended earnings rally. Netflix is the potential bounce setup, where another leg lower could bring price into a more attractive support area.

Both require patience. Neither setup becomes compelling simply because the stock reaches a price level.

The takeaway from this earnings week is that strong fundamentals and strong charts do not always point toward the same immediate trade. A company can deliver excellent results while its stock approaches resistance, just as a disappointing earnings reaction can eventually create an opportunity near support.

Lawton's approach is to let those levels develop, watch how price responds, and evaluate the trade once the market provides more information.

This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Trading involves substantial risk, and past performance is not indicative of future results.

Watch on YouTube

S&P 500 Targets 8,000 as AI Earnings, Netflix Weakness and Treasury Yields Shape the Trading Game Plan

October 21, 2026 | My Trading Game Plan Revealed | Gareth Soloway

The S&P 500 continues to hold its bullish technical structure, with an upside target near 8,000 remaining in play. However, the latest earnings reactions are producing a much more divided picture beneath the broader market's strength. Technology-related buying is supporting sentiment, Netflix is breaking through important chart support, and Treasury yields are approaching a potential technical turning point. In Wednesday's My Trading Game Plan, Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, focused on the levels that could determine where traders find opportunity as earnings season develops.

The central theme is that the broader market can remain bullish while individual stocks present very different trading setups. Gareth's approach continues to emphasize technical confluence, patience around major price levels, and the importance of managing risk when volatility accelerates. With another Treasury auction and major corporate earnings on the calendar, traders have several catalysts capable of testing the market's current momentum.

S&P 500 Technical Analysis: Bullish Trend Points Toward 8,000

The S&P 500 continues to show resilience, with futures trading near their overnight highs during Gareth's morning analysis. A pullback in crude oil helped support the early move in equities, illustrating how changes in energy prices can influence broader market sentiment. While earnings headlines continue to drive individual stocks, the index's underlying technical structure remains constructive.

On the futures chart, Gareth identified 7,790 as an important near-term pivot, corresponding to the previous session's high. A sustained move above that level would strengthen the bullish case and potentially attract additional buying interest. The daily chart also continues to respect an ascending trend line that has supported the advance. As long as that structure holds, Gareth sees room for the S&P 500 to advance toward 8,000 or slightly higher.

That outlook remains conditional on the chart maintaining its current structure. A failure to sustain a breakout above 7,790 would weaken the immediate momentum signal, while a breakdown through the rising trend line would call for a broader reassessment. For now, the market has given Gareth little technical reason to abandon his bullish bias, even as individual sectors and stocks experience sharp earnings-related moves.

AI Stock Rally: Earnings Strength Creates a Resistance Setup Near \$171.85

One of the morning's more notable developments was a sharp premarket advance in an AI-related technology stock following earnings. According to the draft's reported levels, shares moved from approximately \$148 at the previous close toward \$160 before the opening bell. The strength helped ease some concerns surrounding the sustainability of AI-related spending and provided another source of support for technology sentiment.

Gareth's attention was directed toward resistance at \$171.85, where an unfilled gap, previous pivot high, and historical trend line converge. That combination makes the area technically significant if the stock continues to advance. A rally into resistance following an already substantial earnings move could create conditions for a short-term reversal, particularly if buying momentum begins to fade.

The proposed setup is specifically a potential day-trade short rather than a broader bearish call on the company or the AI sector. A test of \$171.85 would need to be evaluated alongside intraday price action, with a sustained move through resistance weakening the reversal thesis. The broader lesson is that strong earnings momentum can carry a stock considerably higher before a meaningful resistance level comes into play.

Netflix Stock Analysis: Breakdown Opens Support Zone Near $61.20–$62.10

Netflix presented a different technical picture following its earnings report, with shares declining approximately 5% in premarket trading and moving below a significant July 2026 pivot low. The breakdown placed the stock at new 52-week lows according to the morning analysis, raising the possibility of additional selling pressure before buyers attempt to regain control.

Gareth identified a potential downside move toward \$61.50, with particular attention on an unfilled gap between \$61.20 and \$62.10. That gap overlaps with other historical chart structures, including a descending trend line extending back to April 2025 and a double-bottom area just below. Together, these levels create a potential support zone for traders evaluating a swing-trade rebound.

The breakdown below the July pivot remains the immediate bearish signal. A move into the lower support zone could become more interesting if selling pressure begins to stabilize and price demonstrates a meaningful reaction. A failure to hold that area would weaken the potential long setup and leave the stock vulnerable to further downside. Gareth's framework favors waiting for price to approach the planned level rather than assuming the initial earnings decline has already created a bottom.

AT&T Earnings Selloff: Gap Support and the \$20.60 Level

AT&T also experienced selling pressure following its earnings release, bringing several lower support levels into focus. Gareth highlighted a gap-fill area and technical shelf between \$21.13 and \$21.91 as the first zone worth evaluating. Historical trading activity around that range makes it a potential area where buyers could begin to respond to the decline.

An additional support level near \$20.60, followed by a previous pivot low, gives the chart a layered structure. These secondary levels help define where the initial support thesis may weaken and where another potential reaction could develop. They do not guarantee that the stock will stop falling, particularly during an earnings-driven move when volatility can remain elevated.

For Gareth, the presence of multiple nearby technical levels improves the ability to plan a trade before entering it. Traders can evaluate the distance between support, potential downside risk, and an appropriate profit objective rather than reacting to the selloff without a defined framework. If the first support zone fails decisively, the next lower levels become relevant, but any new entry still requires its own risk assessment.

10-Year Treasury Yield Outlook: Bear Flag and 4.7% Technical Target

The bond market remains an important part of Gareth's broader outlook. The 10-year Treasury yield has been consolidating after a downward move, creating what he identified as a potential bear flag. This pattern suggests that yields could continue lower if the consolidation resolves to the downside, although confirmation remains necessary before treating that outcome as established.

A larger potential head-and-shoulders formation adds another layer to the analysis. Gareth identified 4.7% as a possible downside objective if the pattern completes and breaks its neckline. Historical pivot levels around 4.7% provide additional technical context for that target. Until the neckline breaks, however, the formation remains developing rather than confirmed.

The macro backdrop adds significance to these levels. Gareth discussed global government debt concerns, including pressure in European bond markets, while noting that the United States continues to benefit from comparatively stronger economic growth. A reported \$13 billion 20-year Treasury auction scheduled for 1 p.m. ET provides another potential catalyst for bond-market volatility. Auction demand and subsequent yield movements could influence interest-rate-sensitive sectors and broader equity sentiment.

Meta and Tesla Earnings: Key Stock Levels to Watch

With Meta and Tesla earnings highlighted on the calendar in the morning's analysis, Gareth outlined potential technical scenarios for both stocks. The emphasis was on identifying relevant price zones ahead of a possible earnings reaction, allowing traders to evaluate the resulting move against established chart structures.

For Meta, Gareth identified the \$650 area as a potential support region following a sufficiently large decline. A gap fill near \$665 and an intersecting descending trend line add technical context to that zone. If shares instead rally sharply, resistance along a trend line connecting previous highs could become relevant for a short-term reversal setup. In either direction, the size of the earnings move and the stock's reaction at the identified levels would help determine whether a trade develops.

Tesla's chart presents a different set of watchpoints. Gareth highlighted resistance just below \$400 along a descending trend line, while identifying \$350 as an important support area in the event of a negative earnings reaction. Optimism surrounding AI, robotics, and autonomous driving could influence investor expectations, but the technical levels provide a more defined framework for assessing how the stock responds to the report.

Gold, Silver and Natural Gas: Commodity Technical Levels

Gold remains technically vulnerable following a break below its rising trend line. Although prices were attempting a modest rebound during the morning session, the broken trend line now represents potential overhead resistance. A sustained recovery above that area would improve the short-term picture, while rejection could reinforce the recent breakdown.

Gareth also pointed to an interesting divergence between gold and Treasury yields. Lower yields can provide support for gold by reducing the relative appeal of interest-bearing assets, yet gold's chart has shown weakness even as the 10-year yield develops a potentially bearish formation. That divergence suggests other forces may be influencing the metal, and Gareth's analysis gives priority to the immediate technical structure rather than assuming the historical relationship must hold.

Silver continues to face its own resistance, with \$60 identified as an important level to reclaim before the technical outlook improves. Natural gas, meanwhile, has declined for six consecutive sessions and is approaching a longer-term ascending trend line near the 2.73 area. Gareth used the move to illustrate the value of taking partial profits during rallies and reassessing positions as prices return to support. Reducing exposure during strength can create flexibility, although adding to a declining position still requires careful attention to risk and potential support failure.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: \$87,200 Breakout Could Target $95,000–$97,000

Bitcoin continues to hold an important support structure despite repeated tests of the same technical area. Gareth viewed that resilience as constructive, particularly given the pressure seen across several other markets. Buyers have continued to defend the level, although a sustained move higher is still needed to strengthen the bullish outlook.

The next significant upside level is approximately \$87,200, where a previous pivot creates resistance. A confirmed breakout above that area could open the door to a larger advance toward $95,000–$97,000, based on the technical targets Gareth outlined. Those objectives remain conditional on Bitcoin clearing resistance and sustaining the move.

A breakdown below the repeatedly tested support line would change the near-term outlook and weaken the bullish setup. The repeated tests make the level especially important because a market that continues returning to support without generating a meaningful rebound may eventually exhaust buying interest. For now, Gareth's analysis identifies a defined support-and-breakout framework rather than an unconditional bullish forecast.

Gareth Soloway's Trading Strategy: Confluence, Discipline and Risk Management

A recurring theme throughout the session was the importance of separating emotional reactions from technical decision-making. Earnings reports, economic headlines, and market narratives can produce substantial volatility, but Gareth's process begins with identifying areas where several independent chart structures point toward the same potential reaction.

Gap fills, pivot highs and lows, trend lines, and historical support zones form the foundation of that approach. When several factors converge near one price, the area may deserve greater attention than a level supported by only one technical reference. Confluence can improve the quality of a setup, but it cannot eliminate uncertainty or guarantee a favorable outcome.

Gareth compared disciplined trading to the approach used by a casino, where decisions are based on a repeatable process rather than the outcome of an individual hand. In financial markets, however, a statistical edge must be demonstrated over a meaningful sample of trades, and losses remain unavoidable even with a disciplined strategy. The practical takeaway is to define a setup, establish acceptable risk, and judge execution by the quality of the decision rather than the result of one trade.

Bottom Line: S&P 500 Strength Holds, but Earnings and Bond Yields Will Test the Trend

Gareth's October 21 Game Plan maintains a bullish outlook for the S&P 500 while recognizing that individual stocks and asset classes are sending different technical signals. The 7,790 futures pivot and the rising daily trend line support the potential advance toward 8,000. At the same time, earnings volatility is bringing several individual stocks closer to important support and resistance areas, while a developing Treasury yield pattern could have broader implications for market sentiment.

The most important levels now provide a framework for evaluating the next move: \$171.85 resistance in the AI-related earnings setup, $61.20–$62.10 support on Netflix, layered support near \$21.13 and \$20.60 on AT&T, and a possible 4.7% target on the 10-year Treasury yield. Bitcoin's \$87,200 breakout level adds another important watchpoint as traders assess whether risk appetite can extend beyond equities.

The broader market trend remains constructive, but the coming sessions will test the strength of that structure. Gareth's approach is to remain aligned with the prevailing trend while evaluating each new setup on its own technical merits. The levels establish the plan. Price action determines whether the opportunity is there.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and reflects technical market analysis, not personalized financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including possible loss of principal. Technical patterns and price targets are not guarantees of future performance. Readers should conduct their own research and consider their financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

U.S. crude oil has spent four consecutive trading sessions pressing into the same price: $98.01, the pivot high set on September 18, 2026. Four consecutive sessions testing the same resistance level suggest buyers are continuing to challenge sellers at $98.01.

Tuesday's session showed why that matters. In Drew Dosek's account of the day's headlines, reports out of Pakistan suggested there could be a path toward a peace deal involving the Strait of Hormuz, and oil sold off on the initial news. Drew noted that most other reports he heard conflicted with that optimism, including accounts of 24 tankers attacked, and crude bounced straight back to its declining trend line. Price moved up and down through that line for the rest of the day and settled right on it, leaving wicks on both the top and bottom of the daily candle.

The headlines are generating volatility. The chart is generating the signal. As long as crude holds above the declining neckline of an inverse head and shoulders pattern, probabilities favor continuation toward a measured-move target of $116.

WTI Crude Oil Tests Key Resistance at $98.01

Two technical references define the current setup, and it helps to keep them separate. The declining neckline of the inverse head and shoulders is the line in the sand for the bullish pattern. The horizontal level at $98.01, the September 18 pivot high, is the immediate resistance crude must work through.

The declining neckline remains the key level for preserving the bullish pattern. Meanwhile, $98.01 is the immediate horizontal resistance that crude must overcome to strengthen the case for a move toward $104.14, followed by $108.26 and ultimately the $116 measured-move target.

The two-sided wicks on the latest daily candle reflect how contested this area is. The recovery after the initial headline-driven selloff suggests buyers remain willing to defend the developing bullish structure.

Crude Oil Inverse Head and Shoulders Targets $116

The broader structure is an inverse head and shoulders, a reversal pattern that forms as selling pressure exhausts across three successive lows. The declining trend line connecting the rally highs between those lows serves as the neckline.

Holding above that neckline keeps the pattern active and the measured move in play. The target, projected from the depth of the pattern, sits at $116. This is a probability framework, not a forecast: the pattern defines what is likely if structure holds, and it defines clearly what would undermine the view if it does not.

Strait of Hormuz Headlines Test Crude Oil's Bullish Structure

The market's reaction to Tuesday's news is the more useful information. A credible peace deal around the Strait of Hormuz would be a meaningful bearish catalyst for oil. The initial selloff showed traders were willing to price that possibility. The recovery showed they were not willing to commit to it, given conflicting reports about continued attacks on shipping.

When headlines point in opposite directions, trend structure becomes the filter. The chart does not need to know which report is accurate. It only needs to show whether buyers defend the levels that matter, and so far they have.

Crude Oil Resistance Levels: $104.14, $108.26 and $116

A move through resistance does not mean a straight line higher. Each level overhead is likely to produce the same type of friction crude is working through now at $98.

Expect consolidation at each of these zones. Pauses at resistance are normal within a healthy advance and do not, on their own, invalidate the structure.

Natural Gas Breakout Targets $3.60 and $3.89

Natural gas is showing a constructive technical structure of its own. Price has produced a sequence of breakouts from its lows, each followed by a clean retest of the broken trend line before moving higher. The most recent move broke a declining trend line and is now testing the lower boundary of a parallel channel.

The near-term expectation is a test of $3.60, likely followed by some consolidation before a move toward the $3.89 target. As long as natural gas holds above its declining trend line at $3.21, the structure remains constructive.

Metals are in a different phase. Gold is consolidating in a bear flag on $4,100 support, with $3,950 as the next level below and a long-term trend line near $3,650. Silver has an active head and shoulders target at $53.26, with the $53.26 to $50 range viewed as a potential accumulation zone. Copper has broken its daily inclining trend line, with $5.99 as near-term support, though its weekly chart remains constructive. In each case, near-term weakness sits within longer-term views that are more balanced than bearish.

What Could Confirm or Invalidate Crude Oil's Breakout?

The immediate test is $98.01. A sustained move above that September pivot would strengthen the bullish case and bring $104.14 into focus, followed by $108.26. One reasonable way to judge that move is a daily close above $98.01 rather than an intraday push. Beyond those resistance levels, the inverse head and shoulders measured move points toward $116.

The declining neckline remains the more important structural reference. As long as crude holds above it, Drew's bullish interpretation remains intact. A decisive break back below would weaken the setup and call the $116 projection into question.

Strait of Hormuz headlines may continue to produce sharp swings in either direction, but the chart provides a clearer framework for evaluating those moves. For now, the question is whether buyers can turn four consecutive sessions of resistance testing into a sustained breakout.

Watch on YouTube

Stock Market Bounce Faces Earnings Test as Nasdaq and Semiconductors Struggle

The stock market managed to stabilize on Tuesday, October 20, but the recovery is running into a familiar problem. Buyers are defending important support levels without yet proving they can reclaim resistance. With technology earnings approaching and Treasury yields still elevated, the difference between a temporary bounce and a sustainable recovery is becoming increasingly important.

That was the central theme of Drew Dosek's latest Trading the Close market analysis for Verified Investing. The S&P 500 held its rising support trend line, but the Nasdaq remained beneath a key technical barrier, and semiconductor stocks failed to respond convincingly to a pullback in Treasury yields. Earnings season could provide the catalyst for a larger move, but the charts have not confirmed its direction.

For traders, the question is not whether stocks can bounce. They already have. The question is whether that buying can survive the next test of resistance. Until that happens, protecting capital and waiting for confirmation remain more important than anticipating a breakout.

S&P 500 Holds Trendline Support, but Nasdaq Resistance Remains the Bigger Test

The S&P 500 finished the session higher after defending an inclining trend line that has been in focus since Friday. That is constructive for the bulls, particularly following the failure of a recent bull flag pattern. However, defending support and rebuilding a bullish structure are two different things.

A failed bull flag can leave buyers who entered expecting a continuation rally facing a difficult decision. If price cannot recover the broken structure, subsequent rallies may attract selling from traders looking to reduce exposure. The S&P 500's sideways consolidation therefore deserves attention, even with Tuesday's positive finish.

The Nasdaq is showing a more immediate technical challenge. Following a sharp decline beneath a previously important trend line, the index has repeatedly attempted to recover that level without securing a convincing close above it.

Drew compared the Nasdaq's repeated tests to someone hanging from a pull-up bar, trying to regain their footing. The analogy captures the technical struggle. Buyers are attempting to reclaim former support, but each unsuccessful test leaves resistance intact.

The important Nasdaq level is 26,579. A daily close above that threshold would strengthen the near-term bullish case and suggest that buyers are beginning to repair the breakdown. Continued rejection would leave the index vulnerable to additional consolidation or selling.

The divergence matters because the S&P 500 can remain relatively stable while technology leadership weakens. A healthier recovery would ideally include both broad-index support and renewed strength in the growth sectors that have helped drive market performance.

Treasury Yields Pull Back, but Semiconductor ETF SMH Fails to Rally

One of the more revealing developments came from the bond market. The 10-year Treasury yield pulled back after a recent advance, remaining within the broader 5.021% to 5.289% range identified in Drew's analysis.

The preceding move higher had produced a topping tail, suggesting that buyers of yields were encountering resistance. The subsequent retreat toward an earlier September pivot added weight to the possibility of near-term consolidation.

Lower yields can provide relief for growth stocks by reducing pressure on valuations and financing expectations. That relationship is particularly relevant to technology and semiconductor companies, where expectations for future earnings often account for a meaningful portion of market valuations.

Yet the VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) declined approximately 0.38% during the session despite the pullback in yields.

That lack of confirmation is more useful than the yield move alone. If one source of pressure is easing but semiconductors are still struggling, traders need to consider whether earnings uncertainty, profit-taking, or weakening momentum is limiting demand.

SMH remains within a longer-term rising parallel channel, with important support near \$529.50 and resistance around the channel's midpoint at \$564.25.

A sustained move above the midpoint would improve the technical outlook, while a breakdown through channel support would signal more significant deterioration. Until either boundary is resolved, the ETF remains in a consolidation that could become increasingly sensitive to earnings announcements.

The takeaway is straightforward: a decline in yields is potentially helpful for technology stocks, but it is not a buy signal by itself. Price action still needs to confirm that buyers are responding.

GE Earnings Highlight the Breakdown-Retest-Fade Trading Setup

Earnings season is bringing another important consideration into focus. A strong company or widely followed earnings report does not automatically translate into bullish price action. The location of the stock on its chart can matter just as much as the announcement.

General Electric (GE) provided an example of the breakdown-retest-fade setup Drew discussed during the show.

After losing an important rising trend line, GE rallied back toward the underside of that broken support. Rather than reclaiming the level, the stock encountered resistance and turned lower.

This sequence is important because former support can become resistance once it breaks. Traders who bought near the original trend line may use a recovery toward their entry price to exit, while bearish traders may view the failed retest as an opportunity to define risk against a nearby technical level.

For GE, the next downside area identified in the analysis is approximately \$285, where a prior gap and support zone could attract attention.

That target is conditional. A sustained recovery above the broken trend line would weaken the bearish interpretation, while continued rejection would keep the downside level in focus.

RTX presented a different challenge. Its chart was also testing a potential breakdown-retest structure, but geopolitical developments were creating additional uncertainty around defense stocks.

The lesson is that technical setups do not operate independently of news. When an industry is exposed to major geopolitical developments, traders need to account for the possibility that a headline can interrupt an otherwise orderly chart pattern.

Netflix Earnings Selloff Puts Fibonacci Support Near \$61.29 in Focus

Netflix offered another example of why technical levels matter after earnings volatility.

Following its earnings-related decline, the stock traded near \$65 in the after-hours session described in the original recap. Drew examined the larger Fibonacci retracement structure drawn between the May 2022 low and June 2025 high.

The stock initially reacted around the 50% retracement level, demonstrating how widely observed technical areas can become decision points during sharp moves.

However, an initial bounce from support does not establish that the correction has ended. When price has already tested or moved through an important retracement level, traders need to assess whether subsequent buying is strong enough to rebuild the chart.

The next Fibonacci level highlighted in the analysis sits near \$61.29, with additional historical pivot support around \$58.75.

These levels provide a framework for evaluating further weakness rather than a prediction that both targets must be reached. If buyers reclaim the broken support structure, the bearish setup would begin to lose strength.

For traders watching earnings reactions, the larger lesson is to separate the initial move from the follow-through. The first bounce can be meaningful, but what happens when price returns to resistance often provides better information about the strength of demand.

Oil Prices Swing Around \$98 as Middle East Headlines Complicate the Chart

Outside equities, crude oil demonstrated how quickly geopolitical developments can change intraday price action.

Oil experienced a sharp decline and recovery amid reports and speculation surrounding potential Middle East peace negotiations. The session produced a wide-ranging doji-style candle, reflecting a market that moved aggressively in both directions without establishing a decisive closing advantage.

The important technical pivot remains near \$98.01.

Despite the intraday volatility, Drew's chart analysis identified a developing inverse head and shoulders structure. The bullish scenario would gain credibility with a sustained move above \$103.88, potentially bringing the pattern's measured-move objective near \$116 into focus.

The bearish alternative remains relevant. If geopolitical developments reduce concerns about supply disruptions and oil loses its current support structure, the next downside levels to monitor are approximately \$93.02 and \$86.90.

These competing scenarios illustrate why a headline-driven market requires flexibility. The same chart can contain a bullish pattern and meaningful downside risk, especially when the next major catalyst is difficult to forecast.

Rather than assuming that a particular geopolitical outcome will occur, traders can use the chart's support and resistance levels to determine which scenario is gaining confirmation.

Gold and Silver Remain Under Pressure as Traders Watch Lower Support

Precious metals are also showing signs of technical weakness, although gold and silver are approaching their respective support structures differently.

Gold has moved below the important \$3,900 pivot and is developing a bearish consolidation pattern. If that structure resolves lower, the next major areas include an inclining long-term trend line slightly above \$3,600 and historical support near \$3,500.

Drew described the region around the rising trend line as a potential "honeypot zone" for buyers. The phrase captures an important trading concept: an area where multiple technical considerations may encourage traders to look for a reaction.

That does not mean buyers must appear there. A support zone becomes more meaningful when price actually responds, ideally with evidence of stabilization or a reversal.

Silver has held relatively better above its recent lows but remains exposed to a broader head and shoulders structure. The pattern's measured-move target sits near \$53.26, with the psychological \$50 level representing another potential support area.

If silver's shorter-term bullish consolidation fails, those lower levels become more relevant. Conversely, a recovery through nearby resistance would reduce the immediate downside pressure.

For both metals, the distinction is between identifying a potential buying area and having a confirmed buying setup. Traders can prepare for support without assuming that the first touch will produce a lasting reversal.

Bitcoin Holds \$80,524 as Traders Watch for a Recovery Toward \$89,926

Bitcoin is showing a different form of resilience. Despite bearish consolidation on the daily chart, price has continued to hold above the important \$80,524 support level identified in Drew's analysis.

That area previously acted as resistance, making its current role as support technically significant. When a former resistance level holds during a pullback, it can indicate that buyers are willing to defend higher prices than they were during the preceding trading range.

The next important upside reference is approximately \$89,926, corresponding to the broken neckline of a larger head and shoulders pattern.

Before that level comes into play, Drew wants to see a stronger consolidation structure develop around \$86,000 to \$86,500. Holding that higher range would suggest that buyers are building a more stable base rather than relying on a single sharp rally.

A loss of \$80,524 would weaken the constructive interpretation and require a reassessment of the near-term setup.

The broader point is that Bitcoin's ability to defend support is encouraging, but the next stage of the recovery still needs confirmation through price structure.

What Traders Should Watch Next as Technology Earnings Accelerate

The next several sessions will test whether Tuesday's stabilization can develop into a more convincing recovery.

The Nasdaq's 26,579 resistance level remains one of the clearest near-term signals. A sustained reclaim would suggest improving technology-sector momentum, particularly if semiconductor stocks begin participating more convincingly.

SMH is another important confirmation tool. A recovery toward its \$564.25 channel midpoint would improve the bullish case, while weakness toward \$529.50 would raise questions about the durability of the broader market bounce.

Treasury yields remain part of the equation. Continued consolidation within the 5.021% to 5.289% range could ease some pressure on growth stocks, but a renewed move toward the upper boundary would bring valuation concerns back into focus.

Earnings reactions will also provide useful information about investor positioning. Traders should pay attention not only to whether companies beat expectations, but also to how their stocks behave around established technical levels after results are released.

A strong report followed by a failed breakout can reveal resistance. A disappointing report followed by a successful support test can reveal demand. In both cases, the market's reaction provides information that the headline alone cannot.

Bottom Line: The Stock Market Needs Confirmation, Not Just a Bounce

Tuesday's market action showed that buyers are still willing to defend important levels. It did not establish that the recent technical damage has been repaired.

The S&P 500 is holding support, but the Nasdaq has not reclaimed resistance. Treasury yields have pulled back, but semiconductors have not responded with convincing strength. Meanwhile, earnings announcements are beginning to test individual stocks against established technical structures.

That combination favors a patient, level-driven approach rather than chasing short-term moves.

Drew's analysis reinforces a principle that applies across stocks, commodities, and cryptocurrencies: the strongest trading decisions begin with a clearly defined setup, an identifiable invalidation level, and the discipline to wait for price to confirm the thesis.

As earnings season accelerates, the opportunity is not simply in predicting the next move. It is in recognizing when the market has provided enough evidence to act.

The euro has been weakening against the U.S. dollar as civil unrest spreads beyond France, with reports of isolated protests in Italy, Spain, Portugal and Belgium. Nick Valdez sees that instability as a potential source of additional pressure on the currency, but the technical chart is approaching a level that could interrupt the decline.

Four sessions ago, the euro found a small shelf of support exactly at the 50% Fibonacci retracement of its prior advance and began to bounce. The question for traders is whether that bounce marks a durable floor or is simply a technical pause inside a larger decline.

That question matters well beyond the currency market. Because the euro is the heaviest component of the U.S. Dollar Index, its direction has an outsized influence on the dollar, and the dollar is an important variable for gold, oil and Bitcoin.

Euro Technical Analysis: The 50% Retracement Shelf

Drawing the Fibonacci retracement from the swing low to the recent local high places the 50% level precisely where the euro found buyers on the daily chart. That alignment gives the bounce some technical legitimacy, but a reaction at a retracement level is not the same thing as a trend reversal.

If the bounce extends, an ascending trend line overhead is the area to watch as a potential rejection zone. If sellers step in there, it would strengthen the case that the move off the 50% retracement was a temporary technical bounce rather than a sustained recovery.

Downside Support Levels if the Euro Breaks Lower

If the 50% shelf gives way, the structure below is well defined. The next support is a lower ascending trend line, which sits roughly 3.7% beneath current prices. Below that, a prior double bottom zone marks a deeper target, representing a decline of approximately 8.5%.

Those are meaningful moves for a major currency pair. Until the chart shows otherwise, the lower levels remain in play.

The Dollar Index Connection: The Euro’s Pain Is the Dollar’s Gain

The inverse relationship between the euro and the DXY is visible on the charts. As the euro has weakened, the dollar index has strengthened, which is consistent with the index’s composition.

On the Dollar Index, the level of interest is a descending trend line that has influenced price action before. If the dollar pulls back toward that line while the euro rebounds, the area becomes a potential support test and a place where the DXY could bounce. Both charts point to the same zone of decision: euro resistance overhead, dollar support below.

British Pound Holds a Narrowing Wedge

The pound has held up better than the euro, with Nick noting that the U.K. has not experienced the same degree of unrest seen across parts of continental Europe. Sterling is trading inside a slightly narrowing wedge that is close to a parallel channel. The level to watch is a descending trend line connecting the January high to the August high. Nick is watching for a potential retest of that line in November, and the reaction there will help define whether the pound can break its pattern of lower highs.

Japanese Yen Bear Flag and Chinese Yuan Breakout

Across Asia, two currencies are moving in opposite directions against the dollar.

The yen’s sharp decline has been followed by a smaller, angled consolidation that Nick identifies as a developing bear flag. If price breaks below that consolidation, the measured move points toward the July lows. Until that breakdown occurs, the bearish target remains a projection rather than a confirmed destination.

The yuan, by contrast, is attempting to break above a resistance range that has repeatedly limited its advance. A retest of that breakout area is possible before any continuation toward the longer-term descending trend line. That line, shaped by price action dating back to 2016, represents the next major technical hurdle. Depending on how long the move takes, reaching it could translate into approximately 2% to 3% additional upside against the dollar.

Key Currency Levels to Watch

The euro’s reaction at the 50% retracement is the signal that matters most. A rejection at the upper ascending trend line, followed by a loss of the current shelf, would strengthen the bearish case and favor continued dollar strength. A clean move through resistance would weaken that view and point toward a dollar pullback into its trend line test.

Dollar strength is an important variable for commodities and cryptocurrencies priced in U.S. dollars. A strengthening dollar can create headwinds for gold, oil and Bitcoin, while dollar weakness can provide a tailwind. Those relationships are not automatic, but they make the euro and DXY charts useful signals for traders watching these markets.

European unrest provides the narrative, but the levels provide the decision points. None of this requires predicting how the unrest unfolds. The key is whether the euro can defend its current support or whether another leg lower strengthens the dollar’s position, potentially creating additional pressure on gold, oil and Bitcoin.

Watch on YouTube

AI Stocks Face a Reality Check as S&P 500, Bitcoin and Gold Test Key Levels

My Trading Game Plan Revealed | October 20, 2026

The artificial intelligence trade is facing a more difficult test as investors begin weighing the cost of AI infrastructure against the earnings needed to support it. In today's My Trading Game Plan Revealed, Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, examined how weakness in AI-related stocks could influence the broader market, Treasury yields, and investor sentiment. With the S&P 500 approaching important technical levels and Bitcoin and gold showing signs of weakness, several markets are nearing areas where the next price reaction could be significant.

The central concern is how dependent the broader market has become on continued strength in AI investment and technology valuations. A sustained decline in that sector could affect spending expectations, market confidence, and the performance of major indexes. Gareth's approach remains grounded in technical analysis, identifying the price levels where buyers may step in, where selling pressure could accelerate, and where the market would need to show confirmation before a trading setup becomes more compelling.

CoreWeave Stock: AI Debt Concerns Put $51–$53 Support in Focus

CoreWeave (CRWV) has become an important stock to watch as investors reassess the financial demands of building AI infrastructure. The company represents a broader concern surrounding capital-intensive AI businesses, where substantial investment in computing capacity creates pressure to generate sufficient revenue and profitability over time. With CoreWeave trading below $59 during today's analysis, Gareth focused on the possibility of additional downside before the stock reaches a more attractive technical support area.

The shift in sentiment extends beyond the U.S. market. Gareth highlighted a South Korean IPO involving an AI infrastructure-related company that reportedly attracted substantial demand, with the offering described as 400% oversubscribed, yet declined approximately 32% when trading began. That type of reversal illustrates how quickly enthusiasm can change when investors become less willing to support elevated valuations. Heavy demand during an offering does not guarantee sustained buying once shares begin trading publicly.

For CoreWeave, Gareth identified a potential support zone between $53 and $51, where three technical factors converge. A descending trend line approaches the $53 area, while a gap fill and the 88.6% Fibonacci retracement sit near $51. The Fibonacci level is measured from the stock's major low to its all-time high, providing another reference point for a possible reaction if selling pressure continues.

The combination makes this area worth watching for a potential technical bounce. Multiple support factors can strengthen the case for a reaction, although they do not guarantee one or establish a specific win rate. Gareth's framework emphasizes waiting for price to reach the identified zone and then evaluating the strength of the response. If buyers fail to defend the area, the technical picture would require reassessment rather than assuming support must hold.

S&P 500 Technical Analysis: 7,450 Support and 8,000 Resistance

The S&P 500 remains at an important technical crossroads as weakness in AI-related companies creates additional pressure on the broader market. Despite a gain of approximately 0.5% in Monday's session, overnight futures weakness suggested that buyers were still facing resistance. The index's ability to hold its underlying technical structure will help determine whether the recent pullback remains contained or develops into a deeper correction.

On the downside, Gareth identified 7,450 as a major support reference if the index breaks below its nearer-term trend line. That level connects with longer-term market structure and areas where buyers have previously responded. A confirmed break of immediate support would increase the importance of 7,450 as the next area to evaluate, particularly if technology stocks continue to weaken and selling broadens into other sectors.

The upside framework centers on the 8,000 area, where a longer-term trend line and previous price rejections create a significant resistance zone. Gareth noted that repeated failures near this level suggest sellers could become more active if the market advances toward it again. A sustained move through resistance would strengthen the bullish case, while another rejection could reinforce the existing trading range.

The S&P 500's next move will depend partly on whether buyers can stabilize technology shares and prevent weakness from spreading. The technical levels provide a practical roadmap: a break of nearer-term support brings 7,450 into focus, while a renewed advance makes the 8,000 resistance area increasingly relevant.

Oil Above $100 and Treasury Yields: How Macro Risks Affect Stocks

Crude oil has added another complication to the market outlook, with prices moving back above $100 per barrel during today's analysis. Rising tensions involving Iran, U.S. military activity, and threats to shipping routes have increased concerns about potential energy supply disruptions. Higher oil prices can create additional inflation pressure, particularly when elevated energy costs begin affecting transportation, production, and consumer spending.

Gareth also discussed how geopolitical decisions can be influenced by political timing, including the U.S. election calendar. However, the market impact depends on the actual developments affecting supply, demand, and expectations. For traders, the immediate consideration is whether oil can sustain its advance above $100 and whether that strength begins influencing inflation expectations and interest rates.

Meanwhile, the 10-year Treasury yield was moving modestly lower despite oil's strength. That divergence deserves attention because rising energy prices can contribute to inflation concerns, while falling yields may reflect expectations for slower economic growth or increased demand for government bonds. The relationship is rarely driven by a single factor, making the combination of oil, yields, and equity performance useful when assessing changes in market sentiment.

AI Capital Spending and the Risk to Consumer Demand

One of Gareth's broader economic concerns involves the concentration of spending and wealth creation around the AI investment cycle. Significant capital expenditures by major technology companies have supported demand across semiconductors, data centers, electricity infrastructure, and related industries. At the same time, rising equity valuations have supported household wealth among consumers with substantial market exposure.

Gareth described this imbalance through an "80/20 economy" framework, highlighting the difference between households facing financial pressure and those benefiting from investment gains. The percentages are best understood as an illustration of economic divergence rather than a verified measurement of recession conditions across the population. The underlying concern is that a meaningful decline in AI investment and stock market wealth could weaken an important source of economic support.

If AI spending slows, the effects could extend beyond technology companies. Reduced capital expenditures may affect suppliers, employment expectations, and business investment, while declining equity wealth could weigh on discretionary spending among higher-income households. Such a development would increase economic downside risks, although the magnitude would depend on how broadly the slowdown spreads and whether other areas of the economy remain resilient.

That possibility also helps explain why Treasury yields may decline during periods of technology-sector weakness. Bond investors may begin anticipating slower growth and a more accommodative Federal Reserve response. Gareth's framework connects the AI trade, consumer demand, and interest rates as related indicators of how market weakness could develop.

GM Stock Earnings: $76.50 and $75 Become Downside Levels

Earnings season continues to demonstrate how heavily stock prices depend on expectations. General Motors (GM) provided an example after reporting results above analyst estimates and announcing a $20 billion share repurchase program, according to the earnings details discussed in today's show. Despite those developments, the stock faced selling pressure as investors evaluated guidance that remained within the previously expected range.

When a stock enters earnings with elevated expectations, a positive report may already be reflected in its valuation. The market can respond negatively if forward guidance fails to support additional optimism. Gareth used GM to illustrate how price action after earnings can provide insight into investor positioning and the willingness of buyers to support a stock.

From a technical perspective, GM was approaching a potential break of its daily trend line. Gareth identified $76.50 as an initial downside area if the breakdown confirms, followed by approximately $75, where several previous pivot lows create another support reference. Those levels offer traders defined areas to evaluate, although a move toward either would depend on continued selling and confirmation of the weaker chart structure.

Earnings Volatility and Trader Psychology: RTX and 3M

Gareth also reviewed earnings reactions in RTX (RTX) and 3M (MMM), emphasizing the importance of volatility when searching for technical trading opportunities. RTX had reported strong results and was trading near $196 in the premarket session, while 3M showed a comparatively muted reaction. Despite the earnings developments, Gareth did not identify a compelling trade level in either stock.

That decision reflects a consistent part of his trading approach. Sharp price movements can push stocks into established support or resistance levels as traders react emotionally to new information. Those conditions may create opportunities to evaluate a potential reversal, provided the chart offers a clear setup and the risk can be defined.

However, volatility alone does not create an edge. The location of the move, the surrounding technical structure, and the reaction at a meaningful price level all contribute to the assessment. Sometimes the most disciplined decision is to remain on the sidelines until the market provides a better setup.

Gold Price Analysis: $3,950 Support and $3,500 Downside Risk

Gold is approaching an important technical decision following several sessions of weakening price action. Gareth pointed to the metal's difficulty holding a previously established support line, with price initially closing near the level, then moving below it, and struggling to recover. That sequence suggests buyers have been losing control of the immediate trend.

If the breakdown receives confirmation, Gareth identified $3,950 as the first downside target. A failure to stabilize around that area could expose a deeper move toward approximately $3,500, based on the broader chart structure. These levels represent potential technical destinations rather than guaranteed outcomes, and a sustained recovery above the broken support area would require reassessing the bearish setup.

The price action is especially relevant given the broader macroeconomic environment. Gold can respond to interest rates, currency movements, inflation expectations, and demand for defensive assets. However, those influences do not prevent technical breakdowns when selling pressure becomes dominant. Gareth's analysis keeps the focus on the chart and the price levels that would confirm or weaken the downside case.

Silver Price Analysis: $50 Support and $60 Resistance

Silver has also experienced technical weakness, although Gareth noted that its recent price action appeared somewhat more resilient than gold's. Despite breaking below support, silver had avoided a more aggressive decline during the sessions discussed, suggesting buyers were still attempting to defend the market.

The immediate downside reference sits near $50, while $60 represents an important level for a potential bullish recovery. As long as silver remains below $60, the weaker technical structure continues to favor the downside. A sustained recovery above that threshold would improve the outlook and suggest that buyers were regaining control.

The divergence between gold and silver is worth following because the metals do not always respond identically to market conditions. Silver has both investment and industrial demand characteristics, which can influence its relative performance. For now, Gareth's levels provide a framework for determining whether the recent resilience develops into a recovery or gives way to renewed selling.

Natural Gas Technical Analysis: Five-Day Selloff Tests Range Support

Natural gas has experienced five consecutive sessions of selling pressure, bringing the commodity closer to the lower portion of its established trading range. Gareth emphasized the importance of viewing the recent decline within the larger chart structure rather than treating each move as the beginning of a new trend.

Since February, natural gas has largely traded within a defined consolidation range, with repeated advances encountering selling pressure near the upper boundary. The latest pullback is bringing price back toward the lower portion of that structure, where buyers have previously attempted to stabilize the market.

A successful defense of range support could create another opportunity for a rebound within the consolidation pattern. Conversely, a confirmed breakdown would suggest that the established range is losing its influence and that a larger directional move may be developing. The reaction at the lower boundary will help determine which scenario becomes more likely.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: $81,000 Support Could Open the Door to $75,000

Bitcoin is approaching one of the more important technical levels in Gareth's current market framework. The cryptocurrency has repeatedly tested support near $81,000, creating a pattern in which buyers have been required to defend the same area several times.

Gareth compared the repeated testing to striking a floor with a hammer. Each successful defense keeps support intact, but continued pressure can eventually absorb available buying interest. The concern increases when price repeatedly returns to support without producing a meaningful rebound, suggesting that demand may be weakening.

A confirmed break below $81,000 would bring approximately $75,000 into focus as the next major downside support area. The speed of any move would depend on market liquidity, selling pressure, and whether buyers emerge at intermediate levels. Conversely, a sustained rebound away from $81,000 would improve the immediate outlook and reduce the pressure on that support zone.

Bitcoin's behavior also provides another perspective on broader risk appetite. If weakness in technology stocks coincides with declining cryptocurrency prices, it may suggest that investors are becoming less willing to hold higher-volatility assets. Gareth's technical framework makes $81,000 the immediate decision point, with $75,000 becoming increasingly relevant if support fails.

Market Outlook for October 20: Key S&P 500, Gold and Bitcoin Levels

Several important technical structures are being tested simultaneously in today's market. AI-related stocks are facing increased scrutiny over capital spending and profitability, while the S&P 500 must contend with technology-sector weakness and broader economic concerns. Rising oil prices add another source of uncertainty, and the behavior of Treasury yields may provide clues about changing growth expectations.

Gareth's analysis identifies CoreWeave's $51–$53 support zone as a potential area for a technical reaction, while the S&P 500's broader framework remains defined by 7,450 support and resistance near 8,000. Gold faces downside levels at $3,950 and potentially $3,500, silver needs to recover $60 to improve its technical outlook, and Bitcoin's repeated tests of $81,000 place $75,000 in focus if support breaks.

The common thread is the importance of confirmation. A stock or index reaching support does not automatically make it a buying opportunity, just as a move below a trend line does not guarantee an extended decline. Price behavior at those levels helps determine whether the market is absorbing selling pressure or preparing for another move lower.

For traders following Gareth's approach, the next opportunity may come from allowing the market to reach a well-defined technical area and evaluating the reaction without being influenced by the surrounding headlines. With several assets approaching important levels, discipline and a clear understanding of risk remain central to the game plan.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or asset. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the potential loss of principal. Technical levels and market scenarios are not guarantees of future performance. Always conduct your own research and consider your financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

For several weeks, the crypto market followed a clean, constructive rhythm: push up, consolidate sideways, push up again. That stair-step structure produced bull flag after bull flag on both Bitcoin and Ethereum, and it gave buyers every reason to stay aggressive.

Last week's selling interrupted that rhythm. The most recent flag on Bitcoin failed to resolve higher, and the price action that followed has started to take a different shape. Across Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Hyperliquid, head and shoulders structures are emerging, raising the possibility that the recent advance is giving way to a broader correction.

The thesis is straightforward. The current bounce is more likely to be a right shoulder than the start of a new leg higher, and the better risk-reward entries in crypto probably sit below current prices. Bitcoin will decide how far that move extends.

Bitcoin: Resistance Near $82,000 Caps the Bounce

Bitcoin's structure can be read a few ways. One interpretation shows a head and shoulders that has already formed, with price now retracing to its neckline. The weakness in that read is the right shoulder, which is shallow and less convincing than a textbook pattern. Another read is a developing bear flag: a down move followed by sideways consolidation that tends to resolve lower.

Lawton favors a larger, more symmetrical head and shoulders pattern that has yet to complete. In that scenario, Bitcoin could pull back, stage another rally toward overhead resistance, and ultimately form the right shoulder before a larger decline.

What anchors that view is the supply overhead. The area around $82,000 marks the highest point of the previous push and is lined with multiple high pivots. That cluster of prior selling explains why the latest rally stalled where it did, and it should continue to act as resistance on any retest.

If Bitcoin rolls over, $76,000 is the first area of major support. The more attractive accumulation zone sits lower, near $70,000 to $71,000, which also aligns with the measured move of the larger head and shoulders pattern toward roughly $71,000. Buying into resistance at $82,000 offers poor risk-reward. Buying into confluent support near $71,000 offers much better.

Ethereum: A Cleaner Head and Shoulders Toward $2,000

Ethereum followed the same stair-step path before stalling at key resistance near $2,800. Unlike Bitcoin, Ethereum has a more clearly defined head and shoulders structure, with a recognizable left shoulder, head, and right shoulder. The pattern favors further downside, although confirmation of the breakdown remains important.

The measured move from that pattern points back toward the $2,000 region. That level carries weight on several fronts. It is a major psychological round number, and it has repeatedly served as a pivot in Ethereum's price history. When a measured-move target lines up with a historically respected level, the confluence gives traders an additional reason to watch for a reaction at that level.

That makes anything under $2,000 the preferred buy zone for Ethereum. The pattern alone does not guarantee that outcome, however. A follow-through move on Ethereum likely depends on Bitcoin selling off as well. Bitcoin remains the directional filter for the entire asset class.

XRP: Broken Trend Line, Defined Support

XRP does not show a classic head and shoulders, because price did push to a marginal new high near $1.70. What it does show is a break of a key upsloping trend line on the latest decline, which shifts the near-term structure from constructive to corrective.

The most recent drop found support just above the September 16 pivot low. The $1.25 region is the first area to watch for support. If selling continues, the dense prior price action near $1.15 makes that area another potential support zone, and anything below $1.15 defines the preferred buy range.

Hyperliquid (HYPE): Watching for a Larger Pattern to Complete

HYPE is testing several trend lines, and like Bitcoin, its chart can be drawn into multiple smaller head and shoulders formations. At minimum, trend lines are breaking. The more meaningful setup would be a larger, more balanced pattern, with the recent low serving as the armpit, followed by a move higher and then a decline to complete the right shoulder.

That pattern is not confirmed and depends on price action over the coming sessions. If it does complete, the measured move points toward roughly $54, which coincides with several prior low pivots. That confluence makes $54 the potential buy level for a bounce.

Key Crypto Levels to Watch

What to Watch Next: Earnings and Risk Appetite

The next catalyst may not come from crypto at all. Upcoming earnings from Meta, Netflix, Texas Instruments, and several semiconductor names are potential catalysts. If those results disappoint and the Nasdaq-100 and broader equity market sell off, capital tends to rotate out of risk assets, and Bitcoin and Ethereum sit firmly in that category.

A rejection near $82,000 on Bitcoin, particularly alongside weakness in tech equities, would strengthen the bearish scenario. A subsequent neckline breakdown would provide more convincing confirmation of the larger head and shoulders pattern. A decisive break and hold above that resistance cluster would invalidate it and suggest the stair-step uptrend is resuming.

Conclusion: Let the Levels Come to You

The shift from bull flags to head and shoulders patterns does not mean the broader crypto cycle is over. It means the near-term risk-reward has changed. Chasing a bounce into heavy resistance offers less attractive risk-reward than waiting for price to approach established support. The opportunity improves when the entry level is better defined, even though the outcome remains uncertain.

The process remains the same across every asset here: identify the structure, define where supply and demand sit, and let Bitcoin confirm direction before committing capital. Patterns can fail, and every level is a probability, not a promise. Discipline means acting on the setup when it arrives, not anticipating it before it does.

Watch on YouTube

Stock Market Bounce Fades as Nasdaq and Semiconductors Test Key Support Levels

Monday's stock market rebound looked encouraging on the surface, but the closing action told a different story. After Friday's sharp sell-off, buyers stepped back into the market, lifting major indices and several technology names. By the closing bell, however, much of that strength had faded, leaving traders with an important question: Was Monday the beginning of a recovery, or simply a bounce into resistance?

During the October 19 edition of Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek focused on the technical evidence behind that question. The Nasdaq struggled to maintain its intraday gains, semiconductor stocks continued showing weakness, and Treasury yields moved higher. Together, those developments suggest that buyers still have work to do before the market can establish a more convincing recovery.

The distinction comes down to confirmation. A positive session following aggressive selling does not automatically repair damaged technical patterns. Until key resistance levels are reclaimed and support holds, traders need to separate short-term rebounds from meaningful changes in market structure.

S&P 500 and Nasdaq Technical Analysis: Why Monday's Bounce Matters

The S&P 500 entered Monday following a sharp decline that brought price action back toward an important former all-time-high pivot and an established rising trend line. That area has supported the broader bullish structure, but repeated tests have increased its importance.

As Drew explained, the market is "hanging on by a thread," pointing to the number of times price has returned to the lower boundary of its recent trading range.

Repeated support tests do not guarantee a breakdown. They do, however, show that buyers are being asked to defend the same area again and again. If those defenses eventually fail, the technical picture can change quickly.

The levels identified in Drew's analysis were 764.04 and 760.40, with additional support near 748.42 at the upper boundary of a longer-term parallel channel extending from the October 2022 market low. These figures appear consistent with an ETF-based chart rather than the cash S&P 500 index and require instrument confirmation before publication.

For now, the important question is whether buyers can defend the current support structure and generate a sustained move higher. A confirmed breakdown would increase the relevance of lower support, while a successful defense would leave the broader consolidation intact.

The Nasdaq presents a different challenge. Friday's decline damaged an important trend line, and Monday's rebound brought price back toward the underside of that broken structure.

This is the type of setup Drew regularly emphasizes: a breakdown followed by a retrace into former support, which may now act as resistance.

A sustained recovery above that resistance would improve the near-term outlook. Rejection, particularly if accompanied by another weak close, would suggest the rebound has not yet changed the underlying technical picture. Drew identified an additional rising trend line near 27,128 as a potential upside resistance area, below the previously discussed 28,000 target.

The takeaway is straightforward. Monday's green finish was constructive, but where the Nasdaq closed relative to its broken trend line mattered more than the percentage gain.

Semiconductor ETF SMH: A Critical Test for Technology Stocks

The semiconductor sector provided another reason to question the strength of Monday's rebound. The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) gained approximately 1.61% during the session, according to the show recap, but finished near its intraday lows.

That closing behavior is important because semiconductors have been a major contributor to technology-sector momentum. When the group struggles to sustain a rebound, it becomes harder to interpret strength in the broader Nasdaq as a decisive improvement in risk appetite.

SMH has been under pressure since its early-October highs, and Drew's chart identified two important downside areas. The first sits near \$528.86, while the more significant technical confluence appears around \$512.36.

The \$512.36 area combines a 50% Fibonacci retracement of the advance from this year's low, the 200-day simple moving average, and a trend line identified in the analysis. When several independent technical references converge near the same price, that zone deserves attention.

Confluence does not guarantee that support will hold. It identifies an area where traders can watch for a change in behavior.

The approach into that zone matters as much as the level itself. An orderly pullback followed by stabilization would offer different information from an accelerating decline that cuts through support without meaningful buying interest.

For traders considering a potential swing setup, the stronger evidence would come from how SMH reacts at support, whether selling pressure begins to ease, and whether price can subsequently reclaim nearby resistance.

Until then, Monday's weak close keeps the semiconductor rebound unconfirmed.

10-Year Treasury Yield: Higher Rates Remain a Headwind for Tech

The bond market added another complication to the equity recovery. According to the draft's figures, the 10-year Treasury yield moved from approximately 5.064% to 5.142%, keeping upward pressure on borrowing costs and the valuation environment for growth-oriented companies.

Drew's technical framework places near-term yield resistance around 5.289%, with a larger parallel-channel objective near 5.77% if the bullish yield structure continues to develop.

The relationship between yields and stocks is not automatic. Higher yields do not force equities lower in every session. However, a sustained rise in yields can make it more difficult for richly valued technology stocks to maintain upward momentum, particularly when their charts are already testing resistance.

That makes the next move in Treasury yields especially relevant. A rejection near resistance could ease some of the pressure on growth stocks, while a sustained breakout would introduce another obstacle for a technology-sector recovery.

Inflation readings and Federal Reserve expectations remain important inputs, but traders should distinguish changing policy probabilities from confirmed policy decisions. The technical picture in yields offers a useful framework without requiring a prediction about the Fed's next move.

For now, rising yields and weak semiconductor closes are sending a similar message: the broader market rebound still needs confirmation.

Amazon, GE and Earnings Season: Why Chart Levels Matter More Than Predictions

Earnings season introduces a different kind of risk. Even when the broader market is struggling, individual stocks can respond sharply to company-specific developments. That makes technical preparation particularly important, but it also means traders need to respect the possibility of gaps through established levels.

Amazon (AMZN) was one of Monday's stronger names, rising nearly 5% according to the recap. Drew highlighted its position within a rising parallel channel, where the stock has repeatedly attempted to establish itself in the upper half of the pattern.

The technical question is whether Amazon can sustain that strength rather than produce another temporary move above resistance. A follow-through close above Monday's candle would strengthen the near-term bullish case, while \$260.62 was identified as an important support reference.

General Electric (GE) offered a contrasting setup. The stock rejected an ascending trend line near \$322.52 and faded, leaving bulls with a clear level to reclaim.

Should weakness continue, Drew's chart identified potential support between \$281 and \$285, close to a gap-fill reference at \$285.58. A reaction from that area could bring \$296 back into focus, although earnings-related volatility could produce moves beyond those levels before the market establishes direction.

The lesson is not that every support zone should be bought. It is that a trader can identify potential reaction areas before a catalyst, then evaluate whether price action supports the original setup.

The source draft also references a security labeled SpaceX, with levels at \$149.34 and \$162.81. Because the instrument and associated earnings event require verification, those figures should not be presented as a confirmed publicly traded SpaceX setup.

Across earnings season, the operating principle remains the same: identify the level, establish what would confirm the setup, and know what would invalidate it before volatility arrives.

Sea Limited Stock: Understanding the Breakdown, Retrace and Fade

One of the strongest educational examples from Monday's show came from Sea Limited (SE), which declined approximately 5.65% and approached a long-term rising trend line.

Drew used the stock to demonstrate a pattern that traders frequently misunderstand: a breakdown does not always produce an immediate retest of the broken level.

Earlier this year, SE broke below a parallel channel in March. Rather than quickly recovering to test the underside of that structure, the stock spent several months finding its footing. The retrace did not arrive until August, when price returned toward the former channel boundary and a January pivot high.

That convergence created resistance, and the subsequent rejection illustrated why former support can become an important selling area.

The timing is the lesson. Traders often recognize a valid technical pattern but underestimate how long it may take to develop. A breakdown, retrace, and fade can unfold over weeks or months, particularly when the pattern is drawn from a higher timeframe.

SE's current chart also demonstrates the difference between a short-term bounce and a stronger swing-trade setup. Daily oversold conditions may support a rebound toward the \$100 area, but the absence of comparable weekly oversold conditions suggests that a larger reversal is not yet established.

Drew identified deeper Fibonacci support near \$69.65 as another area worth monitoring if weakness persists.

Rather than assuming an oversold reading means a bottom has formed, traders can use multiple timeframes to judge whether a rebound is likely to be temporary or the beginning of a broader recovery.

That same reasoning applies to the Nasdaq and SMH. A bounce can occur without changing the larger trend.

Gold, Silver and Energy: Technical Levels Outside the Stock Market

While equities provided Monday's central market signal, commodities offered additional examples of how traders can approach support and resistance without committing to a single outcome.

Gold remained under pressure, with the draft describing a decline of approximately 0.65% and a developing bearish consolidation. A sustained break below \$4,000 would bring the \$3,900 and \$3,800 support areas into greater focus.

Farther down, Drew identified a longer-term zone between \$3,639 and \$3,500, where historical pivots and a rising trend line could attract attention from investors operating on a longer timeframe.

Silver showed better near-term relative strength, but its broader chart still carried downside risk. Resistance near \$59 remains relevant if consolidation holds, while a larger head-and-shoulders formation leaves the \$53 to \$50 region as a potential downside objective.

The difference between a short-term trading setup and long-term physical accumulation is especially important in precious metals. A price that appears attractive over a multi-year horizon may still face meaningful downside risk over the next several weeks.

Energy markets presented their own technical decision points. Crude oil was testing resistance near \$103, where the midpoint of a parallel channel intersects with a declining trend line. A sustained breakout could strengthen the larger inverse head-and-shoulders scenario, which carries a measured-move objective near \$116. Rejection would leave the market vulnerable to another consolidation or pullback.

Natural gas remained a reminder that technically appealing patterns can still carry substantial volatility. Drew highlighted support around \$3.21 and \$3.07, with a potential upside objective near \$3.89 if the recovery develops.

His warning was direct: "Nat Gas is a widow maker."

That is not an argument against trading natural gas. It is a reminder that position sizing and risk tolerance need to reflect the behavior of the instrument, particularly when sharp reversals can occur without much warning.

Stock Market Outlook: Key Levels to Watch After October 19

Heading into the next session, the market has several opportunities to demonstrate whether Monday's rebound was the beginning of something more durable.

For the broader equity market, the first priority is whether S&P-related support holds and whether the Nasdaq can reclaim the trend line it recently broke. A sustained move above resistance would improve the short-term outlook, while renewed rejection would keep downside support levels in focus.

The second priority is semiconductors. SMH needs to demonstrate that buyers can defend important technical areas rather than simply produce intraday rebounds that fade into the close. The \$528.86 and \$512.36 levels provide reference points if selling pressure continues.

Third, the 10-year Treasury yield remains worth watching as it approaches resistance near 5.289%. A continued rise could complicate the recovery in technology stocks, while a reversal could remove some of that pressure.

Finally, earnings season will test individual setups independently of the broader market. Amazon's strength, GE's rejection, and the longer-term structure in SE illustrate why traders need to distinguish a potential opportunity from a confirmed setup.

Drew's broader lesson from Monday was not that the market must move lower. It was that the evidence supporting a sustained recovery remains incomplete.

Bottom Line: The Bounce Is Not the Confirmation

Monday's market action showed that buyers were willing to step back in after Friday's sell-off. What it did not show was a decisive repair of the technical damage.

The Nasdaq's retrace toward broken resistance, SMH's weak close, and the continued rise in Treasury yields all argue for patience while the market works through its next decision points.

For traders, the advantage comes from recognizing what would change the analysis. Support can hold, resistance can break, and a weak rebound can develop into a stronger advance. None of those outcomes needs to be predicted in advance.

The next few sessions will help determine whether buyers can regain control or whether Monday's rebound becomes another failed retrace. Until the charts provide that confirmation, respecting the levels matters more than chasing the bounce.

Friday's session delivered a sharp, broad-based sell-off in technology. The XLK tech ETF and the SMH semiconductor ETF both saw heavy selling as capital moved quickly out of the AI trade, and the VIX jumped more than twenty percent. With yields coming in, Jake Sweeney read the options market as pricing in a relief bounce for the S&P 500 on Monday, October 19.

The bounce arrived, but it did not hold. Stocks pushed higher at the open and then rolled over again through the afternoon. That behavior matters more than Friday's headline move. A rebound that fades the same day it starts suggests the selling pressure has not yet worked itself out.

The practical takeaway: when a relief bounce fails, chasing strength is a low-probability trade. The better opportunities sit lower, at levels where multiple technical factors converge. Even the stronger charts are approaching areas where sellers could reappear.

Meta (META) Stock Fails to Reclaim Broken Trend Line Resistance

A healthy recovery after a sharp sell-off usually includes a retracement back toward the broken level. Meta Platforms (META) showed the opposite. Price broke well below an upsloping trend line on Friday and closed near $709. On Monday, it did not attempt to retest that trend line from below. Instead, it trended lower, reaching roughly $693 before a modest bounce into the low $700s late in the session.

Meta's inability to retest its broken trend line near $720–$725, which also lines up with prior pivots, leaves that area as the first major resistance test. A reclaim would weaken the bearish near-term read, while continued trading below it keeps the lower support levels in focus.

AI Stock Support Levels: META, ALAB, IONQ and APLD

The most useful levels are not single lines on a chart. They are zones where several independent factors overlap: a prior pivot, a trend line, a gap fill, a round number. Confluence like this makes a technical level more meaningful and gives traders a clearer area to watch for a reaction.

Meta. The first major level is $681. For weeks, that price acted as a ceiling, with repeated attempts to break above it. Once price cleared it, that former resistance became a candidate for support, a classic polarity shift. Below that, a gap fill near $665.75 lines up with a downsloping trend line. A sharp pierce into that zone followed by a quick rejection would favor a bounce.

Astera Labs (ALAB). Semiconductors bounced early Monday before fading to flat. A gap and pivot top near $272.27 is a minor first level, but the stronger setup sits lower. A pivot top near $262.90 converges with an ascending trend line around $264, a line with only about four touches so far. Below that, a gap fill near $252.54 adds a third layer. The discipline here is waiting for price to visit the trend line rather than anticipating it.

IonQ (IONQ). This name has already confirmed a breakdown from an ascending trend line dating back to November 5, 2024. Monday's initial bounce faded into another decline of about two percent. Near term, the Thursday pivot low near $30.07 and the $30 round number are the line in the sand, with a small gap near $29.82 just beneath. On a swing basis, the more compelling zone is lower: a gap fill near $26.59 from March 30, 2026, a swing low pivot near $25.92, and prior pivot tops from years back in the $25–$26 range. That overlap makes the $25.92–$26.59 region one of the more compelling swing-long areas if the decline continues. A reaction at that zone would help determine whether buyers are prepared to defend it.

Applied Digital (APLD). After its own heavy sell-off Friday, APLD rallied roughly 11.5 percent above Friday's close at Monday's high before stalling at a prior low wick near the $20 handle, then began fading. Holding above $19.01 would help preserve Monday's recovery attempt, while a close below that level puts support near $17.60, where price found buyers on Friday, back in focus. If APLD can reclaim $20, the next resistance sits at the $22.44 gap fill, followed by the broken trend line around $24.38–$24.50.

Tesla (TSLA) Stock Approaches Key Resistance Ahead of Earnings

Tesla (TSLA) offers the contrast. After surging into Friday and then selling off, it closed just above a key bar near $353.80 and traded up about three and a half percent on Monday. The company reports third-quarter results after the close on Wednesday, October 21.

The question is not whether Tesla is strong, but where that strength meets supply. The first level is $375, where a gap fill aligns with prior pivots, a near-term day-trade level. Above that, pivot resistance at $386.69 is more significant, followed by a gap fill at $391.06. The level that matters most is a descending trend line converging near $392–$393. The descending trend line dates back to early July and has rejected price on roughly seven occasions, giving it more technical weight than the nearby gap-fill levels. Even a sharp move higher would need to clear that line before the broader structure improves.

Defense Stocks NOC and RTX Test Critical Technical Levels

Friday's spike in volatility pushed capital into defense names. Northrop Grumman (NOC) and RTX both surged, but on Monday that move did not see follow-through.

NOC remains capped by a downsloping trend line from March 3, 2026, with six touches so far. The broader structure is a downsloping wedge, which typically carries a bullish bias. If weakness develops, the pivot top near $498.82 is the first expected bounce area, followed by a gap fill near $456.30 and the lower wedge boundary near $434.20, a potential swing-long zone. RTX is testing a convergence of horizontal resistance at $193.46 and an ascending trend line from April 22, 2025. A daily close above that area puts $198.36 in view next.

Key Stock Support and Resistance Levels to Watch

Tech Stock Outlook: What Could Confirm the Next Market Move?

The first signal is whether the broader market can produce a bounce that holds through the close rather than fading intraday. For individual names, confirmation comes from reclaiming broken levels, such as Meta above $720–$725 or APLD above $20. Invalidation of the support zones comes from decisive closes through them rather than brief pierces and rejections. For Tesla, Wednesday's earnings add another catalyst to watch as price approaches the $392–$393 trend line.

The common thread across these charts is patience. With the broader bounce struggling, the focus is on letting price reach stronger support zones rather than chasing rebounds, while recognizing that even the relatively stronger names face meaningful resistance overhead.

Watch on YouTube

S&P 500 Holds Support as Nasdaq Weakens: Gareth Soloway's Key Trading Levels for October 19

The market entered the weekend with investors increasingly concerned about a deeper selloff, particularly in technology stocks. Following a difficult week that saw the Nasdaq come under substantial pressure while the S&P 500 held up comparatively better, bearish sentiment intensified. However, when futures trading resumed Sunday evening, the S&P 500 found buyers near a double-bottom support area. That reaction reinforced a key theme in Gareth Soloway's October 19 market analysis: the broader market continues to show technical resilience even as technology leadership deteriorates.

During this morning's My Trading Game Plan Revealed, Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, examined the divergence between major indices, the growing influence of Treasury yields, and several technical setups across stocks, commodities, and Bitcoin. His framework emphasizes identifying where buyers are defending support, where rallies are encountering resistance, and how traders can use those levels to assess risk as earnings-related volatility develops.

S&P 500 Technical Support Holds as Market Fear Increases

The sharp selling pressure heading into the weekend created an increasingly bearish mood among retail traders. Yet the S&P 500 futures market opened Sunday evening near an established double-bottom support area and subsequently moved higher. Gareth viewed that reaction as an important reminder that elevated fear can create opportunities for technical bounces, particularly when price reaches support that has already attracted buyers.

The distinction comes down to the chart structure and the risk associated with chasing a move after significant selling has already occurred. When a market approaches a well-defined support level amid widespread bearish sentiment, traders need to consider whether the immediate downside has become extended. Support does not guarantee a reversal, but it provides a reference point for evaluating whether buyers are stepping in and whether a potential bounce offers a reasonable risk/reward setup.

October's history also contributes to market psychology, given the major selloffs associated with 1929 and 1987. Gareth discussed the Working Group on Financial Markets, commonly referred to as the Plunge Protection Team, in the context of market stability. The group was established after the 1987 crash to coordinate policy discussions among financial regulators. Its existence should not be interpreted as a guarantee against market crashes or sustained bear markets. For traders, the more immediate evidence remains the price action around established technical levels.

S&P 500 vs. Nasdaq: Bullish Support Meets Weakening Technology Stocks

One of the clearest developments in Gareth's market framework is the growing separation between the S&P 500 and the technology-heavy Nasdaq. The S&P 500 recently tested an ascending trendline connecting multiple important pivot lows and attracted buying interest. That response keeps the broader technical structure constructive, with Gareth continuing to monitor a potential macro bull flag and a longer-term upside objective near 8,000.

The significance of this setup is the ability of the broader index to maintain support despite weakness in several large technology names. Rotation into other sectors can help stabilize the S&P 500 even when former market leaders struggle. As long as the index respects its major rising support structure, the larger bullish scenario remains viable. A confirmed breakdown below that trendline would weaken the setup and require a reassessment of the broader market outlook.

The Nasdaq presents a less constructive technical picture. Gareth has identified a series of lower highs across important AI-related stocks, suggesting that buying momentum has weakened since the sector's earlier peaks. Repeated failures to reclaim previous highs can signal distribution or a developing downtrend, particularly when rallies lose momentum near established resistance. While individual technology stocks may continue to produce strong rebounds, Gareth's analysis favors greater selectivity within the sector.

Intel Stock: Trendline Breakdown Creates a Resistance Test

Intel provides an example of how a positive company headline can intersect with a weaker technical structure. The article's source material describes a JPMorgan upgrade that helped lift the stock, but Gareth's focus remained on a recent breakdown below a major long-term trendline. Once an established support line breaks, a subsequent rally toward that same level can become a test of overhead resistance.

Gareth identified approximately \$102 as a potential resistance area if Intel continues to rebound. A move toward that level could attract selling pressure from traders who view the recovery as a retest of the prior breakdown. However, a sustained recovery above the broken trendline would challenge the bearish interpretation. The important question is whether Intel can reclaim its former support or whether sellers regain control as price approaches that area.

Treasury Yields and US Debt Remain Major Risks for AI Stocks

Beyond individual stock charts, Gareth continues to emphasize the importance of the bond market in shaping the broader investment environment. The 10-year US Treasury yield serves as a benchmark for borrowing costs and influences equity valuations, corporate financing decisions, and investor appetite for risk. Changes in yields can have an especially meaningful impact on companies whose valuations depend heavily on future earnings growth.

This relationship becomes increasingly important within the AI infrastructure trade. Businesses committing substantial capital to data centers, computing capacity, and related infrastructure may face additional pressure when financing costs rise. Gareth highlighted companies such as CoreWeave as examples of businesses where debt obligations and access to capital deserve close attention. Higher borrowing costs can reduce financial flexibility and place pressure on valuations, particularly when investors begin questioning the timing of future returns.

The broader US debt burden adds another layer to Gareth's macroeconomic concerns. Large federal borrowing requirements, interest expenses, and the direction of Treasury yields can influence financial conditions across the economy. Gareth also discussed the US Dollar Index, or DXY, with the 101 area serving as a nearby technical reference. A weaker dollar or temporary easing in yields may provide relief to risk assets, but a sustained rise in borrowing costs could complicate the outlook for heavily leveraged companies and growth-oriented sectors.

Meta, Broadcom and Tesla: Key Stock Levels Ahead of Earnings

With corporate earnings drawing attention to major technology and industrial companies, Gareth identified several chart structures that could become relevant if volatility increases. His approach centers on waiting for price to reach meaningful support or resistance rather than pursuing stocks after an extended move. Earnings can produce sharp gaps in either direction, making technical confirmation and clearly defined invalidation levels particularly important.

Meta Stock: \$683 to \$666 Bull Flag Support Zone

Meta is developing a potential bull flag structure, with Gareth identifying the \$683 to \$666 area as an important support zone. This region brings together prior pivot levels and a significant gap-fill area, creating a potential location for buyers to defend the broader bullish pattern. A pullback toward approximately \$682 could offer a technical setup if price stabilizes and begins showing evidence of renewed demand.

The lower boundary near \$666 provides a reference point for invalidation. A confirmed daily close below that level would weaken the bull flag interpretation and increase the possibility of additional downside. Until then, the structure remains worth watching for traders looking to evaluate a pullback near support rather than chase a rally into earnings.

Broadcom Stock: \$315 to \$316 Fibonacci Support

Broadcom recently tested a support area near \$315 to \$316, where several technical factors converged. Gareth identified a descending trendline, a prior gap-fill level, and the 50% Fibonacci retracement of the relevant price swing. When multiple independent technical references align, they can strengthen the significance of a support or resistance area.

The stock subsequently moved higher, leaving traders who missed the initial test without the same entry conditions. Gareth's framework favors patience in that situation. If Broadcom revisits the \$315 to \$316 zone, the reaction could help determine whether buyers remain willing to defend it. A decisive breakdown would reduce the strength of the bullish setup and suggest that the earlier confluence is no longer providing effective support.

Tesla Stock: Parallel Channel Resistance Near \$400

Tesla remains within a technical parallel channel defined by established highs and lows. Gareth is watching the upper boundary, located just below \$400 in the source analysis, as a potential resistance area if the stock rallies. A move into that region could create an opportunity to evaluate a bearish reversal, particularly if price begins losing momentum near the channel's upper trendline.

The lower boundary offers the opposite scenario. A substantial pullback toward channel support could attract buyers if the structure remains intact and price begins to stabilize. Earnings-related gaps may temporarily move Tesla outside the channel, so the strength of any breakout or breakdown matters. A sustained move beyond either boundary would require traders to update the existing technical framework.

Verizon Stock Rebound Shows Why Technical Support Matters

Verizon provided another example of Gareth's approach to evaluating market reactions during periods of negative sentiment. The stock experienced a sharp selloff amid concerns about potential competition in the mobile communications industry. That decline brought price toward an area where an ascending trendline aligned with a previous resistance level that had become support.

The subsequent rebound illustrated how an established technical level can attract buyers even when the surrounding news narrative remains negative. Traders evaluating the setup had a defined area where the bullish thesis could be tested. A successful defense of support strengthened the case for a recovery, while a sustained break below it would have weakened the trade.

The broader lesson applies beyond Verizon. Large news-driven moves can push stocks into technically significant areas, and those locations may provide opportunities to assess whether selling pressure is becoming exhausted. Gareth's framework emphasizes the quality of the support, the market's reaction at that level, and the amount of downside risk involved if the setup fails.

Gold and Silver Price Outlook: Critical Support Levels

Precious metals are approaching technical levels that could determine their next directional moves. Gareth's analysis of gold and silver reflects a cautious near-term outlook, particularly as recent price action has struggled to generate convincing rebounds from established support. The quality of the bounce is an important part of the assessment because repeated tests of support without meaningful upside follow-through can indicate weakening demand.

Gold Price: \$4,100 Trendline Support and \$3,950 Downside Target

Gold is trading near an important trendline around \$4,100 in Gareth's chart analysis. Although the level has attracted buying interest, the price action has remained relatively subdued. Instead of producing a strong rebound away from support, gold has been consolidating close to the trendline, creating the possibility of a bearish continuation pattern.

A confirmed daily close below \$4,100 would weaken the current support structure and bring approximately \$3,950 into focus as the next downside reference. If selling pressure continues beyond that area, Gareth has identified a deeper potential support zone near \$3,500. Conversely, a stronger rebound that carries gold decisively away from the trendline would reduce the immediate breakdown risk and improve the near-term technical outlook.

Silver Price: \$55 Breakdown Level and \$50 Support

Silver has already shown weakness following a breakdown from its wedge formation. The subsequent rebound appears limited in the context of the original pattern, leaving Gareth focused on whether sellers can push price below approximately \$55. A confirmed break would strengthen the bearish scenario and bring the \$50 area into consideration as a potential downside target.

The technical read would improve if silver recovered above the broken structure and began establishing stronger support. Until that occurs, the existing breakdown warrants attention, particularly given the possibility that weakness in precious metals could extend across related markets.

Crude Oil and Natural Gas: Bearish Oil Targets, Bullish Gas Setup

Crude oil remains under pressure within Gareth's technical framework. He continues to favor a bearish outlook, with approximately \$88.75 identified as a downside objective and \$75 representing a deeper potential target if the larger breakdown develops. These levels are conditional targets based on the chart structure, and any sustained recovery through important resistance would require a reassessment of the bearish case.

Natural gas offers a contrasting setup. Gareth identified a developing bullish wedge, with price recently testing resistance but failing to establish a confirmed breakout. The pattern suggests that buying pressure may be improving, although the technical signal remains incomplete. A confirmed daily close above wedge resistance would strengthen the bullish interpretation, while continued rejection could keep natural gas confined to its existing consolidation.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: \$81,000 Support and \$87,200 Resistance

Bitcoin remains within a defined trading range, with Gareth identifying approximately \$81,000 as critical support and \$87,200 as resistance. Price action between those boundaries leaves the near-term direction unresolved. For traders, the range provides a framework for evaluating potential opportunities while avoiding premature assumptions about which direction the eventual breakout will take.

A confirmed breakdown below \$81,000 would weaken the current structure and bring approximately \$75,500 into focus as a potential downside objective. Alternatively, a sustained move above \$87,200 would improve the bullish outlook and open the possibility of a rally toward the \$95,000 to \$97,000 region. Both scenarios require confirmation, particularly because Bitcoin can produce sharp reversals around widely watched technical levels.

Gareth's broader point concerns the trade-off between entering early and waiting for stronger evidence. Anticipating a breakout may improve the entry price if the move succeeds, but it also increases exposure to failed signals. Waiting for confirmation can mean sacrificing part of the move in exchange for greater clarity about market direction. The appropriate decision depends on the setup, the available risk/reward, and whether price action supports the original trading thesis.

Gareth Soloway's Market Outlook: Key Levels and Trading Discipline

The central theme from Gareth's October 19 market analysis is the divergence between a technically resilient S&P 500 and weakening leadership in technology stocks. That separation creates a more selective trading environment, where broad index strength may conceal weakness in individual sectors. Treasury yields and financing conditions add another source of risk, particularly for companies with substantial capital requirements and debt exposure.

The immediate framework remains defined by identifiable chart levels. The S&P 500's rising trendline will help determine whether the broader bullish structure remains intact. Meta's \$683 to \$666 support zone, Broadcom's \$315 to \$316 confluence, and Tesla's channel resistance near \$400 provide individual equity setups. Gold's \$4,100 trendline and Bitcoin's \$81,000 to \$87,200 range offer additional signals for traders assessing whether current consolidations resolve higher or lower.

The advantage comes from preparing for both outcomes before price reaches a decision point. A support level that holds can provide a defined setup, while a confirmed breakdown changes the trade and the risk involved. With earnings and macroeconomic pressures capable of producing significant volatility, Gareth's framework favors disciplined entries, clear invalidation levels, and patience when the chart has yet to confirm a direction.

S&P 500 Remains Bullish Above 7,575 as Inflation and Tech Weakness Test Markets

The S&P 500 continues to hold its bullish technical structure despite renewed inflation concerns, weakness in technology stocks, and growing questions about the economy. Thursday's sharp intraday recovery reinforced a theme Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, has been emphasizing: price action and established technical levels remain the foundation of his short-term market outlook, even when the broader economic picture raises concerns.

During Friday's My Trading Game Plan Revealed, Gareth outlined why the S&P 500 still has a potential path toward 8,000, how falling Treasury yields may reflect increasing economic anxiety, and where traders should be watching for confirmation across equities, commodities, and cryptocurrencies. The underlying message was consistent throughout the session. Market conditions can change quickly, but a defined trading framework helps establish where the odds favor a move and where that assessment needs to change.

S&P 500 Technical Analysis: Bullish Above 7,575 With 8,000 in Focus

Thursday's trading session offered another example of how quickly market sentiment can reverse. Following inflation concerns and overnight weakness in global technology shares, the Nasdaq entered the session under substantial pressure. The S&P 500 also opened sharply lower before recovering and finishing approximately 0.33% higher, representing a rebound of more than 1% from its intraday lows.

For Gareth, the recovery reinforced an existing technical framework. He continues to maintain a bullish short-term bias on the S&P 500 while the index remains above 7,575. That level represents the boundary between his bullish and neutral outlooks. A sustained break below 7,575 would weaken the current structure and shift his assessment toward neutral, while a more significant decline below 7,000 would raise the possibility of a broader bearish trend.

The next major upside area sits near 8,000, where an ascending resistance trendline dating back to the 2022 bear market comes into play. Because the trendline rises over time, its exact value changes depending on when price reaches it. Gareth identified approximately 8,003 as the immediate resistance level, increasing toward 8,038 by the end of October. This creates a potential upside objective of roughly 2% to 2.5% from Thursday's close, assuming the current bullish structure remains intact.

The history of this trendline makes it particularly important. Previous encounters have produced meaningful selling pressure, suggesting that another approach could attract sellers looking to defend resistance. Gareth's framework therefore allows for additional upside while recognizing the potential for a larger reversal near that zone. A rally toward 8,000 would bring the index into an area where the strength of buyers and the response from sellers could determine the next significant move.

Hot PPI Inflation and Falling Treasury Yields Raise Economic Questions

One of the more revealing developments this week was the decline in Treasury yields despite elevated inflation readings. Hot Producer Price Index (PPI) and Consumer Price Index (CPI) data would ordinarily increase concerns about restrictive monetary policy and put upward pressure on yields. Instead, the 10-year Treasury yield moved lower as investors appeared increasingly concerned about the economic implications of weakness in technology and credit-sensitive assets.

Gareth connected this behavior to broader concerns surrounding the artificial intelligence trade, credit conditions, and the possibility that economic growth could deteriorate. When investors become more concerned about financial stability or recession risk, demand for U.S. Treasury securities can increase. Higher bond prices translate into lower yields, creating a situation where Treasury markets reflect growth concerns even as inflation remains elevated.

This interpretation becomes more relevant when viewed alongside the recent weakness in South Korea's technology-heavy equity market and the pressure on companies associated with the AI investment cycle. If investors begin questioning whether aggressive spending on artificial intelligence will generate the expected returns, the consequences can extend beyond individual technology stocks. Credit conditions, corporate investment, and broader risk appetite may also come under pressure.

Gareth also discussed changing expectations surrounding Federal Reserve policy. The market's assessment of future interest rates can shift rapidly as investors weigh persistent inflation against signs of slowing economic activity. The combination creates a difficult environment for policymakers, particularly if inflation remains elevated while financial conditions tighten. For traders, the interaction between yields, equities, and credit-sensitive assets provides an additional way to evaluate whether the recent market recovery has broad support.

Trading Psychology: Why Technical Levels Help Control Emotion

Thursday's reversal also highlighted one of Gareth's recurring lessons about trading psychology. Sharp market declines can encourage emotional decisions, particularly when economic headlines and price action appear to reinforce one another. Traders who enter positions primarily because prices are moving aggressively may find themselves reacting to short-term volatility without a defined framework for managing risk.

Gareth frequently compares disciplined trading to the approach used by a casino. A casino operates around a mathematical framework and understands that individual outcomes will vary. In trading, the practical lesson is to focus on repeatable decision-making, defined risk, and a process that can be evaluated across many trades. Unlike a casino with a built-in mathematical house edge, however, a trading strategy does not automatically possess a positive expectancy, and losses remain an unavoidable possibility.

Technical analysis provides a structure for that process. Support and resistance levels help identify potential entries, targets, and invalidation points before emotions become a factor. Thursday's recovery demonstrated how a market can move sharply against the prevailing sentiment while remaining consistent with a broader technical outlook. A trader who has already identified the relevant support zones is better positioned to evaluate that move without relying entirely on the headlines.

The same principle applies to cryptocurrencies, where leveraged liquidations and concentrated stop-loss orders can contribute to rapid price movements. Understanding where liquidity may be concentrated can help explain sudden volatility, although those movements should not automatically be attributed to deliberate institutional manipulation. Gareth's broader approach emphasizes preparation, patience, and the willingness to change a market assessment when the technical evidence changes.

IONQ and Caterpillar Stock: How Technical Confluence Shaped the Rebound

Several individual stocks provided examples of technical confluence during Thursday's market recovery. Gareth highlighted IONQ, a quantum computing company, after shares declined into an area where an ascending trendline intersected with a previous price gap. The alignment of two separate technical references created a support zone that traders could evaluate for a potential rebound.

According to the levels discussed during the show, IONQ recovered from approximately \$30 to \$34 during the session, representing a move of more than 10% from the referenced low. The significance of the setup was the alignment of technical factors at a defined price area. When several independently identified levels converge, traders can evaluate whether the market is responding to a potentially meaningful support zone. Such confluence can strengthen a setup, although it does not guarantee that support will hold.

Caterpillar (CAT) offered a similar example after selling pressure pushed the stock toward a gap-fill area that aligned with an 88.6% Fibonacci retracement. This deep retracement is sometimes used by technical traders to identify potential reversal areas following an extended move. The stock's response illustrated how a combination of chart structures can provide a more specific trading framework than relying on a single indicator.

Both setups reinforced Gareth's emphasis on allowing price to reach predetermined areas rather than chasing moves after they have already developed. A support level becomes more useful when the trader understands the surrounding structure, the potential upside objective, and the price action that would invalidate the original setup. Even a strong technical confluence can fail, making position sizing and risk management essential parts of the process.

Tesla Stock Analysis: \$393 Channel Resistance Remains the Key Level

Tesla (TSLA) remains a stock where Gareth sees a clearly defined technical structure. Shares have been trading within a parallel channel, with repeated reactions near the lower support boundary and selling pressure developing around the upper resistance line. The channel provides a framework for evaluating potential moves in both directions, particularly when price approaches either boundary.

The upper resistance area currently sits near \$393, according to Gareth's chart. Previous movements within the channel have created sizable trading ranges, but the opportunity depends on how shares respond when they approach the established boundaries. A rejection near \$393 could support a bearish short-term setup, while a sustained breakout above resistance would require traders to reassess the channel and the possibility of further upside.

Tesla also remains closely associated with ambitious product announcements and long-term technology expectations. Gareth expressed skepticism about aggressive development timelines, citing the challenges associated with autonomous driving, robotics, and regulatory approval. These considerations provide background for investor sentiment, but the immediate trading framework remains tied to price structure and the reaction around resistance.

For traders following the stock, the important question is whether Tesla continues respecting the channel or begins establishing a new trend. Repeated resistance tests can eventually weaken a level, and a confirmed breakout would change the technical assessment. Until then, the established channel offers a reference for evaluating entries, potential targets, and the risks associated with a failed setup.

Microsoft Stock: Topping Tail Signals Caution Near Triple-Top Resistance

Microsoft (MSFT) presented a different technical picture after forming a topping-tail candlestick on its daily chart. This pattern develops when buyers push a stock higher during the session but fail to maintain those gains into the close. The resulting upper wick can indicate selling pressure, particularly when the formation appears near an established resistance area.

Gareth identified a potential triple-top structure but emphasized that Microsoft had not reached the exact resistance level before reversing. That detail weakens the precision of the setup because the expected test of resistance did not occur. A topping tail can provide useful information about intraday selling pressure, although additional price action is needed to determine whether the pattern develops into a meaningful reversal.

The setup also illustrates the importance of distinguishing between an interesting chart formation and a trade with clearly defined parameters. Without a clean test of resistance, traders may have less favorable entry and risk characteristics. Gareth's preference was to remain patient and allow the chart to provide better confirmation before treating the formation as a potential short opportunity.

U.S. Dollar Index and 10-Year Treasury Yield: Key Macro Levels

The U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) has shown signs of cooling following its recent advance, with Gareth identifying 100.85 as an important potential support area. That level previously acted as resistance and may now attract buyers during a retracement. A constructive reaction around 100.85 could support another move higher, while a failure to establish support would suggest that the dollar's recent momentum is weakening.

The 10-year Treasury yield is also approaching an important technical decision after reacting to a long-term resistance trendline extending back toward the 2007 highs. Gareth highlighted a weekly topping-tail formation near that resistance, followed by the recent decline in yields. The sequence suggests that sellers of yield, or buyers of bonds, became more active around a historically significant technical area.

Taken together, these charts offer additional context for the broader equity market. A weaker dollar can influence commodities and multinational earnings, while declining yields may support certain equity valuations or reflect increasing concern about economic growth. The reason behind those moves affects how traders interpret them, making the relationship between the dollar, bonds, and stocks particularly useful during periods of heightened volatility.

Oil Prices Near \$95 to \$96: Resistance Challenges the Recent Rally

Crude oil has continued its recent advance, with Gareth identifying seven consecutive positive sessions and prices trading near \$95 to \$96 per barrel. Although the sequence reflects persistent buying interest, the rally is approaching an area where he sees increasing resistance and the potential for a pullback.

Gareth indicated that he had initiated a small bearish position through the United States Oil Fund (USO) as prices moved toward resistance. The position reflects his interpretation of the current chart rather than certainty about the next move. An extended rally can continue beyond resistance, particularly when supply developments or geopolitical events affect energy prices.

The setup also introduces a broader macro consideration. Elevated oil prices can contribute to inflation pressures at a time when investors are already concerned about economic growth. A reversal in crude could ease part of that pressure, while continued strength would complicate the inflation outlook. For Gareth, the immediate technical response around resistance will help determine whether the recent advance is beginning to lose momentum.

Gold and Silver Technical Analysis: Precious Metals Show Different Risks

Gold and silver are presenting different technical structures, even as both markets respond to inflation expectations, Treasury yields, and shifts in risk appetite. Gareth noted that gold recently moved below an important support trendline but recovered before establishing a convincing breakdown. That recovery leaves the support area relevant, although another confirmed move below it would weaken the current chart.

His downside scenario for gold points toward the 3,500 area if the breakdown is confirmed. That target remains conditional on the loss of support and subsequent price action. A sustained recovery above the trendline would instead suggest that buyers have successfully defended the structure, reducing the immediate significance of the bearish scenario.

Silver appears more vulnerable following a confirmed break below its primary support area. Although prices subsequently rebounded from a secondary double-bottom level, the broken support may now act as resistance on a recovery. Gareth identified the \$50 area as a potential downside objective if sellers regain control and the current bearish structure continues to develop.

The divergence between the metals is useful because gold has recovered a key level while silver remains below its former support. Traders following the sector can use those differences to assess relative strength and determine whether any rebound is improving the broader technical picture or merely testing resistance created by the earlier breakdown.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: \$81,000 Support Holds the Key to \$75,500

Bitcoin remains at an important technical threshold after briefly trading below \$81,000 during Thursday's volatility before recovering. Gareth identified \$81,000 as the line in the sand for the current chart, with buyers managing to defend the area despite the temporary breakdown.

The distinction between an intraday move below support and a confirmed daily breakdown is particularly important in cryptocurrency markets. Bitcoin frequently experiences sharp moves around widely followed levels, and an initial break can reverse before establishing a sustained trend. Gareth's framework therefore places emphasis on the daily close and subsequent confirmation rather than treating every temporary breach as decisive.

If Bitcoin establishes a confirmed daily breakdown below \$81,000, the next major downside area identified in the analysis sits near \$75,500. That would represent a meaningful deterioration in the current technical structure. Conversely, continued defense of \$81,000 would leave open the possibility of stabilization and another attempt to recover higher resistance levels.

Bitcoin's reaction also provides a broader measure of speculative risk appetite. Weakness in technology stocks, changing liquidity conditions, and pressure on leveraged positions can all influence cryptocurrency prices. The \$81,000 level offers a defined reference for evaluating whether buyers are maintaining control or whether the recent volatility is developing into a deeper correction.

Market Outlook: S&P 500 Resistance and Earnings Season Set the Next Test

The coming week introduces another potential source of volatility as corporate earnings take a larger role in shaping individual stock performance. Major technology-related reports, including Netflix, will give investors additional information about consumer demand, corporate profitability, and the outlook for businesses carrying elevated growth expectations.

Gareth's broader framework remains constructive on the S&P 500 while the index holds above 7,575, with the rising resistance zone near 8,000 to 8,038 representing the next major upside objective. That bullish assessment exists alongside growing concerns about economic growth, elevated inflation, and weakness in portions of the technology sector. Those risks may become more important if the market begins losing the support levels that have sustained the recent advance.

Across other markets, the technical decisions are similarly defined. Tesla faces channel resistance near \$393, the dollar has potential support at 100.85, oil is approaching resistance after an extended advance, and Bitcoin continues to defend \$81,000. Each level provides a reference for assessing whether the existing market structure is holding or beginning to change.

The central takeaway from Friday's My Trading Game Plan Revealed is that a bullish market outlook can remain valid even as economic concerns increase. Gareth's approach is to respect the prevailing technical structure while remaining prepared for the evidence to change. For the S&P 500, 7,575 defines that near-term framework, and the approaching 8,000 resistance zone may provide the next meaningful test of buyer conviction.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security, commodity, or cryptocurrency. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the possible loss of principal. Technical analysis identifies potential scenarios and does not guarantee future performance. Readers should conduct their own research and consider their financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

Hot PPI Inflation Shakes Stocks, but Treasury Yields and Semiconductors Signal a Shift

October 15, 2026 | Trading the Close Market Review | Drew Dosek

Hot inflation data was supposed to put additional pressure on stocks Thursday. Instead, the market delivered a different message. Treasury yields moved lower, major indexes recovered from early weakness, and semiconductor stocks staged an important intraday reversal.

That does not mean the selling is over. It means the market's response to the inflation report deserves more attention than the report itself.

During Thursday's Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek focused on the disconnect between the morning's Producer Price Index (PPI) release and the price action that followed. With technology stocks already under pressure from weakness in Asian markets, the session presented an important test of whether sellers could maintain control.

By the closing bell, the S&P 500 had gained 0.28%, while the NASDAQ finished 0.08% higher. Those modest gains concealed a more constructive recovery beneath the surface.

The question heading into the next session is whether that recovery can develop into sustained buying or whether Thursday's strength was simply a bounce within a vulnerable market.

Hot PPI Inflation Sends a Different Message Through Treasury Yields

The Producer Price Index came in significantly hotter than expected, with the reported reading nearly twice the consensus forecast. Ordinarily, an upside inflation surprise would raise concerns about the Federal Reserve's ability to lower interest rates, potentially putting upward pressure on Treasury yields.

Yet the 10-year Treasury yield moved sharply lower.

That divergence became one of the day's most important developments. Rather than assume the inflation report would dictate the market's direction, Drew focused on what the yield chart had already been showing.

The previous session produced a pronounced upper wick on the daily candle, suggesting that buyers had struggled to sustain higher yields. Drew also identified what he calls a sleeper hold pattern across the daily and weekly timeframes, adding technical weight to the possibility of a reversal.

The next downside level to monitor is 5.021%. A continued decline toward that area would reinforce the reversal setup, while a recovery in yields would require traders to reassess the outlook.

The broader significance extends beyond bonds. Lower Treasury yields can ease valuation pressure on growth stocks and other interest-rate-sensitive areas of the market. That relationship helps explain why technology shares were able to recover despite the inflation surprise, although yields alone do not establish the cause of the rebound.

The lesson is straightforward: economic data provides context, but the market's reaction helps determine whether that information is actually changing price behavior.

S&P 500 and NASDAQ Recover, but Key Resistance Still Matters

The major indexes entered Thursday under pressure following weakness in South Korean technology stocks and another difficult session for semiconductor shares. The early selling suggested that the prior day's weakness might continue.

Instead, buyers defended important technical areas.

The S&P 500 remains within a broader consolidation that has developed since August. Despite the recent volatility, the index has not decisively broken the structure that supported its earlier advance.

Drew highlighted an important trend line that held during Thursday's session. That defense keeps the near-term bullish case alive, but it does not yet establish a fresh breakout.

SPY Technical Levels: 766.17 Support and 781 Resistance

For traders following the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY), the key downside reference is \$766.17. A daily close below that area would weaken the current setup and suggest that sellers are regaining control.

On the upside, \$781 remains the more important confirmation level. A sustained daily close above that resistance would strengthen the case for a move toward the psychologically important \$800 area.

The distinction between holding support and breaking resistance matters. Buyers have demonstrated a willingness to defend the range, but they still need to prove they can push price beyond its upper boundary.

Until that happens, the market remains in consolidation rather than a confirmed new leg higher.

NASDAQ and QQQ: Trendline Recovery Supports the Bullish Case

The NASDAQ also showed improvement beneath its relatively flat closing performance.

The index recovered above a declining trend line associated with its earlier breakout structure. However, an ascending trend line extending from the March lows remains overhead, with the 27,000 area serving as a potential technical destination.

The Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) offers another constructive development. Drew identified a recovery above both a prior breakout trend line and the neckline of an inverse head and shoulders pattern.

That formation carries a measured-move objective near \$806, provided the breakout structure remains intact.

For now, the recovery is encouraging. The next test is whether buyers can maintain control above the reclaimed neckline and work through overhead resistance without another sharp reversal.

Semiconductor Stocks Stage a Key Reversal as SMH Tests Resistance

If Treasury yields provided the day's macro divergence, semiconductors offered the clearest example of changing intraday behavior.

The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) finished approximately 1% lower, underperforming the broader market. Looking only at that closing loss, however, misses what happened during the session.

SMH entered Thursday after breaking below its 61.8% Fibonacci retracement level. It then opened beneath the midpoint of a parallel channel, extending the selling pressure that had developed over several sessions.

For roughly the first 30 minutes, sellers remained in control.

Then the pattern changed.

Rather than forming another bear flag followed by renewed selling, SMH recovered and finished near the upper end of its daily range. The bounce brought price back toward the 50% line of its parallel channel.

This was a meaningful change of character, but not yet a confirmed bullish reversal.

The important question is whether SMH can reclaim that channel midpoint on a closing basis. If buyers accomplish that, the upper boundary near \$597.69 becomes the next potential upside target.

If the midpoint continues to act as resistance, Thursday's recovery may prove to be a temporary bounce within the existing decline.

Drew's approach here is particularly useful. A strong intraday recovery deserves attention, but the chart still needs to confirm that the underlying structure has improved before traders assume the trend has changed.

Micron Stock Rebounds After Filling a Technical Gap

Micron Technology (MU) provided a related example of buyers responding to an established technical level.

Following six consecutive declining sessions, Micron traded near \$860 and filled a gap around \$868.52 before recovering into positive territory.

That rebound suggests buyers were willing to respond near the gap-fill area, particularly after the stock had experienced substantial selling pressure.

However, Micron recently broke below an ascending parallel channel. That breakdown leaves overhead resistance that could limit the recovery.

Drew identified the \$1,035 to \$1,070 region as a potential retest zone if the rebound continues. A move into that area would provide an opportunity to evaluate whether former support has become resistance.

The important point is not to assume that one positive session has repaired the chart.

Micron has demonstrated that buyers are still present, but the larger technical structure requires additional work. Waiting for a cleaner test of resistance may offer more information than chasing the first bounce.

Natural Gas and Oil: Why Risk Management Matters More Than Momentum

Energy markets presented a different set of technical conditions, particularly in natural gas.

U.S. oil continued pushing higher, with Drew identifying \$102.81 as the next potential resistance area. That level corresponds with the midpoint of a parallel channel and provides a logical location to monitor for a reaction if the advance continues.

Natural gas, however, offered a more immediate lesson in risk management.

The commodity recently reached the lower boundary of its parallel channel and has since advanced sharply. Its daily Relative Strength Index (RSI) moved above 70, placing momentum in overbought territory.

The breakout carries a measured-move objective near \$3.89, but an upside target does not automatically make the current price an attractive entry.

Drew was particularly direct about the risk:

"Nat Gas is a widow maker. It can whip up as much as it can whip down on charts. So whatever you do, just go light, be careful…"

That warning reflects the speed and volatility that can characterize natural gas trading. Strong momentum can continue longer than expected, but sharp reversals can also erase gains quickly.

Rather than chase the advance, Drew identified a declining trend line near \$3.26 as a potential pullback area worth watching.

A retreat toward that level would not guarantee a successful trade. It would, however, allow traders to reassess the setup closer to a defined technical reference, where entry, invalidation, and position size can be evaluated more deliberately.

The broader lesson applies well beyond natural gas. Recognizing an opportunity and finding a favorable entry are two different decisions.

Gold and Silver Technical Analysis: Bond Yields Offer Relief, but Risks Remain

The decline in Treasury yields also coincided with a recovery in gold.

Gold bounced from technical support as yields weakened, but its broader chart continues to show a bearish consolidation structure. The bounce is constructive in the short term without necessarily changing that larger outlook.

If Treasury yields resume climbing and gold loses support, the \$3,900 area remains a potential downside objective.

Silver, meanwhile, continues to display relative weakness compared with gold.

The metal has struggled to recover its previous consolidation range and faces resistance around the midpoint of a long-term parallel channel extending back to February 2008.

Drew also highlighted an active head and shoulders pattern with a measured-move objective near \$53.26.

That target sits close to a broader \$50 to \$53.26 area where traders may begin watching for a stronger buying response. However, potential support should not be confused with confirmation that a bottom has formed.

For both metals, the next reaction at support or resistance will carry more weight than an attempt to anticipate the exact turning point.

Bitcoin Price Outlook: Repeated Support Tests Raise Breakdown Risk

Bitcoin finished Thursday approximately 0.87% higher, but the daily gain did little to resolve the larger technical concern.

The cryptocurrency has broken its shorter-term uptrend and continues consolidating close to a major horizontal support line associated with a November 2025 pivot low.

That support remains important. As long as Bitcoin holds above it, the larger breakdown scenario has not been confirmed.

The concern is how frequently price has returned to the same area without producing a sustained advance.

As Drew explained:

"The more you knock on the door, the more likely someone's going to open and price can just collapse down underneath."

Repeated tests can indicate that buyers are defending a level, but they can also suggest that demand is being absorbed. The longer Bitcoin remains pressed against support, the more important the next decisive move becomes.

A recovery toward \$86,000 would help demonstrate that buyers can create meaningful separation from the support zone.

Conversely, a confirmed break below the horizontal level would weaken the current structure and increase the risk of additional selling.

For now, Bitcoin is a market where confirmation matters more than anticipation. The chart has not yet resolved the tension between support holding and buying momentum fading.

Ericsson, Zillow and Nike: Three Stock Setups Built Around Technical Levels

Beyond the major indexes and commodities, Drew highlighted several individual stocks where price was interacting with longer-term technical structures.

These setups share a common principle: the location of price relative to support and resistance matters more than whether a company is currently popular with investors.

Ericsson Stock: Earnings Strength Meets a Multiyear Channel

Ericsson reported earnings above expectations, with earnings per share beating estimates by approximately 22% and revenue exceeding forecasts by 6.8%.

The stronger results helped support a move from the lower boundary of a parallel channel that has been developing since April 2024.

The channel matters because it provides a historical reference for where buyers have previously responded.

If Ericsson maintains its recovery and establishes further strength above Thursday's candle, a pullback toward nearby trendline support could offer a new technical area to evaluate.

The initial upside references are \$10.84 and \$11, followed by the midpoint of the longer-term channel.

A failure to maintain the recovery would weaken the immediate bullish case, making the next support test important.

Zillow Stock: Lower Treasury Yields Support a Technical Bounce

Zillow is another name worth watching because of its sensitivity to interest rates and housing-market expectations.

The decline in Treasury yields provided a more favorable backdrop for rate-sensitive stocks, while Zillow's chart showed a breakout, retracement, and bounce sequence.

Drew identified \$36.52 as an important nearby level, with a longer-term trend line connecting the March 2020 and October 2022 lows adding technical significance to the area.

A sustained recovery through resistance would strengthen the argument that Zillow's larger trend is improving.

With earnings expected in early November, traders also need to account for the possibility of additional volatility around that catalyst.

The technical setup may be constructive, but an upcoming earnings report can materially change the risk profile.

Nike Stock: A Channel Recovery Creates a Defined Technical Test

Nike provided one of the session's more interesting examples of separating a company's fundamental challenges from the technical opportunity on its chart.

After declining toward \$32.14 and moving below the lower boundary of a parallel channel dating back to September 2022, Nike recovered into that channel.

The \$34.17 area now serves as an important technical reference.

Drew's approach was not based on whether Nike is an attractive brand or whether its longer-term business challenges have been resolved.

As he explained:

"I don't need to buy my favorite company or avoid my least favorite company. I just need to see if there's a good trading opportunity."

That distinction is central to technical trading. A stock can present a tradable recovery even while its fundamental outlook remains uncertain.

For Nike, the initial upside resistance sits near \$40, followed by a Fibonacci retracement level around \$43.34 and a more significant technical reference at \$46.16.

Those levels provide a framework for evaluating the recovery. They are not guaranteed destinations, and the setup would weaken if Nike loses its reclaimed channel support.

What Traders Should Watch After the October 15 Market Reversal

Thursday's session improved the near-term technical picture, but several important questions remain unresolved.

The 10-year Treasury yield is the first area to monitor. Continued weakness toward 5.021% would support the current reversal thesis and could provide a more favorable backdrop for rate-sensitive equities. A sharp rebound in yields would challenge that interpretation.

For the broader equity market, SPY needs to maintain support around \$766.17 and eventually clear \$781 to strengthen the bullish case. QQQ must also hold its reclaimed breakout structure if the inverse head and shoulders setup is to remain relevant.

Semiconductors may offer the clearest confirmation signal. SMH's intraday recovery was encouraging, but a close above the midpoint of its parallel channel would provide stronger evidence that buyers are regaining control.

Outside equities, Bitcoin remains vulnerable while it consolidates near major support, and natural gas demonstrates why a strong chart does not necessarily justify an immediate entry.

These are different markets with different technical conditions, but the decision-making process remains consistent: identify the important level, wait for the market's reaction, and reassess when the evidence changes.

Respect the Recovery, but Don’t Assume Confirmation

October 15 was not simply a session when stocks recovered from an inflation scare.

The more important development was the divergence between the economic headline and the technical response. Treasury yields declined despite hotter PPI data, major indexes defended support, and semiconductors recovered from aggressive early selling.

Those developments suggest that selling pressure may be easing in parts of the market. They do not establish that a new bullish trend has begun.

For Drew, the practical takeaway is to respect the recovery without getting ahead of the confirmation.

The next session will help determine whether Thursday marked the beginning of a more durable shift or another temporary rebound within an unsettled market.

The opportunity is not in predicting that outcome with certainty. It is in knowing which levels will help distinguish one scenario from the other.

Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the potential loss of principal. Technical patterns, price targets, and historical market behavior do not guarantee future results. Always conduct your own research and evaluate your individual risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

Crypto has had no shortage of headlines lately, from Chainlink's interoperability upgrade to Solana's breakout above long-standing resistance. But the charts point to a simpler conclusion: most of the meaningful upside targets across the major tokens depend on one level on the Bitcoin chart.

On the weekly timeframe, Bitcoin has broken down from a head and shoulders pattern and has not yet reclaimed the neckline. That line is rising, and it projects near $89,832 by the week of October 26. Until price gets back above it, rallies in Bitcoin and the altcoins that track it are better treated as tests of resistance than as the start of a new trend.

That changes how each setup should be traded. The upside targets are real but conditional. The support levels are in play right now.

Bitcoin Technical Analysis: $89,800 Neckline and $75,000 Support Risk

The near-term case for Bitcoin rests on a single horizontal support level. That level rejected price on several attempts, then gave way after a period of consolidation, and has since flipped into support. Bulls have defended it so far, and it is now the near-term line in the sand.

The daily chart is less constructive. After consolidating near the top of the range, Bitcoin pushed lower and has since drifted sideways, forming a bear flag. At the same time, the rising trend line connecting the August 17 pivot low to the more recent pivot low has been broken. That does not guarantee a move back to the bottom of the broader parallel channel, but it does mean the horizontal support is now carrying most of the weight.

There is also a structural point worth keeping in mind: every test of a floor weakens it. Bitcoin has been pressing on support repeatedly. The constructive path is for price to lift back into the upper portion of the consolidation, build a base there, and let probabilities shift toward a push through the neckline. A break below support instead brings the $75,000 pivot low into play, where the setup would need to be reassessed.

Ethereum Price Analysis: $3,041 Resistance or a Drop Toward $2,000?

Ethereum staged a solid recovery from its intraday low, but its structure is weaker than Bitcoin's. Price is trading below its recent low pivot, something Bitcoin has not done, which leaves Ethereum more exposed if the broader market rolls over.

Near term, Ethereum came close to a multi-month trend line that has already produced two meaningful touches. Drew views a third test of a line like this as a potentially strong bounce setup. What matters next is separation: bulls want to see price lift away from support rather than curl over and sit on it. Prolonged consolidation on top of support raises the odds of a breakdown, which would target $2,000.

The upside case runs through Bitcoin. If Bitcoin reclaims its neckline, Drew sees $3,041 as Ethereum's next major upside target, where the January pivot extended forward converges with an inclining trend line that has acted as both support and resistance, around the end of October. That confluence is where Ethereum would likely stall and need further consolidation, with the $3,000 area serving as the broader resistance zone.

Solana Breakout Analysis: Can SOL Reach $124 and $178?

Solana broke above a declining trend line after testing it repeatedly, then pulled back to retest the breakout, a textbook breakout, retrace, and bounce setup. The issue is the quality of the bounce.

Drew's preference would be to trim or exit rather than wait through further consolidation. The breakout remains intact, but three sessions without meaningful separation from the trend line make the immediate setup less compelling. As long as Solana holds above the line, a retest of $124 remains on the table. If Bitcoin reclaims its neckline, Solana's larger bullish target comes into focus near $178, where the lower boundary of its former parallel channel sits.

Chainlink Price Analysis: $14.58 Resistance and $10.65 Support

Chainlink has drawn attention since the late-September launch of CCIP 2.0, the latest version of its Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol, which positions it as a talking point for institutional tokenized finance. Price spiked on the news and was rejected exactly where the chart said it should be.

The rejection came at a trend line built from multiple low pivots. Repeated tests weakened that support until it broke, and the recent spike was simply a retest of the breakdown from below. Good news does not change that dynamic. Until it is reclaimed, $14.58 remains the line in the sand. Above it, a long-term trend line originating in May 2021, the same line that capped the 2025 rally, sits near $18.28.

On the downside, Chainlink's inclining trend line near $10.65 aligns the May 2026 high pivot with the September 2026 low pivot. A clean pullback into that level would offer a favorable risk-reward area for a bounce back toward resistance in the $14.60–$14.80 zone.

Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana and Chainlink: Key Support and Resistance Levels

Crypto Market Outlook: What BTC, ETH, SOL and LINK Need to Confirm

Start with how Bitcoin behaves at horizontal support. Separation from that floor and a move into the upper part of the range would set up a test of the neckline. A sustained reclaim of the weekly neckline, projected near $89,832 by October 26, would strengthen the bullish case and challenge the existing bearish structure. Because the neckline is rising, the level to clear moves higher each week. A loss of support would invalidate the near-term bullish view and open the door to $75,000.

For the altcoins, the tell is the same: separation versus stalling. Ethereum needs to lift off its trend line, Solana needs to extend away from its breakout, and Chainlink needs to clear $14.58 before its news-driven narrative carries any technical weight.

Across all four charts, long-term trend lines and pivot levels are defining both the targets and the rejection points. That is what allows a trader to buy weakness into support and sell strength into resistance with a plan rather than a reaction. None of these outcomes is guaranteed, but the levels are clearly mapped, and the discipline to act at them matters more than conviction about the story.

Watch on YouTube

Hot PPI Inflation, Falling Treasury Yields and AI Stock Weakness: Gareth Soloway's October 15 Game Plan

Hotter inflation, falling Treasury yields, and growing pressure on artificial intelligence stocks are creating an unusual combination for traders. Producer prices are signaling persistent inflation, yet bond yields are moving lower as investors reassess economic growth and credit risk. Meanwhile, weakness in AI-related stocks is weighing heavily on the Nasdaq even as the broader S&P 500 shows relative resilience.

In his October 15 My Trading Game Plan, Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, focused on how these developments connect. His analysis centered on the possibility that markets are beginning to price in slower growth alongside stubborn inflation, with the AI trade emerging as a potential source of additional selling pressure. The technical levels across Treasury yields, major indices, commodities, and Bitcoin provide a roadmap for assessing whether that pressure continues.

Hot PPI Inflation and Falling Treasury Yields Signal a Shift in Market Expectations

The latest Producer Price Index (PPI) report added to concerns that inflation remains difficult to contain. According to the figures discussed in the supplied market recap, headline PPI increased 6.3% year over year, approximately one percentage point above expectations, while the monthly increase reached 1.3%. Core PPI, which excludes food and energy, was reported at 5% annually against expectations of 4.4%. The monthly core reading also exceeded forecasts.

Core inflation deserves particular attention because it suggests price pressures extend beyond volatile energy and food costs. Businesses facing persistent increases in production costs may attempt to pass those expenses to customers, absorb them through lower margins, or reduce spending elsewhere. Each outcome has implications for corporate profitability and economic growth. The reported figures require confirmation against the official release before publication.

The Treasury market is providing an important counterpoint. Despite the inflation concerns, the 10-year Treasury yield has been moving lower following topping-tail formations on the daily and weekly charts. Gareth identified the 5% area as an important technical reference, with a potential move toward 4.7% if that level breaks convincingly.

That decline in yields raises questions about what investors are pricing into the economy. Persistent inflation would ordinarily increase pressure on yields, particularly if traders expect tighter monetary policy. However, growing concerns about economic weakness can increase demand for Treasury securities, pushing bond prices higher and yields lower. The two forces can operate simultaneously, creating the divergence Gareth highlighted.

A confirmed breakdown below 5% would strengthen the technical case for lower yields, although it would not establish that a recession or financial crisis is inevitable. The accompanying behavior of equities, credit markets, and economic data will help determine whether the move reflects changing monetary-policy expectations, defensive positioning, or a combination of both.

AI Stock Selloff Raises Questions About CoreWeave Credit Risk

The AI sector remains central to Gareth's broader market analysis. Heavy investment in data centers, computing infrastructure, and semiconductor capacity has supported expectations for sustained growth. As financing costs and questions about investment returns receive greater attention, however, the market is becoming more selective about which companies can justify their valuations.

CoreWeave provides a useful example of this shift. Gareth discussed rising costs associated with credit default swaps, or CDS, instruments that can provide protection against a borrower's default. The supplied recap referenced annual protection costs of approximately 10% for one maturity and 15% for protection extending to 2032. Those figures require independent verification, but the underlying relationship is important: higher CDS spreads generally indicate that investors are demanding greater compensation for perceived credit risk.

A higher cost of credit protection does not establish that a company will default. It does, however, suggest increased concern about debt repayment, financing conditions, or the outlook for the business. For capital-intensive AI infrastructure companies, that concern deserves attention because their growth strategies often depend on substantial upfront investment and expectations of future demand.

CoreWeave shares reportedly declined 15.5% in the preceding session. Gareth identified approximately \$59.50 as a potential technical support area where buyers could attempt to stabilize the decline. A reaction at that level could produce a short-term bounce, while sustained trading below it would suggest that selling pressure remains in control.

The broader concern is whether weakness in AI infrastructure financing begins to affect valuations throughout the sector. A company can maintain a compelling long-term business outlook while its stock experiences significant multiple compression. If investors become less willing to pay premium valuations for future earnings, even businesses delivering strong operating results may face selling pressure.

Nasdaq Weakness and S&P 500 Resilience Reveal a Market Divergence

The difference between the Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500 has become an important feature of the current market. In the session discussed by Gareth, the Nasdaq 100 declined approximately 2%, compared with a loss of roughly 1.1% for the S&P 500. The divergence continued into the following morning, with Nasdaq futures indicating greater weakness than S&P 500 futures.

Concentration helps explain part of this performance gap. The Nasdaq 100 has substantial exposure to large technology and growth companies, many of which are closely connected to the AI investment cycle. When investors reduce exposure to that theme, the selling can have an outsized impact on the index.

The S&P 500 also carries meaningful technology exposure, but its broader sector composition creates additional sources of support. Capital moving toward defensive companies, value-oriented businesses, and other sectors can partially offset weakness in technology. This rotation helps explain how the S&P 500 can remain relatively close to record highs while portions of the growth market experience much deeper declines.

Gareth's technical framework leaves open a potential advance toward 8,000 on the S&P 500, provided the index continues to maintain its underlying structure. A stabilization or short-term recovery in technology shares could provide additional support. However, continued deterioration in market breadth or a loss of important S&P support levels would weaken that bullish scenario.

Walmart illustrates the importance of evaluating individual charts within the rotation. Although defensive retailers can attract capital during periods of uncertainty, strong relative performance can leave a stock extended. Gareth highlighted the \$120 area as a potential resistance zone where traders could assess whether the recent advance is losing momentum. A rejection would support a short-term bearish setup, while sustained strength above resistance would challenge that interpretation.

Semiconductor Stocks Face Pressure as AI Valuations Reset

Semiconductor stocks are another area where Gareth's technical approach emphasizes patience. The sector has benefited from expectations for continued AI spending, but those expectations also create vulnerability when prices become extended or investors begin questioning the pace of future growth.

Micron was highlighted as an example of a chart that showed signs of exhaustion following an earnings-related advance. Gareth identified a topping structure followed by a bearish consolidation pattern and subsequent selling pressure. That sequence suggests buyers have struggled to regain control following the initial reversal.

The supplied recap lists Micron near \$8.72, with a potential gap-fill support zone around \$7.30 to \$7.40 and a longer-term retracement reference near \$4.60. These figures appear inconsistent with the stock's expected price scale and must be checked against the original chart before publication. They should not be treated as verified trading levels in their current form.

The underlying technical lesson remains useful. Following a sharp decline, a stock can produce several countertrend rallies before reaching a more meaningful support area. Traders who identify support in advance can evaluate price behavior when the stock approaches that zone, rather than responding emotionally to every sharp move.

Nebius Group (NBIS) was also discussed as part of the broader AI-related weakness. The draft references a gap-fill target of \$1.48, another level that requires chart verification. For both stocks, the relevant questions are whether selling momentum is slowing, whether price is approaching established support, and whether buyers are demonstrating enough strength to justify a change in the near-term outlook.

Copper, Silver and Oil Charts Reflect Growing Economic Concerns

Commodity markets are offering additional information about expectations for global growth. Copper, silver, and crude oil each respond to different supply-and-demand dynamics, but their charts can help traders assess how economic concerns are influencing risk appetite.

Copper is particularly relevant because of its widespread industrial use, including construction, manufacturing, electrical infrastructure, and data centers. Gareth identified a developing breakdown from a rising wedge structure, with a daily close below the supporting trendline serving as potential confirmation. If the breakdown holds, the technical framework outlined in the draft points toward \$6.30 as a possible downside reference.

The economic implications extend beyond the chart. Copper has benefited from expectations for infrastructure investment and electrification, including demand associated with AI data centers. If spending projections weaken or economic growth slows, investors may reassess those demand assumptions. A confirmed technical breakdown would add evidence that the market is adjusting its outlook.

Silver has already experienced a more pronounced decline in the supplied analysis, falling more than 6% toward \$55 per ounce. Gareth's chart framework identifies the breakdown of a wedge pattern, with approximately \$55.50 serving as a potential resistance area during a rebound. A sustained recovery above the broken structure would weaken the bearish interpretation, while rejection could leave the \$50 to \$48 region in focus as a potential longer-term support zone.

Crude oil presents a different combination of forces. Geopolitical developments can support prices through concerns about supply disruptions, while weaker economic activity can reduce demand expectations. Gareth identified a potential resistance area around \$100 to \$101, corresponding with a gap-fill zone. The draft also references a longer-term bearish scenario toward \$55 per barrel, although the timing attached to that forecast is outdated and should be removed.

Across these commodities, the common theme is the need for confirmation. A breakdown can establish a bearish technical bias, but price behavior around broken support, resistance, and subsequent retracement levels will determine whether the move continues or begins to reverse.

Gold Technical Analysis: A Failed Breakdown Could Support a Recovery

Gold offers a contrasting technical picture. While industrial commodities are showing signs of pressure, gold continues to attract attention as investors assess economic uncertainty, monetary policy, and potential demand for defensive assets.

Gareth highlighted a recent move below an important support line that failed to develop into a sustained breakdown. Price subsequently recovered above the level, creating the possibility of a failed-breakdown setup. These formations can be significant because sellers who entered on the initial break may need to cover positions if the market continues moving higher.

The key condition is whether gold can maintain the reclaimed support area. Continued strength would improve the technical case for a recovery toward the \$3,500 reference identified in the draft. A renewed decline below support would weaken that scenario and suggest the earlier recovery lacked sufficient buying conviction.

Gold's relative performance against equities and industrial commodities will also provide useful context. Strength during periods of weakening risk appetite could indicate demand for defensive exposure, although gold remains sensitive to changes in real yields, the dollar, and liquidity conditions.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: \$81,000 Resistance and the \$75,500 Support Target

Bitcoin is facing an important technical test following a failed bullish pattern and subsequent selling pressure. The supplied recap places Bitcoin near \$80,390, below the previously identified \$81,000 support area. That breakdown has shifted the immediate chart structure toward the bearish side.

Gareth's analysis describes an unsuccessful bullish flag formation followed by a developing bear flag. The failed upside move is relevant because it suggests buyers were unable to sustain momentum despite an initially constructive pattern. The subsequent breakdown increases the importance of the \$81,000 level, which may now act as resistance.

A sustained recovery above \$81,000 would be an early indication that buyers are regaining control. Continued rejection below that level would leave \$75,500 as the next significant downside reference from Gareth's framework. That area could attract short-term buying interest, although the reaction would need to be evaluated as price approaches support.

For a broader retracement, Gareth identified approximately \$67,000 as a potential longer-term accumulation area. Reaching that level is a scenario rather than a certainty, and any eventual setup would depend on market structure, momentum, and confirmation at the time.

Bitcoin's behavior relative to technology stocks is also worth examining. During periods of credit stress and declining risk appetite, Bitcoin can trade alongside other speculative assets. Its current weakness suggests that broader market conditions are influencing price action, reinforcing the importance of using technical levels rather than relying solely on long-term narratives.

Gareth Soloway's Key Market Levels for October 15

The technical framework from today's discussion provides several reference points for evaluating the next market moves. These levels represent areas of potential support, resistance, or scenario targets from the supplied recap, not guaranteed outcomes.

| Market | Key level or zone | Technical significance | | ----- | ----- | ----- | | 10-Year Treasury Yield | 5%, then 4.7% | Potential support breakdown and lower-yield scenario | | S&P 500 | 8,000 | Conditional upside target if broader structure holds | | CoreWeave (CRWV) | \$59.50 | Potential short-term support | | Walmart (WMT) | \$120 | Potential resistance after defensive-sector strength | | Copper | \$6.30 | Downside reference following a confirmed wedge breakdown | | Silver | \$55.50, then $50–$48 | Near-term resistance and lower support zone | | Crude Oil | $100–$101 | Potential gap-fill resistance | | Gold | \$3,500 | Conditional upside reference following a failed breakdown | | Bitcoin (BTC) | \$81,000, \$75,500, \$67,000 | Reclaim level, downside support, and longer-term support scenario |

Editorial verification required: These levels have been preserved from the supplied draft. The original October 15 charts and market data must be checked before publication. Micron and NBIS levels have been excluded from the table pending verification.

Bottom Line: Inflation, Credit Risk and Market Breadth Define the Trading Plan

The October 15 market picture presents a difficult combination for equities. Inflation remains a concern, Treasury yields are weakening, and AI-related stocks are facing pressure as investors reassess valuations and financing risks. At the same time, the S&P 500 continues to demonstrate relative strength compared with the Nasdaq, suggesting that sector rotation is helping support the broader market.

Gareth's framework places particular importance on whether these divergences persist. A breakdown in the 10-year Treasury yield below 5%, further weakness in AI-related credit markets, and continued Nasdaq underperformance would strengthen the case that investors are becoming more defensive. Conversely, stabilization in technology shares and continued strength across other S&P 500 sectors could keep the broader index's bullish scenario alive.

The technical levels across Bitcoin, gold, copper, silver, and individual equities offer additional confirmation points. Each provides a way to evaluate whether selling pressure is accelerating, losing momentum, or approaching an area where buyers may become more active.

The trading discipline is straightforward: establish the levels in advance, wait for the market to confirm the setup, and recognize when price action invalidates the original thesis. With inflation and growth expectations pulling markets in different directions, patience and risk management remain central to navigating the current environment.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or asset. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the potential loss of principal. Technical levels and market scenarios are not guarantees of future performance. Conduct your own research and consider your financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

Gold has spent the past several weeks trading inside a wedge, and the structure inside that wedge is now hard to ignore. The metal has completed the right shoulder of a clean head and shoulders pattern, and on the larger timeframe a second, bigger head and shoulders is taking shape beneath it. Silver has already worked through most of its own version of the same setup.

Multiple head and shoulders patterns are developing across gold and silver, strengthening the bearish technical case. But gold has yet to confirm its breakdown, and silver is already approaching support. The patterns favor additional downside, though the next moves will depend on how prices react at those levels.

The core point is simple: this is not a call to abandon gold or silver. It is a case for patience. Based on the current chart structure, the more attractive potential entries sit meaningfully below today's prices.

Gold Head and Shoulders Pattern Targets $3,400

On the shorter timeframe, gold has formed a well-defined left shoulder, head, and right shoulder, with the right shoulder completing in today's session. The neckline is forming now, and that line is the trigger. Until price closes below it, the pattern is a warning rather than a confirmed breakdown.

A head and shoulders pattern does not have to reach its measured move. Many stall at support or fail outright. But the measured move here is worth knowing: roughly a 16.5% decline, which projects to about $3,400. That target lines up with the consolidation range gold built from April through July of 2025. When a measured-move target lands on a prior area of heavy trading, it carries more weight than a number drawn in empty space. Lawton identifies that $3,400 area as his preferred potential buying zone.

Zooming out adds another layer. The higher timeframe shows a significantly larger head and shoulders still developing, with a target that sits even lower. Its neckline has not broken, so it remains a potential pattern, not an active one. Still, stacked reversal structures across timeframes favor a move lower.

Gold Price Support: Why $4,000 Matters

Before any of those deeper targets come into play, gold has to deal with $4,000. That level is doing two jobs at once: it is the lower trend line of the wedge, and it is a major psychological level that has been defended multiple times.

If gold breaks the neckline and slides into that area, a reaction is likely. On the shorter timeframe, $4,000 is the zone to watch for a bounce. A bounce there would not cancel the larger bearish structure. It would simply be support doing what support does.

Silver Head and Shoulders Pattern Nears $55.67 Target

Silver offers a useful preview of how this kind of setup plays out. Its head and shoulders pattern projected a measured move to about $55.67, and price has now come very close to completing it. The lows of that move also line up with prior price action, which reinforces the level.

Below that, the next pivot is the bottoming tail from July 17, near $54.76. Silver has not tested it yet. Previous upper pivots in this area should offer additional layers of support.

The key condition is what happens if those two pivots fail. A clean break below them opens the way toward the $50 range. Lawton identifies the $50 area as both his downside objective and a potential buying zone, given its psychological significance and history as support.

Oil and Natural Gas Show Bullish Chart Patterns

Not every commodity chart looks the same. U.S. oil continues to respect a parallel channel with notable precision and is pressing against the top of it. Weekend escalation, including Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia, adds a geopolitical tailwind, while the president's statement that there would be no further strikes on Iran until after the election leaves the situation unsettled.

Structurally, oil completed an inverse head and shoulders with a measured move toward roughly $125, which would mean new highs. After an initial push and retrace, the question is whether it can extend. Resistance sits at $100, with a gap near $100.93, followed by pivots around $106–$107, $117, and $119–$120.

Natural gas is showing another variation of the bullish setup. An inverse head and shoulders pattern broke to the upside, retraced, and has since resumed pushing higher. That latest advance stalled directly at a previous pivot, where an extended period of sideways consolidation reinforces the resistance. The next question is whether natural gas can clear that ceiling or whether sellers defend it again.

The divergence matters. Metals are showing topping structures while energy is showing bullish continuation setups. Treating commodities as one trade misses that.

Gold, Silver, and Oil: Key Support and Resistance Levels

Gold and Silver Price Outlook

Gold's neckline is the immediate decision point. A confirmed breakdown would put $4,000 support in focus, with Lawton's deeper $3,400 target remaining a possibility if that support eventually fails. Silver is already much closer to completing its measured move, making the reaction around $55.67 and $54.76 particularly important before considering a move toward $50.

Oil and natural gas offer a different picture, with bullish inverse head and shoulders structures facing overhead resistance. The broader lesson is that commodities are not moving in lockstep. Gold and silver favor patience at lower support levels, while energy traders are watching whether recent strength can clear established resistance.

Watch on YouTube

AI Stocks Face a Financing Test as S&P 500 and Nasdaq Support Weakens

Trading the Close Market Review | October 14, 2026 | Drew Dosek

The hotter-than-expected Consumer Price Index (CPI) report gave sellers another reason to pressure equities Wednesday, but the more important development was unfolding beneath the headline. Higher borrowing costs are becoming a serious consideration for companies financing the artificial intelligence infrastructure buildout, and investors are beginning to reassess how much growth they are willing to pay for.

During Wednesday's Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek focused on the connection between inflation, corporate financing costs, and weakening technical support across the market. The S&P 500 declined 1.08%, while the Nasdaq Composite fell 1.88%. Semiconductor stocks remained under pressure, and several AI infrastructure names struggled to attract buyers even as they approached established support.

The question heading into Thursday's Producer Price Index (PPI) report is whether these support levels can produce meaningful buying interest or whether any rebound becomes another opportunity for sellers to reduce exposure. That distinction matters more than the size of Wednesday's decline.

CoreWeave (CRWV) and AI Infrastructure Stocks Face Rising Financing Costs

One of Drew's most important observations came from the corporate debt market rather than an equity chart. Companies investing heavily in AI infrastructure require substantial capital, and the cost of obtaining that capital can materially change the economics of their expansion plans.

Drew connected the pressure directly to the macroeconomic environment: "Higher inflation is combining with higher yields, is combining with higher CAPEX spending. That's dampening investor buying enthusiasm right now."

CoreWeave (CRWV) illustrated that concern. According to the figures discussed during the show, yields on debt associated with 2031 and 2032 maturities moved from approximately 9.75% and 9.625% to 14.9% and 14.8%, respectively. Such a move indicates a substantial repricing of the outstanding bonds and the risk investors associate with them. It does not mean all of CoreWeave's existing debt immediately becomes more expensive, but it raises questions about the terms the company could face when seeking additional financing.

For capital-intensive businesses, that is an important distinction. Revenue growth can remain strong while financing costs reduce the potential returns from new projects. Investors must evaluate not only how quickly AI infrastructure demand is expanding, but also how efficiently companies can finance that expansion.

CRWV declined 15.46% during the session and moved toward an inclining support trendline extending back to April 2025. Its Relative Strength Index (RSI) reached 29.18, placing the stock in technically oversold territory. However, an oversold reading alone does not establish a bottom, particularly when the underlying business narrative is being reassessed.

Drew identified \$79.13 as an overhead resistance area to monitor on a rebound. If the current support trendline fails, the gap fill near \$60.82 and additional support around \$59.72 become relevant downside reference points. A bounce is possible after such a sharp decline, but the strength of that bounce and the ability to reclaim resistance will provide better information than the RSI reading alone.

Nebius (NBIS) Tests Critical Support as AI Capital Spending Comes Under Scrutiny

Nebius (NBIS) presented a related technical setup. The stock traded as low as \$183.11, filled a gap near \$184.11, and finished around \$186. Despite analyst price targets extending into the upper \$270s and \$280s, the immediate chart structure remains the more useful guide for traders managing near-term risk.

The key level is the inclining trendline near \$182.78. As long as that area holds, buyers have an opportunity to stabilize the stock following its decline. A sustained break below it would weaken the setup and bring the lower boundary of the parallel channel, near \$136, into focus as a potential longer-term support area.

Drew expressed interest in the lower channel boundary as a possible buying location, but that interest is based on price reaching a defined technical area, not an assumption that the stock must reverse there. The condition of the broader market and the behavior of price upon arrival would still matter.

Together, CoreWeave and Nebius illustrate the same market concern. Investors are becoming more selective about AI infrastructure exposure, and previously attractive growth expectations may not be enough to support prices when financing costs and technical momentum move in the opposite direction.

S&P 500 and Nasdaq Technical Analysis: Key Levels After the CPI Selloff

The pressure in individual AI names was reflected in the broader indices. Overnight weakness in Asian semiconductor shares, including a decline of more than 10% in SK Hynix cited during the show, added to the negative tone before U.S. markets opened.

The S&P 500 finished down 1.08%, breaking below the neckline of an inverse head and shoulders pattern Drew had been monitoring. That failure is important because traders who entered in anticipation of a bullish reversal may now be reconsidering their positions.

When a bullish pattern loses its confirmation level, the market often needs to establish a new area of demand before buyers can regain control. The immediate downside references discussed were 765.71 and the nearby gap fill at 763.97. These levels should be checked against the specific chart instrument used during the broadcast before publication.

The Nasdaq Composite declined 1.88% and closed beneath an inclining trendline connecting significant lows from March, July, and September. That break weakened its near-term structure, although the index remained above a longer-term declining trendline, leaving the broader breakout framework intact for now.

Drew identified 26,900 as the level bulls need to reclaim to begin repairing the damage. Below 26,614, the chart would become more vulnerable to additional selling. Until the Nasdaq can recover lost support, rallies need to be evaluated against overhead resistance rather than automatically interpreted as renewed strength.

The Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) showed a somewhat different picture. Its inverse head and shoulders structure had not yet failed, making the \$722.93 neckline an important level to monitor during the next session. Holding that area would preserve the bullish pattern, while a decisive break would further weaken the near-term outlook for large-cap technology stocks.

Semiconductor ETF (SMH) Nears Fibonacci Support After Seven-Day Decline

The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) offered one of the clearest lessons of the session: an initial reaction at support is not the same as a confirmed reversal.

On Tuesday, SMH reached its 61.8% Fibonacci retracement and bounced. That response initially suggested buyers were willing to defend the area. Wednesday's gap lower and subsequent selling changed the interpretation, showing that the earlier reaction had not established durable demand.

The ETF is now approaching a stronger technical area where the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement near \$559.55 aligns with the midpoint of a large parallel channel extending back to April 2025.

After seven declining sessions from its recent high, SMH could produce a countertrend rebound as selling becomes extended. Drew identified \$596.38 as a potential resistance area if that rebound develops. However, a rally into resistance would not by itself reverse the recent technical damage.

The more useful evidence will come from how price responds at support, whether buyers can sustain a rebound, and whether the ETF can reclaim levels that previously failed.

Dell provided another example of why traders should not assume multiple technical levels guarantee a strong reaction. Despite reaching an area where channel support, an inclining trendline, and a gap fill converged, the stock managed only a modest bounce of approximately 1%.

That muted response suggests buyers have not yet shown enough conviction to establish a meaningful reversal. If the support area fails, Drew identified \$488.21 as a lower reference point, while \$539 remains an overhead resistance level.

The lesson across SMH and Dell is consistent: the number of support levels matters less than the buying response they produce. Strong technical confluence creates a location worth watching, but price action determines whether the setup is working.

Gold and Silver Diverge as Treasury Yields React to Inflation

Outside equities, precious metals offered another perspective on the market's changing risk environment. Gold declined but continued to hold support near \$4,104.14, while silver broke beneath the midpoint of its parallel channel.

The 10-year Treasury yield initially moved higher following the CPI release before reversing and finishing below the previous session's level. Drew also highlighted weekly and daily technical formations that could limit additional upside in yields. That reversal is worth monitoring because sustained changes in Treasury yields can influence valuations, borrowing conditions, and demand for precious metals.

Gold's ability to hold support despite the inflation-driven volatility suggests buyers are still defending an important technical area. A confirmed break below \$4,104.14 would shift attention toward \$3,900 and \$3,800, with a more substantial historical consolidation area around \$3,500.

Silver's chart is weaker. Its break below the channel midpoint leaves a head and shoulders measured-move objective near \$53.26. Below that, the intersection of a declining trendline and a historical pivot from April 2011 creates another potential support area around \$49.83. The lower channel boundary near \$35 remains a longer-term technical reference rather than an immediate price forecast.

Drew emphasized that repeatedly testing the same support area can weaken its effectiveness. Each successful defense matters, but buyers must eventually demonstrate enough strength to move price away from the level. Otherwise, the risk of a breakdown increases.

Crude Oil and Natural Gas: Technical Targets Require Patience

Energy markets continue to reflect a combination of geopolitical uncertainty and established technical patterns. Crude oil moved higher early Wednesday before finishing relatively flat, producing a narrow-bodied candle following seven consecutive advancing sessions.

Drew continues to monitor a large head and shoulders bottoming formation with a measured-move objective near \$116. That target remains conditional on the pattern maintaining its bullish structure. Before a potential advance toward that objective, oil faces resistance near \$105.42, where a declining trendline intersects the midpoint of its parallel channel.

Geopolitical developments around the Strait of Hormuz add uncertainty to the supply outlook, but those risks do not guarantee that a technical target will be reached. Price must still confirm the setup.

Natural gas provided a more straightforward lesson in execution. After reaching the overbought 70 level on its daily RSI twice, the commodity began pulling back from its recent advance.

Rather than pursuing price after an extended move, Drew identified potential support around \$3.32 and a lower area between \$3.22 and \$3.21. These are locations for evaluating a possible setup, not automatic entry signals. Waiting for price to reach a planned level allows traders to assess risk and potential reward before making a decision.

Missing a trade because it never reaches a preferred entry is part of disciplined trading. Chasing an extended move often means accepting less favorable risk relative to the remaining upside.

AbbVie (ABBV): How Traders Identify Resistance at All-Time Highs

One of Wednesday's stronger individual stocks was AbbVie (ABBV), which advanced 3.32% and reached new all-time highs. Its strength created an opportunity for Drew to demonstrate how traders can identify potential resistance when there are no previous price highs overhead.

The first technique involves projecting a parallel channel using established pivot lows and a corresponding upper boundary. By extending that structure, traders can identify areas where price may encounter resistance even as the stock moves into uncharted territory.

AbbVie reached the midpoint of Drew's projected channel during Wednesday's advance. The second technique involved extending a trendline through historical pivot points, including one dating back to March 10, 2025.

Together, those methods identified a potential resistance zone between \$292.74 and \$295. The confluence provides a logical area to evaluate profit-taking or a possible pause in momentum, although strong trends can continue through projected resistance.

The broader lesson applies beyond AbbVie. When a stock enters price discovery, traders do not have to abandon technical analysis. Projected channels and extended trendlines can provide useful reference points, provided they are treated as areas of interest rather than guaranteed turning points.

Thursday's PPI Report: What Traders Should Watch Next

Thursday's PPI release at 8:30 a.m. ET is the next scheduled inflation catalyst. After Wednesday's selling, the market's response may be more informative than the report's headline number alone.

A softer reading could ease some of the immediate pressure on Treasury yields and growth-sensitive equities. A stronger reading could reinforce concerns about borrowing costs, particularly for companies financing substantial capital expenditures. Neither outcome guarantees a specific market direction, making the response at established technical levels especially important.

For equities, the first question is whether the Nasdaq can reclaim 26,900 and whether QQQ can defend its \$722.93 neckline. In semiconductors, SMH's response near \$559.55 will help indicate whether the recent decline is approaching a tradable stabilization point or whether sellers remain in control.

CoreWeave and Nebius also deserve attention because their charts are testing whether buyers are willing to support capital-intensive AI businesses at current valuations. In precious metals, gold's \$4,104.14 support and silver's breakdown toward \$53.26 provide additional insight into how investors are responding to the macroeconomic backdrop.

Bitcoin remains another risk-sensitive market to monitor. Drew's chart identified support near \$80,524 and resistance around \$89,643, with a developing bear flag suggesting that a sustained break of support could invite additional selling. As with the equity setups, confirmation matters more than the pattern's appearance alone.

Trading the Close: The Bottom Line on AI Stocks and Market Support

Wednesday's decline was about more than one inflation report. The combination of elevated borrowing costs, substantial AI capital spending, and weakening technical structure is testing investors' willingness to continue supporting some of the market's most growth-sensitive companies.

Drew's analysis also reinforced an important trading principle: reaching support is only the beginning of the decision-making process. Whether the market produces a convincing reaction, reclaims resistance, or continues making lower lows determines how the technical outlook develops.

Heading into Thursday, the priority is not predicting the exact bottom of the selloff. It is identifying which support levels hold, which breakdowns become confirmed, and whether buyers demonstrate enough conviction to change the current market structure.

For traders, the advantage comes from having those levels and scenarios established before the next catalyst arrives.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the potential loss of principal. Technical patterns, support levels, resistance levels, and price targets are not guarantees of future performance. Conduct your own research and consider your individual financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

AI infrastructure stocks are under heavy pressure today. CoreWeave, Nebius (NBIS), IREN, and Dell are among the session's biggest losers, and several are pushing to new lows. CoreWeave's heavy borrowing to fund its AI expansion has put credit concerns in focus, and that is adding pressure to a group that was already weak.

On the other side of the tape, Walmart, Lockheed Martin, and Eli Lilly are moving higher as traders favor more defensive names. That divergence is the story of the session, and it carries a clear trading lesson.

Neither side of this move should be chased. The weakest names are approaching defined support, and the strongest are approaching defined resistance. The opportunity is in letting price reach those levels rather than reacting to the day's percentage moves.

CoreWeave (CRWV) Stock: Oversold RSI and Key Support Levels

CoreWeave shows the pressure most clearly. It is down nearly 7%, volume is on pace for roughly 77 million shares with two hours left in the session, and the relative strength index (RSI) has just slipped below 30.

An RSI reading under 30 often gets treated as an automatic buy. It isn't. When momentum breaks into oversold territory on heavy volume, it can stay there for weeks rather than snapping back right away. Oversold describes the move. It does not mark the bottom.

Structure matters more than the indicator. CoreWeave is currently sitting on the pivot top from April 2, 2025, a level that produced a clean bounce before and was quickly reclaimed the last time it broke. Buyers are defending it today. If it gives way, the next support is a horizontal pivot near $57.65 with several touches, followed by a descending trendline that could bring price toward $55 to $53, depending on when the test comes.

NBIS, IREN and Dell Stock: Key Support Levels to Watch

The same approach applies across the group: find where buyers have stepped in before, and let price come to those levels.

Nebius (NBIS) is down about 11% and has just filled a gap. An aggressive long level sits near $179.40, where prior pivots line up with a rising trendline from the $73.52 low that hasn't been tested since late July. Price has broken through both before, so the preferred zone is lower. Between $164 and $160, the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement near $160 lines up with prior price action, which makes that the cheaper area for a long.

IREN is down about 12% and trading roughly 60 cents above the $30 round number, which also lines up with a prior candle high that price pierced and then recovered the next day. If $30 fails, a trendline from June 14, 2024 comes in around $29.25 to $29.40. Together they form a tight zone, about 5% wide, where risk on a long can be clearly defined.

Dell is testing an ascending support trendline from the May 19, 2026 low. An earlier break below that line was followed by a recovery, which reinforces its importance. Today's close will show whether buyers defend it. The $514 pivot is the other key reference: a sustained move below it leaves that level as major resistance on any rebound. Below that, the $469.47 shelf, an area of prior consolidation, is where a bounce becomes more likely, and a large unfilled gap beneath it offers a further level for a day or swing long.

Walmart (WMT), Lockheed Martin (LMT) and Eli Lilly (LLY) Stock Resistance Levels

The defensive names are working, but each one is moving toward levels where a fade becomes reasonable.

Walmart is up about 2.8% after breaking above trendlines from May 19, 2025 and bouncing off them as support. Near-term support has formed around $111 to $112, and the trend is constructive. Overhead, pivots at $116 to $116.90 and the $117.45 level have rejected price several times. The higher-conviction setup is the unfilled gap near $119, where a trendline converges. A sharp move into that zone would offer a multi-factor short.

Lockheed Martin is up about 3% after breaking a steep downtrend line that had rejected price repeatedly, retesting it, and confirming the breakout. The first resistance is $538.81, where the last attempt to reclaim that level left a series of wicks. Above that, an ascending trendline from December 2, 2025, which has flipped between support and resistance, comes in near $565 to $570.

Eli Lilly is up about 4% and heading toward a rising trendline from the April 30, 2026 low, near $1,243 to $1,244. Combined with the pivot top at $1,249.45, that zone sets up a two-factor short for day or swing traders. A clean break through it would open a test of the double top near $1,292.65. On the downside, price should hold above $1,133.95, where buyers have already stepped in.

AI Infrastructure and Defensive Stocks: Support and Resistance Levels

AI Stock Selloff: What Traders Should Watch

The next test is whether CoreWeave and Dell can defend their current support or whether the selling pushes them toward the lower zones on the chart. On the other side, Walmart, Lockheed Martin, and Eli Lilly are approaching resistance that could offer opportunities for traders watching for a fade.

On a day like this, it's tempting to buy the biggest losers or chase the strongest stocks. The disciplined approach is to do neither until price reaches a level worth trading. Oversold can stay oversold, and strength can keep running. The levels are already on the charts. What comes next is seeing how price reacts when it reaches them.

Watch on YouTube

Hot CPI Sends Yields Higher, But Key S&P 500 Support Holds as Gold and Bitcoin Face Pressure

A hotter-than-expected Consumer Price Index (CPI) report put immediate pressure on stocks, gold, silver, and Bitcoin Wednesday morning, while Treasury yields and the U.S. dollar moved higher. But the most important takeaway from today's My Trading Game Plan Revealed was not simply that inflation came in hot. It was that the market's reaction has yet to invalidate the broader technical structure in the S&P 500, even as several other assets show signs of increasing downside risk.

Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, focused on the levels that separate a temporary reaction to economic data from a more meaningful change in trend. With Treasury yields approaching critical resistance, the S&P 500 holding its broader bullish structure, and Bitcoin repeatedly testing support, the next confirmed moves could provide a clearer picture of where risk assets are headed.

Hotter Core CPI Puts Treasury Yields Back in Focus

The October 14 inflation report delivered a reminder that price pressures remain persistent. Headline CPI increased 3.7% year over year, above the 3.6% consensus estimate, while the monthly reading of 0.6% matched expectations. The more important development came from core CPI, which excludes food and energy. Both the annual and monthly readings exceeded forecasts by 0.1 percentage point, suggesting that inflation pressures extend beyond volatile energy and food prices.

That matters because the Federal Reserve cannot base its interest rate decisions solely on the direction of oil or gasoline prices. Even with crude oil trading around \$95 to \$96 per barrel, elevated core inflation complicates the case for easier monetary policy. The market responded by pushing the 10-year Treasury yield as high as 5.33%, increasing the relative appeal of bonds while creating another valuation challenge for equities.

Gareth's technical analysis of the 10-year yield centered on the relationship between daily and weekly charts. Although the daily chart recently produced a topping tail, the weekly timeframe carries greater significance for determining whether yields are approaching a sustained reversal. The major level remains the previous high near 5.6%. A weekly close below that resistance would keep the potential bearish reversal structure intact, while a confirmed weekly breakout above 5.6% would weaken that setup and raise the possibility of another move higher in yields.

The important point is that rising yields do not automatically establish a new bearish trend in stocks. They create pressure that must be evaluated alongside price action. If yields continue climbing while equity support begins to fail, the two signals would reinforce each other. Until then, the charts still need to confirm whether the inflation reaction is developing into something more significant.

S&P 500 Pulls Back, But the Bullish Structure Remains

S&P 500 futures were trading near 7,880 before the CPI release, then dropped to approximately 7,822 as sellers responded to the inflation numbers. The move erased the earlier gains and demonstrated how quickly expectations can change around a major economic release. However, Gareth emphasized that the decline did not automatically reverse the broader bullish technical picture.

The S&P 500 has been challenging major overhead resistance, with 8,000 remaining an important upside objective. Gareth identified 7,818 as a key daily closing reference in his analysis. The distinction between trading above a level intraday and confirming a breakout at the close is important, particularly when economic data produces sharp moves in both directions. A sustained move above resistance would strengthen the case for 8,000, while a failure to hold the relevant support structure would require a reassessment of the bullish outlook.

Another important consideration is the difference between the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq. The Nasdaq's substantial exposure to large technology and artificial intelligence companies makes it more sensitive to weakness in those heavily owned names. The S&P 500 has broader sector participation, including industrial, financial, and other cyclical businesses. That diversification does not eliminate downside risk, but it helps explain why the two indexes can behave differently when leadership becomes concentrated.

For traders, the immediate CPI selloff is less important than what follows it. A market that absorbs selling pressure and maintains its technical structure is behaving differently from one that begins breaking established support levels. Gareth's framework remains bullish on the S&P 500, but confirmation through the relevant daily closing levels is still necessary before assuming the next advance toward 8,000 is underway.

Dollar Strength Does Not Mean Inflation Is Disappearing

The U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) moved sharply higher alongside Treasury yields, approaching 103 with additional resistance near 103.35. Higher U.S. yields can support the dollar by making dollar-denominated assets relatively more attractive. However, Gareth highlighted an important distinction between the dollar's performance against other currencies and its purchasing power within the United States.

The DXY measures the dollar against a basket of major foreign currencies. A rising index means the dollar is strengthening relative to those currencies, not necessarily that American consumers are gaining purchasing power. Domestic prices can continue rising even while the dollar outperforms the euro, yen, or pound. The latest CPI readings illustrate that relationship, with inflation remaining elevated despite the dollar's technical strength.

This creates an important connection between the macroeconomic and technical pictures. A stronger dollar can pressure dollar-denominated commodities and create additional challenges for multinational companies with significant overseas revenue. Combined with higher Treasury yields, continued dollar strength could become another headwind for risk assets. The next resistance level at 103.35 is therefore worth watching alongside the 10-year yield rather than treating the dollar's rally as an isolated move.

Earnings Season Reveals Where Buyers Are Losing Conviction

Earnings season is beginning to expose a different kind of market risk: stocks that struggle to advance despite favorable company news. Gareth highlighted ASML as an example. The semiconductor equipment company delivered strong reported results, including revenue and earnings beats, higher guidance, and a substantial order backlog. Yet the stock initially moved higher before giving back those gains and turning negative.

The price reaction matters because strong earnings are not always enough to support a stock that has already priced in substantial future growth. When expectations are elevated, even impressive results can become an opportunity for existing shareholders to take profits. This is the classic sell-the-news setup. It does not prove that institutions are distributing shares, but it does suggest buyers are becoming less willing to pay higher prices despite positive fundamentals.

Bank of America (BAC) offered a separate technical setup following weakness around its earnings-related headlines. The stock moved below \$50, bringing Gareth's near-term support level around \$49.50 into focus. That area represents a potential day-trading reaction zone, where the response from buyers becomes more important than the level alone. For a larger swing-trading opportunity, Gareth identified approximately \$45 as a more attractive area to evaluate, assuming the stock continues lower.

The difference between those levels reflects the importance of matching a setup to its timeframe. A day trader may look for a reaction at nearby support, while a swing trader can afford to wait for a deeper decline that potentially offers a more favorable entry relative to risk. Gareth also noted the less decisive price action in Morgan Stanley and BlackRock, where choppy trading offered little technical advantage. Sometimes the best decision is to wait for a cleaner setup rather than force a trade simply because earnings are generating headlines.

Refiners Look Extended While Defense Stocks Approach Support

One of Gareth's more important observations involved the contrast between stocks that have already experienced substantial rallies and sectors that have pulled back toward longer-term technical support. Refiners such as Phillips 66 (PSX) and Valero have benefited from strong price momentum, but their charts are increasingly extended. Elevated Relative Strength Index (RSI) readings suggest the stocks are overbought, while PSX is approaching significant resistance between \$298 and \$300 within a large ascending channel.

An overbought RSI does not mean a stock must decline immediately. Strong trends can remain overbought for extended periods. The concern is that the potential reward from chasing a mature advance may be less attractive when compared with the downside risk. Gareth discussed the possibility of a substantial correction, potentially approaching 30% under an unfavorable scenario involving weaker oil prices and narrowing refining margins. That is a risk scenario, not a predetermined price target.

The drone and defense sector presents a different technical picture. AeroVironment (AVAV) has pulled back toward a major descending trendline extending from 2022, an area that has previously influenced price action. Gareth also highlighted another drone-related company trading near \$40 after falling from approximately \$67 in August. Both examples illustrate the value of studying stocks that have experienced meaningful corrections rather than focusing exclusively on those making new highs.

The defense industry's longer-term demand outlook may provide a fundamental reason to keep these companies on the radar, particularly given continuing geopolitical tensions. However, a favorable industry outlook does not guarantee that an individual stock has reached a bottom. The technical setup still needs to demonstrate that buyers are defending support. Gareth's approach is to identify where a favorable risk/reward opportunity may develop, then allow price action to determine whether the trade is justified.

Gold and Silver Weaken as Bearish Patterns Develop

Gold's reaction to the inflation report was notable because the metal declined even as inflation exceeded expectations. Although gold is often viewed as a long-term inflation hedge, its short-term price action can be heavily influenced by Treasury yields and the dollar. Higher yields increase the opportunity cost of holding a non-yielding asset, while dollar strength can create additional pressure on precious metals.

Gareth identified a developing bear flag in gold, formed by a sharp decline followed by a relatively weak consolidation. This structure can precede another move lower if sellers regain control. The first significant downside objective sits near \$3,950, with a more extended bearish scenario pointing toward \$3,500. Neither target is automatic. A confirmed breakdown from the consolidation would strengthen the bearish interpretation, while a recovery that invalidates the flag would require a reassessment.

Silver showed even greater weakness, declining approximately 4% during the session and approaching important support around \$55. The immediate question is whether buyers can defend that level or whether the selling pressure continues. A confirmed break below \$55 would shift attention toward lower support, with the original analysis indicating an area around \$45 to \$48 per ounce. As with gold, confirmation matters more than anticipating a breakdown before it occurs.

The weakness in both metals reinforces the broader message from the CPI report. Inflation alone does not determine commodity direction. Traders must also consider the movement in yields, the dollar, market positioning, and the technical structure of each asset. When those factors align against a commodity, the traditional inflation-hedge narrative may offer little protection in the near term.

Natural Gas Tests Its Breakout as Bitcoin Pressures \$81,000

Natural gas remains an example of a market where a breakout has occurred but still needs to prove itself. After closing above its breakout line in the previous session, the commodity pulled back toward trendline support near \$3.17. Holding that area would support the possibility of continued upside toward \$3.50 to \$3.60. A sustained move back below the breakout structure, however, would weaken the bullish setup and raise the possibility of a failed breakout.

Bitcoin is presenting a more concerning structure. The cryptocurrency continues to test major support near \$81,000, but the response from buyers has been relatively weak. Instead of producing a strong rebound after the initial decline, price has been consolidating sideways near support. Gareth views that behavior as a warning because repeated tests can weaken a support area when buyers fail to generate meaningful upside momentum.

The important levels are clearly defined. A confirmed breakdown below \$81,000 would increase the risk of a move toward the next major support near \$75,500. Conversely, a confirmed breakout above \$87,200 would weaken the bearish consolidation pattern and suggest buyers are regaining control. Until one of those outcomes develops, the chart remains vulnerable, with the burden on buyers to demonstrate that the \$81,000 level can hold.

Bitcoin's setup also fits the broader macro picture. Higher Treasury yields and a stronger dollar can create a more difficult environment for speculative assets, particularly when technical momentum is already weakening. That does not guarantee further downside, but it provides context for why the repeated failure to bounce from support deserves attention.

The Bottom Line: Let the Levels Confirm the Next Move

The October 14 CPI report changed the near-term market environment, but it did not deliver the same technical message across every asset. Treasury yields and the dollar strengthened, the S&P 500 retained its broader bullish structure, and gold, silver, and Bitcoin showed more concerning signs of weakness. The divergence is important because it argues against treating every market as though it must respond identically to the same economic release.

Gareth's key levels provide the framework for what comes next. A weekly breakout above 5.6% in the 10-year Treasury yield would increase concern about sustained interest rate pressure. The S&P 500 still needs confirmation around its key daily levels to support a move toward 8,000. Gold faces downside risk toward \$3,950 if its bear flag confirms, while Bitcoin's repeated tests of \$81,000 leave \$75,500 as the next important support if that level fails.

The larger lesson is about separating a compelling narrative from an actionable setup. Hot inflation can explain why markets moved, but it cannot determine where a trader should act. That requires technical levels, confirmation, and an understanding of the risk if the chart moves in the opposite direction. For now, the S&P 500 remains structurally stronger than several other major assets, and that divergence deserves more attention than the initial reaction to CPI.

Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or asset. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the potential loss of principal. Technical levels and price targets are scenarios, not guarantees. Conduct your own research and consider your individual financial circumstances before making investment decisions.

The U.S. dollar has been gaining ground against most major currencies, and the more useful signal is what has happened since. Across several pairs, the dollar has made a strong move higher and then moved sideways instead of reversing. That pattern of trend followed by tight consolidation usually points to continuation.

That is the main thing to take from the current currency picture. The strength is not limited to one pair or one headline. It shows up in the British pound, the Canadian dollar, the Japanese yen and the Australian dollar, and in most of those charts the structure leans toward further upside for the dollar, not exhaustion.

There are two exceptions that are worth understanding: the euro, where the trend is intact but the pattern is less constructive, and the Chinese yuan, where the dollar has stalled at a long-term support level.

USD/GBP Bull Flag Faces Resistance at 0.76–0.77

The USD/GBP chart is the clearest reference point because the earlier setup has already played out. An inverse head and shoulders pattern pointed to a measured move of about 1.4% on a breakout to the upside. The pair broke out and went on to gain roughly 2.2%, well beyond the target.

A 2% move matters in currencies. These markets move in much smaller increments than equities or crypto, so a pattern that more than meets its objective is a real sign of underlying demand for the dollar.

Since then, price has moved sideways in a range that looks like a potential bull flag. The obstacle is overhead. A prior pivot high sits near 0.76, and the zone between 0.76 and 0.77 is where resistance should be expected. A move through 0.76–0.77 would strengthen the continuation case. A rejection would leave that resistance intact, while a break below the consolidation would weaken the bull-flag setup.

USD/CAD Bull Flag Builds Below Key Resistance

USD/CAD has the textbook version of the same structure: a sharp move higher (the flagpole), followed by tight sideways movement (the flag). Consolidation works like a spring being wound. Pressure builds until price breaks out, and the preceding trend usually indicates which way it will go. Here, it points up.

The location of the pause matters. The pair has stopped just below a large congestion zone that runs from late 2024 into early 2025, and it is also moving around pivots from June. That is a lot of prior price activity for buyers to work through. The pattern favors upside, but this is where the move will be tested.

USD/EUR Rising Channel: A Breakdown Could Put 0.87 in Focus

USD/EUR also shows a strong push higher, but the follow-through looks different. Instead of moving sideways in a flag, the pair keeps drifting upward inside a tight, upward-sloping parallel channel. The trend is clearly up, but the structure is less bullish than a true flag because it is grinding rather than building pressure.

The key line is the bottom of that channel. If that rising trendline breaks, the next target is around 0.87, about a 1% decline into an area with significant prior support.

This also matters for the pound. The euro and the pound are closely linked, so a breakdown in USD/EUR would raise a warning for the bullish USD/GBP setup. Right now the two charts disagree: one has a bullish continuation pattern and the other leans more bearish. The other dollar pairs would still need to be judged on their own structures.

USD/JPY and USD/AUD: Inverse Head and Shoulders Setups Await Confirmation

USD/JPY is a reminder that patterns fail too. A well-formed head and shoulders broke to the downside and then quickly reversed back above the right shoulder. The failure was not a surprise given the heavy support in that area from January and February. The more useful takeaway is what has formed since: an inverse head and shoulders that, on a confirmed breakout, points to new highs around 165. The dollar has strengthened against the yen despite earlier intervention by Japan. The open question is whether the recent retest is the entry or just another false start.

USD/AUD shows another inverse head and shoulders, but it has not broken out yet. The pair has tested the neckline without clearing it, so the right shoulder is the area to watch. A confirmed breakout would carry a measured move of about 6%, the largest potential move of any pair here.

USD/CNY Holds Near Long-Term Support as the Yuan Outperforms

USD/CNY is the one chart where the dollar has clearly cooled. Price is now sitting just above a pivot low from January 2023, a level that has held as support so far. If it gives way, the next support is around 6.65.

Lawton views the divergence as potentially reflecting yuan-specific strength rather than broad dollar weakness. Every other chart shows a dollar that is firm to strong, so one pair moving against the trend does not by itself change the broader picture.

Key Forex Support and Resistance Levels

U.S. Dollar Outlook: Breakout Signals and Downside Risks

The bullish dollar case strengthens if the USD/GBP and USD/CAD flags break higher and USD/AUD clears its inverse head-and-shoulders neckline. On the risk side, a break of the lower trendline in the USD/EUR channel would raise a warning for the bullish USD/GBP setup, given how closely the euro and pound trade together.

The current currency picture is not a call for a runaway dollar rally. It shows a trend that has paused in an orderly way instead of reversing, and orderly pauses after strong moves tend to resolve in the direction of the trend more often than not.

The discipline is in waiting for confirmation. Flags need breakouts, inverse head and shoulders patterns need their necklines cleared, and each pair needs to be judged on its own structure. Until those signals arrive, the edge is in the structure, not in anticipating the outcome.

Watch on YouTube

S&P 500 Holds Bullish Structure as Semiconductor Stocks Test Support

Trading the Close Market Review | October 13, 2026

The S&P 500 barely moved Tuesday, but the flat close concealed a more active market beneath the surface. Semiconductor stocks continued to absorb selling pressure, Apple traded near record territory, and Treasury yields remained elevated. Despite those competing forces, the major indexes held their broader technical structures. The S&P 500 finished down 0.01%, while the Nasdaq declined 0.15%. 

In Tuesday’s Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek outlined a market where index resilience and sector weakness were developing simultaneously. The constructive index patterns remained intact, but individual charts required more selective analysis. A bullish market framework did not make every pullback a buying opportunity or every rebound a confirmed reversal.

With the next inflation report approaching, the focus was on whether buyers could continue defending the index breakout areas while weaker sectors attempted to stabilize. The technical levels provided a way to evaluate that response without committing to a prediction about the economic data. 

S&P 500 and Nasdaq Technical Analysis: Bullish Patterns Hold Near the Highs

Drew’s S&P 500 analysis centered on two overlapping formations: an inverse head and shoulders pattern and a bull flag. Price continued to hold above the inverse head and shoulders neckline, preserving the bullish interpretation despite weakness elsewhere in the market.

“This all looks like bullish consolidation right at the top of the charts,” Drew noted. 

Consolidation near the highs can suggest that buyers are absorbing selling pressure without allowing a deeper retracement. However, the pattern’s location also calls for restraint. After an extended advance, a bullish formation still needs confirmation, particularly when an economic release could change the near-term direction.

The neckline remains the key reference. Holding above it keeps the continuation scenario intact. A sustained move below it would weaken that setup and require a reassessment of the upside case. Drew’s broader discussion included a potential test of the S&P 500’s psychological 8,000 level, but that remains a conditional objective rather than an expected destination.

The Nasdaq offered a similar framework. Its recent sideways-to-lower consolidation had not surrendered the breakout above previous all-time highs. Drew identified a rising trend line from the March lows near 26,900 as a support reference, with 28,000 entering the upside discussion if the broader advance continues. The immediate test is whether the breakout area holds, not whether the index reaches the higher target. 

SMH Semiconductor ETF: Fibonacci Support and $594.58 Resistance

The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) illustrated the difference between a reaction from support and a completed reversal. Following six consecutive sessions of selling pressure beginning October 6, SMH gapped lower into the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement of its recent advance. Buyers responded, producing a recovery from the lows.

The significance of that retracement came from its alignment with an earlier resistance area that was being tested as support.

“This is when you know you have really good retrace levels. When you line them up with, say, other pivots on the chart,” Drew explained. 

That overlap gave traders more than an isolated Fibonacci reading. Two technical references were identifying the same area. The buying response showed that the zone attracted interest, but it did not establish that the sector’s correction was over.

An open gap near $573 remained a lower reference, while the bottom of a parallel channel near $594.58 presented overhead resistance. A recovery through that resistance would strengthen the rebound. Rejection there would leave the lower support structure in focus. Neither a continued rally nor a gap fill should be treated as automatic. 

For the broader market, SMH’s next move could help clarify whether semiconductor weakness is stabilizing or remaining a source of pressure. The indexes have held up through the selling so far. A durable semiconductor recovery would provide additional support for that resilience.

Seagate (STX) Stock: $700 Support and an $860 Rebound Scenario

Seagate Technology (STX) offered a related lesson in trader psychology. The stock traded through $700 during a sharp morning decline before reversing and recovering toward $747. The response developed around a widely watched round number rather than at the deeper Fibonacci level Drew had been monitoring.

The price reaction established $700 as a useful reference for this session. It did not prove that round numbers always hold or that the larger correction had ended. Drew identified a possible recovery toward $860, an area he described as “X marks the spot,” while noting that a deeper 61.8% retracement remained untested. 

Those observations create two scenarios. Continued buying could bring the higher resistance area into play. A failed rebound would keep the lower retracement relevant. Traders can respect the initial response without assuming it marks the final low.

Apple (AAPL) Stock: $344.57 Breakout Level and $365–$370 Resistance

Apple presented a stronger chart than several of the semiconductor and memory names discussed during the show. With shares near record territory, Drew focused on the previous all-time high at $344.57 and the upper boundary of the stock’s rising parallel channel.

A daily close above $344.57 would strengthen the continuation case toward the $365 to $370 channel-resistance area. Failure to secure that close would leave the breakout unconfirmed. Drew also identified $333.49 as a lower support reference that could become relevant during a pullback. 

The trading decision is separate from the directional outlook. Apple can remain technically constructive while offering a less attractive entry after an extended move. A trader entering near resistance may have to accept more distance to a logical support level than one evaluating a pullback.

Apple’s relative strength also provided context for the index performance. Weakness was not uniform across technology. That contrast supports a selective approach rather than treating the entire sector as a single trade.

10-Year Treasury Yield Outlook: 5.289% Resistance and 5.021% Support

Treasury yields remained part of Drew’s broader equity-market framework, with different timeframes presenting competing signals. An hourly bearish consolidation was followed by a rebound in yields, while the weekly chart displayed a topping tail.

Drew identified 5.289% as resistance and 5.021% as support. Those levels provide reference points for determining whether the recent upward pressure is continuing or beginning to ease. The weekly topping tail supports monitoring for a reversal, but it does not confirm one by itself. 

For equities, the useful approach is to evaluate the yield chart alongside the index structures. Renewed upward pressure in yields would present a different backdrop from a sustained decline. Neither outcome replaces the need to monitor whether the S&P 500 and Nasdaq continue defending their own support areas.

Gold Price Analysis: $4,100 Support and the $3,886–$3,941 Zone

Gold declined approximately 0.03% while maintaining a bearish consolidation structure. Drew identified \$4,100 as the immediate support reference. A confirmed breakdown would bring the lower $3,886 to $3,941 region into focus. 

The sequence is important. The lower zone becomes more relevant if current support fails. Until then, it remains part of a downside scenario, not an assumed destination. A support map is most useful when it establishes how the outlook changes as price moves between levels.

Silver Price Analysis: Long-Term Channel Support and a $53.26 Target

Silver declined approximately 1.9% to $59.15, approaching the midpoint of a parallel channel extending back to 2008. Drew also discussed a daily head and shoulders formation with a measured-move objective near $53.26. Losing channel support would weaken the chart, while confirmation of the head and shoulders breakdown would support monitoring that lower objective. 

Drew separately discussed potential areas of interest for physical silver around $53 to $50, with deeper scenarios involving $40 or $30 during a more substantial selloff. Those comments reflected his longer-term planning, not a universal accumulation strategy or a forecast that silver would reach each level. 

The educational lesson is preparation. Identifying potential areas of interest in advance can reduce the pressure to make decisions during a fast decline. That preparation still requires an assessment of downside exposure, because lower prices do not automatically establish value and technical support can fail.

Crude Oil Technical Analysis: $86.90 Support and $102.43 Resistance

Crude oil rebounded as reported supply concerns involving Saudi Arabia returned to focus. The move followed a test of support near $86.90 and interrupted a declining consolidation pattern. Drew highlighted a developing daily bottoming tail as evidence of buying interest at lower prices.

The next major upside reference was near $102.43, corresponding to the midpoint of the parallel channel. 

The initial reaction and the follow-through are separate tests. The rebound showed that buyers responded to the support area. Sustaining that recovery would provide stronger evidence than the first move alone. A reversal back toward the lows would instead call the developing bottoming pattern into question.

Natural Gas Price Outlook: Breakout Support at $3.30–$3.32

Natural gas continued higher after breaking above a declining trend line extending from 2023. Drew had been monitoring a deeper retracement near $3.22, but the advance continued without providing that entry.

The chart retained a measured-move projection near $3.89, while a pullback toward $3.30 to $3.32 offered an area to reassess the breakout. That zone would still need a constructive price response; reaching it would not automatically create a trade. 

The setup reinforced a practical point about execution. Missing a preferred entry does not make the next available price equally attractive. A trader can maintain a constructive outlook while waiting for a clearer relationship between potential upside, support and invalidation.

First Solar (FSLR) Stock: Testing $195–$200 After a Channel Breakdown

First Solar advanced 3.83% despite negative analyst commentary, but the rebound developed within a chart that had already broken below a parallel channel. Drew identified former pivot support between \$195 and $200 as the next resistance area. 

The test is whether buyers can reclaim that zone and work back into the former channel. A sustained recovery would improve the structure. Rejection would leave the possibility that the advance is a rebound within a weakened trend.

A positive session does not resolve that question by itself. The relationship between price and former support provides a more useful framework than the daily percentage gain or the direction of the latest analyst revision.

Oracle (ORCL) Technical Analysis: Parallel Channels and the $146.94 Pivot

Drew’s Oracle discussion focused on how to build a chart framework when a position has moved against the trader. Rather than starting with the price needed to recover a loss, he began with larger trend lines, which he called his “blinders.”

From those broader boundaries, he connected meaningful pivot lows and projected a parallel line through corresponding highs. The resulting channel provided additional references for evaluating support, resistance and midpoint reactions. These are analytical guides, not fixed limits on where price can trade.

For Oracle, the chart showed a recent rejection where a declining trend line intersected the channel midpoint. Drew identified $146.94 as a pivot high that bulls would need to reclaim. A confirmed recovery above it could bring the higher channel reference near $162.82 into focus. 

That sequence replaces a vague hope for recovery with observable conditions. Until the lower hurdle is cleared, the higher objective remains conditional. The chart cannot guarantee that a losing position will recover, but it can help a trader evaluate whether the structure is improving or deteriorating.

Inflation Report Outlook: S&P 500, SMH and Treasury Yield Levels to Watch

The next inflation release will enter a market where broad-index strength and sector weakness are still competing. The response across those charts should provide a clearer read than the headline number alone.

For the S&P 500, the first test is continued support above the inverse head and shoulders neckline. For the Nasdaq, it is the ability to maintain the prior breakout area. Losing those structures would challenge the constructive index interpretation, particularly if semiconductor selling resumes. 

SMH’s recovery also needs follow-through. Reclaiming channel resistance would strengthen the stabilization case, while another rejection would keep the lower gap and support levels relevant. Treasury yields add context through their own resistance and support tests, but the equity charts must confirm the response. 

Taken together, these signals can help distinguish a market absorbing sector-level selling from one beginning to lose its broader support.

Stock Market Outlook: Bullish Index Structure Still Needs Confirmation

Tuesday’s nearly unchanged index close did not mean the market stood still. Semiconductors tested support, Apple maintained relative strength, and several individual charts approached levels that could determine whether their next moves develop into sustained recoveries.

Drew’s framework remained conditional: identify the structure, monitor the response and reassess when price stops supporting the setup. The S&P 500’s bullish formations remain relevant while their support holds. A semiconductor bounce deserves attention, but it still needs to clear resistance. An upside target provides a reference, not a reason to disregard downside risk.

The indexes are holding their bullish structures. The next test is whether sector stabilization and price follow-through reinforce that strength.

Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the potential loss of principal. This article is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Technical levels and projections are not guarantees of future performance. Evaluate your financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

Gold and silver are pulling back toward rising trendlines, but Nick Valdez isn't treating them as equal opportunities. He's already entered a long position in gold through IAU options while keeping his silver exposure much smaller.

The reason comes down to location.

Gold is pressing into ascending trendline support, giving Nick a technical level against which to evaluate the trade. Silver, trading near $59, remains above its own rising trendline around $57.67. That leaves room for another pullback before silver reaches the area where Nick would prefer to increase his exposure.

Both metals offer potential bullish setups. But having a bullish outlook on two assets doesn't mean taking the same size position in each. For Nick, the difference between buying near support and buying above it is enough to change how he approaches the trade.

Gold Trendline Support Creates the Cleaner Bullish Setup

Gold is testing an ascending trendline that has supported its broader advance. Nick sees the possibility of a bounce from this area and has established a bullish position through November-dated options on the iShares Gold Trust (IAU).

The bullish trade comes with a complication.

Gold is also developing a megaphone, or broadening, pattern. This structure forms as price swings widen, producing progressively larger moves in both directions. Nick gives the pattern a slight bearish lean, although he considers that edge too small to outweigh the support level he's trading against.

In his view, the bearish tendency is barely stronger than a coin toss. He prefers setups with multiple confirming factors rather than relying heavily on a single pattern.

That creates an interesting conflict. The broader pattern leans slightly bearish, but gold is approaching an ascending support line where Nick sees an opportunity for a bullish reaction.

Rather than shorting gold because of the megaphone, he's positioning for a potential bounce.

Nick entered the IAU options position on October 13, with expiration in November. He is also open to adding over the next several sessions if price responds favorably to the trendline.

The distinction is important. He's not dismissing the bearish pattern. He's assigning more weight to the immediate support test while recognizing that the broader structure still carries downside risk.

A sustained break below the rising trendline would weaken the technical reasoning behind the long position.

Silver Trendline Support Near $57.67 Keeps Position Size Smaller

Silver has a similar bullish foundation, but its price is not yet where Nick wants it.

An ascending trendline continues to define the underlying advance, while a descending trendline from recent highs creates a wedge structure. The two lines are converging, putting silver closer to a technical decision point.

With silver trading around $59, Nick identifies rising trendline support near $57.67. That leaves approximately $1.33 of potential downside before price reaches the area he's watching for a more substantial long position.

Instead of waiting entirely on the sidelines, Nick has established a small initial position through the iShares Silver Trust (SLV).

The smaller size reflects his assessment of the chart. He wants some exposure to a potential bullish move, but silver has not yet reached the support level that would make him more comfortable adding.

That is the central difference between his gold and silver trades.

Gold is already testing the area he wants to trade. Silver still needs to get there.

Silver Support Near $54 Becomes Important if the Wedge Breaks

For silver, If price breaks below the wedge structure, Nick identifies another significant horizontal support area near $54.

That creates two distinct downside reference points: the ascending trendline around $57.67 and the lower horizontal support near $54.

The first is where Nick would consider increasing his long exposure. The second becomes important if the wedge fails and silver continues lower.

This explains why he's keeping his initial SLV position small. Entering aggressively near $59 would expose the position to a deeper pullback before silver reaches either of those technical levels.

By starting smaller, Nick retains flexibility as the chart develops.

That flexibility doesn't eliminate downside risk, particularly with options, where premiums can decline because of changes in price, time, and implied volatility. It does allow him to reassess the setup without having committed his intended exposure before the primary support test.

Platinum and Copper Show Why Technical Support Still Matters

The broader metals complex offers additional examples of why Nick is paying attention to how prices behave around established technical boundaries.

Platinum is attempting to break below an ascending parallel channel. Price closed beneath the lower boundary on October 7, recovered above it, and is now challenging that boundary again.

Nick is also watching a separate, nearly horizontal trendline associated with an earlier double-top formation and subsequent upside breakout. Platinum has already returned to test this area more than once.

If the ascending channel gives way, that lower trendline becomes an important area to watch for another potential reaction.

Nick is less enthusiastic about expressing this setup through options because of limited trading volume in platinum ETFs. Even an attractive technical level can be difficult to trade when the available options lack sufficient liquidity.

Copper presents a different situation.

Its ascending parallel channel recently saw an attempted upside breakout, but price failed to maintain that move. Nick notes that breaking above an already rising channel can reflect unusually strong bullish momentum.

The failure to hold above the channel makes the subsequent retest important.

Copper is now moving back toward the channel boundary, making the response at that former breakout level the next important signal.

Neither chart offers the same immediate trade location Nick sees in gold. Both reinforce the importance of waiting for price to establish how it will react at a meaningful technical level.

Key Gold, Silver, Platinum and Copper Levels to Watch

The quoted silver levels refer to the underlying silver chart, not SLV share prices. Gold's trendline is a technical reference rather than a specific IAU price target.

What Would Change the Gold and Silver Outlook?

For gold, the immediate test is whether buyers can defend the ascending trendline.

A bounce would strengthen Nick's bullish case and could support his plan to add to the IAU position. A sustained move below the line would weaken the setup and bring the bearish megaphone structure back into focus.

Silver has a different sequence to work through.

The first level is approximately $57.67, where the rising trendline offers a potential support test. A constructive reaction there would strengthen the case for increasing exposure.

If silver loses the wedge instead, attention shifts toward the horizontal support near $54. That would represent a materially deeper pullback and require reassessing the bullish setup.

For platinum, the question is whether the ascending channel breaks down and brings the lower, nearly horizontal trendline into play. Copper needs to demonstrate whether its former channel boundary can still attract buyers after the failed breakout attempt.

Bottom Line: Gold Is at Support, Silver Is Still Approaching It

Nick is bullish enough on gold to have established a long position, but he's not giving silver the same level of commitment yet.

The difference is the location of each asset relative to the technical levels he's using to evaluate the trade.

Gold is already at its decision point. Silver is still approaching one.

That is the practical lesson from these setups. A trader can favor the same direction in two related markets while taking different levels of exposure. The chart location, potential downside, and conditions for adding all influence that decision.

For now, Nick is giving gold the larger commitment and silver more room to develop. What happens at their respective trendlines will determine whether that approach continues to make sense.

Watch on YouTube

AI Stocks Slide, but the S&P 500 Holds Firm: Gareth's Game Plan for Market Rotation

The biggest signal from Gareth Soloway's October 12 market analysis was not simply the selling pressure in artificial intelligence stocks. It was the broader market's ability to absorb that weakness without following technology shares sharply lower. With Nasdaq futures underperforming S&P 500 futures, Gareth focused on a developing rotation beneath the surface. The question was whether money leaving crowded AI trades was finding opportunities elsewhere, allowing the broader market to maintain its bullish structure even as former market leaders came under pressure.

During My Trading Game Plan Revealed, Gareth outlined how competition in AI hardware, declining Treasury yields, and improving technical setups in previously beaten-down stocks could help explain the divergence. His broader S&P 500 target of 8,000 remained in place, but that did not mean every sector deserved the same bullish outlook. The distinction was between an index maintaining its upward trajectory and individual stocks beginning to show signs of exhaustion.

AI Stock Selloff Puts Semiconductor Pricing Power Under Pressure

The selling pressure in AI-related stocks was particularly noticeable in memory and storage names, including Sandisk, Micron, and Seagate. In the session described by Gareth, Nasdaq futures were lower by approximately 0.8%, compared with a decline of just 0.1% in S&P 500 futures. That relative weakness suggested investors were reassessing the outlook for some of the companies that had benefited most from the AI investment cycle.

One development Gareth highlighted was reported progress by Chinese memory manufacturer CXMT in developing higher-density memory technology. The significance extended beyond one company's product announcement. It raised a broader question about how long existing manufacturers could maintain elevated pricing and margins if competing suppliers continued improving their products. A technological advantage can support strong profitability, but that advantage becomes harder to defend when new competitors offer comparable or more efficient alternatives.

Gareth connected that development to a familiar economic cycle. High demand initially allows suppliers to command premium prices, which attracts additional investment and competition. Over time, expanding supply can pressure selling prices and reduce margins. That process does not necessarily mean AI demand is disappearing. It means investors may need to distinguish between continued industry growth and the profitability individual companies can sustain as competition increases.

For traders, the market's reaction provided the key evidence. If AI hardware stocks continued breaking technical support while the broader indices held their ground, it would strengthen the case that leadership was rotating rather than the entire market entering a coordinated decline. A recovery in semiconductor leadership, however, would challenge the idea that the sector's weakness was developing into a sustained trend.

S&P 500 Holds Bullish Structure as Capital Rotates Beyond Tech

Despite the pressure on technology shares, Gareth maintained his bullish framework for the S&P 500, including his previously identified 8,000 target. His reasoning centered on the difference between weakness in a heavily owned sector and deterioration across the entire market. A major index can remain resilient when selling in one group is offset by buying in other sectors, even if the stocks attracting capital were previously out of favor.

Institutional portfolio rebalancing was an important part of that interpretation. When managers reduce exposure to an extended or crowded trade, they may redeploy some of that capital into other opportunities rather than move entirely into cash. That creates the possibility of relative strength in companies that have already experienced substantial corrections. The behavior of those stocks can provide useful evidence about whether market participation is broadening beyond technology.

Nike and Clorox were two examples Gareth discussed. Nike had experienced significant weakness following earnings, but subsequent buying suggested demand was returning at lower prices. Clorox had also declined toward an established horizontal support area, where a bottoming tail appeared on the chart. That candlestick showed buyers responding after an attempt to push the stock lower, providing an early indication that selling pressure could be weakening.

With Clorox referenced near \$85.50, Gareth identified \$87.75 as an initial resistance objective. The setup depended on buyers continuing to defend the support area rather than allowing the stock to break below it. A bottoming tail alone does not confirm a lasting reversal, but a successful defense of support followed by higher prices would strengthen the bullish interpretation. This is the type of evidence traders can use to assess whether capital rotation is gaining traction.

10-Year Treasury Yield Reversal Could Support Rate-Sensitive Stocks

The bond market provided a second piece of Gareth's broader framework. The 10-year Treasury yield was referenced near 5.206%, following the formation of topping tails on both the daily and weekly charts. Those formations suggested yields had encountered selling pressure after attempting to extend higher, creating the possibility of a near-term reversal.

A topping tail develops when an instrument moves higher during a trading period but gives back much of that advance before the close. In this case, the appearance of similar formations across two time frames added weight to the technical warning. It did not guarantee that yields had reached a lasting top, but it gave traders a reason to watch for additional downside confirmation rather than assume the prior advance would continue uninterrupted.

Gareth identified 5% as the next important support area for the 10-year yield. A continued decline toward that level could improve the relative appeal of interest-rate-sensitive assets, including real estate investment trusts. Lower yields can reduce financing pressure and make dividend-paying investments more competitive against fixed-income alternatives, although the magnitude of that benefit depends on broader credit and economic conditions.

This relationship helped connect the bond market to the equity rotation thesis. If yields moved lower while REITs and other previously pressured sectors continued strengthening, that would provide another sign of improving participation outside technology. If yields instead recovered and broke above their recent highs, the anticipated benefit for rate-sensitive stocks would become less convincing.

JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and Healthcare Earnings Meet Key Technical Levels

With major financial and healthcare companies reporting earnings, Gareth emphasized that the market's reaction to results could carry more weight than the headline figures alone. Earnings surprises, guidance, and positioning can all influence the opening move, but established technical levels often help determine whether that move attracts follow-through or encounters opposition.

JPMorgan Chase was one example. The draft's reported earnings figures showed earnings per share of \$5.75 against expectations of \$5.94, alongside stronger-than-expected revenue. Despite an initial negative reaction, the stock recovered as buyers responded near an established support area. Gareth's technical interpretation focused on that response: a stock that refuses to extend lower after disappointing expectations may be signaling that much of the negative outlook was already reflected in its price.

Goldman Sachs presented a different opportunity. Rather than treating its positive earnings reaction as a reason to chase the stock higher, Gareth identified the \$1,000 area as potential swing-trade resistance. That level was associated with a previously broken parallel channel, making a return toward the former structure worth watching. A rejection near \$1,000 could support a bearish setup, while sustained strength above that area would weaken the resistance argument.

In healthcare, Johnson & Johnson and UnitedHealth offered additional examples of how earnings-driven volatility could create technical opportunities. Following the reported pullback in Johnson & Johnson, Gareth identified \$251 as an initial support area and approximately \$247 as a stronger potential swing-trade zone, supported by historical pivots. For UnitedHealth, resistance was identified near \$405 to \$406, followed by a higher resistance area around \$415.

The trading approach was consistent across those names. Let price reach the level first, then evaluate the reaction. A prior support or resistance zone can define the setup, but the response at that zone determines whether the trade remains valid.

Crude Oil, Silver and Natural Gas Signal Different Economic Pressures

The commodity charts added another layer to the broader market picture. Crude oil was trading around a significant pivot at \$88.75, a level Gareth identified through repeated historical reactions. Holding above that area would leave room for stabilization or a renewed advance, while a confirmed breakdown could shift the technical outlook toward the next downside objective near \$77.

Oil prices reflect a combination of supply conditions, demand expectations, and geopolitical developments. A break of major support would not independently establish that the economy was weakening, but it could add to evidence of softer demand if other economically sensitive assets were showing similar deterioration. Continued support near \$88.75, by contrast, would show that sellers had not yet taken control of the broader structure.

Silver presented a related but distinct concern. Gareth noted that silver was underperforming gold, raising questions about the outlook for industrial demand. The AI investment cycle has supported substantial spending on data centers and related infrastructure. If that investment slowed meaningfully, it could affect economic activity and demand expectations for certain industrial materials. That is a potential transmission mechanism, not confirmation that AI capital expenditure or the broader economy is already contracting.

For silver, Gareth discussed the possibility of a move toward \$50 if the existing support structure failed. Gold, meanwhile, was showing relative stability around its longer-term trend line. The difference between the two metals was important because gold's monetary and defensive characteristics can support demand under conditions that are less favorable for silver's industrial component.

Natural gas offered a more constructive technical picture. After a sharp decline toward a major trend line, prices recovered substantially and continued showing buying interest near the lows. Gareth interpreted that behavior as potential accumulation and anticipated a possible breakout over the following week, with \$3.50 identified as an upside objective. The bullish case depended on support continuing to hold and price confirming the breakout.

Bitcoin Range Defines \$81,000 Support and \$87,000 Breakout Level

Bitcoin remained in a wide consolidation range following an unsuccessful attempt to extend its decline. Gareth identified buying interest near \$81,000, while the \$87,000 area represented the upper boundary traders needed to see broken before assigning greater weight to a bullish continuation.

The range created two clearly defined scenarios. A confirmed breakdown below \$81,000 would expose the next downside objective around \$75,000. Alternatively, a sustained breakout above \$87,000 could open the door to a move toward the \$95,000 to \$97,000 resistance zone. Until either boundary gave way, the chart offered less directional clarity, particularly for traders entering near the middle of the range.

That structure gives traders a cleaner framework than trying to anticipate every move inside the consolidation. The boundaries define where momentum could expand and where risk can be evaluated more clearly.

SanDisk, Micron and Marvell Approach Key Semiconductor Support Zones

Although Gareth was concerned about the weakness in AI-related stocks, he also identified technical areas where selling pressure could temporarily exhaust itself. A bearish view of a sector does not eliminate the possibility of short-term rebounds, particularly when stocks approach major support levels after an extended decline.

In the source draft, Sandisk was associated with an aggressive bounce area near \$1,333, a larger trend-line support level around \$1,300, and a lower gap area near \$1,275. Micron was described as approaching a potential gap-fill level near \$926, with stronger support around \$905. Marvell Technology was also identified as having historical support in the \$240 to \$241 region. These specific price references should be confirmed against the original charts before publication.

The trading principle behind the setups is straightforward. When a stock falls sharply, entering before support is reached adds unnecessary uncertainty. Gareth's approach focuses on allowing price to move into areas where multiple technical factors converge and then evaluating the reaction.

A bounce from support may create a short-term opportunity, but a failure to defend the same level can signal that sellers remain in control. The level identifies where a setup may develop. Price action determines whether that setup earns confirmation.

Market Rotation Keeps Gareth's S&P 500 Bullish Case Intact

Gareth's October 12 game plan centered on a market showing two different behaviors at once. AI-related stocks were under pressure as investors reconsidered pricing power and future profitability, yet the broader S&P 500 continued demonstrating resilience. That divergence kept his 8,000 index target in play while reinforcing the need to evaluate individual sectors and stocks on their own technical merits.

The rotation thesis would gain credibility if semiconductor weakness continued alongside improving participation in value, cyclical, and rate-sensitive areas. A broader decline that pulled those groups lower as well would weaken that interpretation and put more pressure on the bullish index framework.

The game plan was not to buy everything that had fallen or short everything that had rallied. It was to identify where capital appeared to be moving, define the levels that support or challenge that view, and let price action confirm the next move. In a market where leadership can change quickly, that framework gives traders a cleaner way to separate rotation from genuine broad-market deterioration.

This article summarizes market analysis and technical scenarios discussed in My Trading Game Plan Revealed for October 12, 2026. Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including possible loss of principal. The information is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute personalized financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Technical levels and price targets are conditional, not guarantees of future performance.

Bitcoin slipped about 1% Monday, but the size of the move is not what matters on the chart. Price is still trading around the $82,814 pivot it broke below last week. That leaves traders with a clear question: can Bitcoin stabilize around that level and make another push into resistance, or will the recent weakness extend toward deeper support?

Ethereum and Solana face technical decisions of their own. Ethereum is holding above recent support while pressing toward a heavily tested descending trendline. Solana is trading between broken resistance overhead and a former resistance zone that has repeatedly acted as support.

What the three charts have in common is not the size of Monday's move but where price is sitting. Each is approaching levels that have already mattered multiple times, which gives traders clearly defined areas to watch next.

Bitcoin Price Tests the $82,814 Support Pivot

Bitcoin broke below $82,814 last Wednesday and has traded around that level in the sessions since.

The constructive read is that Bitcoin made a lower low without accelerating much further down. Price is trying to stay near the $82,814 pivot, which keeps a recovery attempt in play if buyers continue to hold the area.

On a move higher, the first resistance is an ascending trendline that Bitcoin pushed into roughly a week ago. Beyond that sits $87,395, a heavily traded shelf that has repeatedly flipped between support and resistance and is currently acting as resistance. A level that has changed roles that often carries more technical weight than one that has been tested only once.

If Bitcoin cannot hold the current pivot, the next reference is a descending support trendline farther below, around $77,000 to $78,000. A move into that region would mean a considerably weaker technical picture and would put sellers more firmly in control.

For now, $82,814 is the immediate reference. Holding around it keeps the recovery scenario alive, while losing it would bring deeper support back into focus.

Ethereum Tests Support Below $2,667 Resistance

Ethereum slipped roughly 0.56% Monday after an attempt to turn positive faded.

Recent selling has found support near $2,473, and Ethereum has continued to close above that area. Beneath price is an ascending support trendline that starts at the February 5, 2026 low. Ethereum tested that line during last Thursday's selloff and bounced.

The first resistance is $2,667, where price was repeatedly rejected on wicks before losing control.

A move through that level would bring a longer-term descending trendline into focus. That line runs back to December 11, 2025 and has now been touched roughly five to six times. Jake Sweeney sees that repeated testing as a sign the trendline could break to the upside soon if price presses into it again.

If that test comes later this week, the trendline would sit roughly in the $2,740 to $2,758 area.

A confirmed move above that trendline would strengthen the bullish case. Until then, Ethereum sits between rising support underneath and well-established descending resistance overhead.

Solana Watches $105–$106 Support After Trendline Breakdown

Solana declined roughly 2.3% Monday after an attempt to test overhead resistance was rejected.

The upside reference is $114.94, near a trendline Solana previously broke down from. If price rallies back toward that area, sellers could become active again.

The more immediate level is below price. Solana traded as low as $107.01 Monday, bringing it closer to the $105 to $106 area. That zone acted as resistance several times before price broke above it, and it has repeatedly acted as support since. That support-resistance flip is what gives the zone its significance.

If Solana moves back into $105 to $106 and buyers defend it again, that would reinforce the level as an important floor in the current structure. If the area fails, the next support reference is a descending trendline around $101 to $102.

That gives Solana a relatively clean framework:

• Resistance: $114.94 overhead
• Support: the $105 to $106 zone underneath
• Next support: $101 to $102 if the zone gives way

Bitcoin, Ethereum and Solana Support and Resistance Levels

Crypto Technical Analysis: What Traders Should Watch Next

Bitcoin is the most important chart of the three right now because it is already testing the $82,814 level that needs to hold.

Ethereum has defended its rising support trendline but still needs to clear $2,667 before its larger descending resistance line comes into play.

Solana remains between $114.94 resistance and the $105 to $106 support zone created by its earlier polarity flip.

None of these setups has fully resolved, and that is what makes the current levels useful:

• If Bitcoin holds $82,814, the recovery scenario stays alive. If it fails, attention shifts to $77,000 to $78,000.
• If Ethereum clears $2,667, the larger descending trendline comes back into focus.
• If Solana holds $105 to $106, the support structure built since its breakout stays intact.

For now, the charts are giving traders levels rather than confirmation. How price reacts at those levels should say considerably more than Monday's modest percentage moves.

Watch on YouTube

S&P 500 Holds Flat as Nvidia and Semiconductors Flash Warning Signs

The S&P 500 finished Monday's session down just 0.06%, but that relatively quiet close did not tell the full story. Beneath the surface, semiconductor stocks continued to weaken, Nvidia showed signs of exhaustion, and the Nasdaq approached an important technical test. For traders, the question is no longer simply whether the broader market can hold its highs. It is whether the technology stocks that helped drive the rally can stabilize before selling pressure spreads further.

During today's Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek focused on that growing divergence. The weakness in AI-related stocks comes as investors reassess the pace of AI monetization and the expectations already reflected in valuations. At the same time, the 10-year Treasury yield is showing a potential reversal signal that could eventually provide some relief for growth stocks.

That combination creates an interesting setup. Technology is pulling back, several important support levels are approaching, and a potential change in yields could influence the next move. But approaching support and confirming a reversal are two different things. Drew's framework is to identify where the odds may begin to favor a bounce, then let price action determine whether the trade is worth taking.

A Flat S&P 500 Is Masking Weakness in Technology

The S&P 500 spent much of Monday moving sideways before buyers stepped in during the final 30 minutes, bringing the index back near unchanged. On the surface, it was an uneventful session. The Nasdaq, however, showed more pronounced weakness as investors continued to reassess the AI trade.

The concern is shifting from how quickly AI infrastructure can expand to how effectively companies can turn that investment into sustainable returns. After an extended rally, expectations have become more demanding. Companies no longer receive the same benefit of the doubt simply for increasing their exposure to AI. Investors want evidence that spending can translate into earnings.

Drew connected that changing sentiment to the market's position late in the year.

"We've already had a huge run this year," Drew explained, raising the question of whether investors have gotten too far ahead of themselves as portfolios begin preparing for 2027.

That observation matters because a stock does not need bad news to decline after a substantial advance. Sometimes the expectations embedded in its price become difficult to satisfy. With earnings season approaching, traders are beginning to weigh how much future growth has already been priced into the technology sector.

Technically, the Nasdaq has developed a topping tail, reflecting selling pressure after an attempt to move higher. That does not establish a broader downtrend by itself. The index still has support from an ascending trendline extending off its March lows, currently near 26,856. Holding that area would keep the larger bullish structure in play. A sustained break below it would suggest the recent weakness is becoming more significant.

Semiconductors Approach a Support Zone Worth Watching

The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) provided one of the clearest examples of the technology sector's deteriorating near-term momentum. SMH declined 2.05% on Monday, extending its losing streak to five consecutive sessions and moving back inside an ascending parallel channel that has helped define the broader trend since April 2025.

The important development is not simply that semiconductors are falling. It is where the pullback may begin to attract buyers.

Drew identified initial support near $588.60, corresponding to the 50% Fibonacci retracement of the recent advance from the September 14 pivot low. Below that, the more significant area sits near \$576.59, where the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement aligns with previous pivot highs.

That second level carries more technical weight because two separate forms of analysis point toward the same price area. Former resistance can become support when buyers who previously missed a breakout look for an opportunity to enter on a retest. When that structure overlaps a Fibonacci retracement, traders have a clearer location to watch for a reaction.

However, confluence identifies a potential opportunity, not a guaranteed reversal. A test of $576.59 followed by stabilization and improving buying pressure would strengthen the case for a bounce toward the upper boundary of the parallel channel. If sellers drive price decisively through that area, the bullish bounce thesis weakens and the next lower support becomes more relevant.

The distinction is important. Drew is not suggesting traders buy semiconductors simply because they have declined for five sessions. He is identifying where the risk-reward picture could improve, provided price confirms that buyers are returning.

Nvidia's Weekly Chart Raises a Bigger Question

Nvidia presents a similar setup, but its weekly chart adds another layer of caution.

After reaching all-time highs, the stock developed a weekly topping tail, a pattern that suggests buyers were unable to sustain higher prices. Nvidia has also recorded five consecutive declining daily candles, putting near-term support levels into focus.

Drew identified $222.99 as an initial Fibonacci support area where a short-term bounce could develop. However, the weekly topping tail changes how traders should evaluate that possibility.

A daily reversal may create an opportunity for a tactical rebound, but it does not automatically erase resistance established on a higher timeframe. Weekly candles represent a longer period of trading activity and can influence price behavior well beyond a single session.

For that reason, Drew distinguished between a potential short-term bounce and a more attractive structural entry. The $215 area offers a stronger technical reference because it combines the lower boundary of an ascending parallel channel with previous pivot highs from June and July.

If Nvidia rebounds from $222.99, traders still need to watch how price behaves as it approaches overhead resistance. A stronger reaction near $215, should price reach that level, could offer a different setup with a clearer structural reference for managing risk.

The broader lesson is that a good company and a good entry price are not necessarily the same thing. Nvidia can remain an important leader in the AI industry while its chart signals that patience may offer a better opportunity.

Treasury Yields Could Change the Technology Setup

One of the more important developments outside equities came from the 10-year Treasury yield.

With the Treasury market closed for the Columbus Day holiday, Monday did not provide a fresh yield-market reaction. The existing chart structure, however, remains relevant heading into the next session.

Drew highlighted a potential reversal setup on both the daily and weekly timeframes, including a weekly topping tail and what he describes as a "sleeper hold" pattern. The alignment of those signals suggests the recent advance in yields may be vulnerable to a pullback, although confirmation is still needed.

Why does that matter for technology stocks?

Higher Treasury yields can place pressure on growth-stock valuations because investors discount expected future earnings at higher rates. When yields begin to retreat, some of that valuation pressure can ease, particularly in sectors where expectations for future growth account for a substantial portion of the investment thesis.

Drew identified the previous 2023 pivot high near 5.021% as an important longer-term reference if yields begin consolidating lower.

This creates a possible connection between two separate charts. Semiconductors are approaching technical support while Treasury yields are showing signs of potential exhaustion. If yields retreat as SMH and Nvidia stabilize, the conditions for a technology rebound could improve.

The opposite scenario also deserves attention. If yields resume climbing while semiconductor support breaks, the market would lose a potential source of relief at the same time technical weakness is increasing.

For now, the yield chart is a watchpoint, not confirmation that the pressure on technology has ended.

Snapchat Shows Why Individual Stock Selection Still Matters

Not every technology-related stock participated in Monday's weakness.

Snap Inc. (SNAP) gained 4.82%, providing a notable contrast to the selling in semiconductors. The move occurred alongside reported interest in call options and renewed attention to the company's potential AI-related opportunities.

The chart itself is more important than the narrative. Snapchat has been attempting to improve its technical structure after an extended period of weakness, and the recent advance brings several resistance levels into focus.

Drew identified $7.06 as the first important upside test. Beyond that, a longer-term trendline connecting the December 2018 and April 2025 lows sits near $7.66.

A sustained move through that longer-term resistance would represent a meaningful improvement in the stock's chart structure. Until that happens, traders should recognize that a strong daily gain can still run into resistance from a much larger timeframe.

On a pullback, Drew highlighted $6.18 and $6.07 as potential support areas. Those levels provide locations to evaluate whether buyers remain interested after the initial advance.

Snapchat illustrates an important point about the current market. Broad technology weakness does not eliminate individual opportunities. It does, however, make selectivity more important. A stock showing relative strength can deserve attention, but traders still need to distinguish between a breakout attempt and a confirmed change in trend.

Gold, Silver, Oil and Bitcoin: Secondary Signals to Monitor

Outside equities, several markets are approaching technical levels that could influence near-term positioning.

Gold and silver remain under pressure. The U.S. Dollar Index advanced approximately 0.35%, moving toward resistance near 102.86. Dollar strength can create an additional headwind for precious metals, although that relationship is not consistent in every session.

Gold is testing support around $4,104.14 while trading within a bearish flag structure. A daily close below that level would weaken the immediate setup and bring the $4,000 psychological level into focus, followed by additional support near $3,945.

Silver declined approximately 0.9% and continues to display a bearish consolidation pattern. Drew identified a head-and-shoulders measured-move objective near $53.26. That area could become relevant for a potential reaction if selling continues, but traders would still need evidence of stabilization before treating it as a reversal.

Crude oil continues to hold a constructive technical structure. Despite uncertainty surrounding geopolitical developments and energy policy, Drew's chart remains focused on an inverse head-and-shoulders formation. As long as oil holds above the relevant neckline support, the pattern maintains a potential measured-move objective near $116.

That target is conditional on the pattern remaining intact. A failure to hold the breakout structure would require traders to reassess the bullish outlook rather than assume the objective must be reached.

Bitcoin remains caught between consolidation and potential breakdown. After declining approximately 0.84%, Bitcoin continues to trade within a near-term bearish flag. The immediate challenge for buyers is to reclaim the $86,400 region and establish support rather than simply produce another brief rally.

Above that, $89,500 remains a major reference because of its relationship to a larger historical head-and-shoulders structure. Continued rejection below resistance would leave the bearish consolidation vulnerable to another move lower.

Drew's point was that repeated attempts to overcome resistance can eventually succeed, but traders need to recognize the difference between persistence and confirmation. Until Bitcoin can reclaim and hold the relevant levels, the chart has not established that buyers have regained control.

GE Aerospace Reinforces the Value of Waiting

Drew's analysis of GE Aerospace (GE) brought the discussion back to a principle that applies across the market: a stock can have an attractive longer-term story while offering an unfavorable near-term entry.

GE has been trading within a broad ascending parallel channel, but its recent price action includes a bearish M-shaped formation near the upper portion of the range. After breaking a shorter-term ascending trendline, the stock found support near its 38.2% Fibonacci retracement.

The immediate resistance level sits near $321.07, with a more substantial resistance zone between $338 and $340.

Rather than chase price between those areas, Drew identified $300 as an important psychological support level and $288 as a deeper structural reference near the bottom of the larger parallel channel.

Those levels are not automatic buy signals. They are areas where traders can begin looking for evidence that selling pressure is fading and buyers are defending the broader trend.

This is where preparation becomes more valuable than prediction. By identifying support and resistance in advance, traders can evaluate a setup without feeling pressured to react to every intraday move. If the stock never reaches the preferred area, there may simply be no trade.

What Traders Should Watch Next

The next phase of the market will depend less on Monday's nearly unchanged S&P 500 close and more on how several important technical structures resolve.

For technology, the first test is whether SMH can defend its retracement levels near \$588.60 and \$576.59 while Nvidia stabilizes around $222.99 or, on a deeper pullback, $215. The Nasdaq's ascending trendline near 26,856 remains an important broader-market reference.

The 10-year Treasury yield adds another variable. A confirmed pullback in yields alongside improving semiconductor price action would support the case for a relief rally. Continued yield strength combined with failed equity support would argue for greater caution.

Earnings season introduces an additional test of the AI investment narrative. The market will be looking for evidence that spending and infrastructure expansion can support the earnings expectations already reflected in stock prices.

The key is not to predict every reaction. It is to identify which developments would strengthen the bullish case, which would undermine it, and where the technical structure offers a reasonable way to manage risk.

Bottom Line

Monday's flat S&P 500 close concealed a more important development: leadership in AI and semiconductor stocks is being tested while several major technical levels come into view.

Drew's analysis does not suggest that the broader bull market has ended, nor does it establish that a technology rebound is imminent. It identifies a market approaching a decision point, with semiconductor support, Nvidia's weekly resistance, and Treasury yields providing the clearest signals to monitor.

For traders, the advantage comes from knowing what needs to happen before taking a position. Support matters when buyers defend it. A breakout matters when price can hold above resistance. Until those confirmations appear, patience remains part of the trade.

Rivian (RIVN) has fallen nearly straight down since August, sliding from roughly $17 to $13.75. On its own, that looks like a stock in trouble. On the chart, it looks like something more specific: price returning to the lower boundary of a parallel channel that has contained it since April 2024.

That boundary has now been tested five times, and each test produced a bounce. Today marks the sixth. With the daily RSI near oversold and earnings scheduled for October 29, the setup has a defined level, a defined catalyst, and a defined upside target.

The core point is this: a sixth touch of a long-term channel is not an automatic buy. The more useful question is how price is likely to behave around that level, and where a reaction could reasonably carry it.

Why the Sixth Test Is Different From the First

Repeated tests of support do two things at once. They confirm that the level matters to buyers, and they gradually wear it down. Each visit absorbs more of the demand sitting at that price.

That is why Drew Dosek reads this test as roughly a coin flip, with a slight lean toward a break. Drew slightly favors a modest pierce below the channel floor, with price potentially touching the $13.51 area before buyers step back in.

That distinction matters. Buying the exact line on a sixth test invites getting shaken out by a brief undercut. Accounting for a possible undercut helps traders avoid treating a brief break of support as an automatic failure.

Momentum and the Earnings Catalyst

The daily RSI sits at 31.85, approaching the traditional oversold threshold of 30. That reinforces the view that Rivian may be due for a near-term bounce, although oversold conditions alone do not confirm a reversal.

The timing ahead of earnings adds another variable. When a stock sells off sharply into a report, positive news can provide the catalyst for a relief rally. With Rivian already at long-term support, a favorable reaction to the October 29 report could reinforce the technical bounce setup.

Where a Bounce Could Travel

Drawing trend lines from prior pivots produces a convergence zone overhead, an "X marks the spot" where several lines meet. Price has a history of reacting at these lines, sometimes piercing them briefly but responding to them all the same.

That convergence sits in the $15.53 to $15.75 range. If Rivian holds near the bottom of its channel, either at current levels or after a brief dip toward $13.51, that zone is the logical near-term destination, roughly 13 to 14 percent above $13.75.

SharkNinja Approaches $200 With Momentum Diverging

SharkNinja (SN) offers the mirror image of Rivian. Instead of oversold price at long-term support, it is pushing into resistance with weakening momentum.

Shares rose 3.88% today into a double top near the all-time high around $194. The daily RSI, however, has been declining even as price returned to those highs. That bearish divergence suggests the buying behind the advance is thinning.

If price does clear the all-time high, it may not travel far. The top of the rising parallel channel sits at $199.55, just below the psychological $200 level, an area likely to draw profit taking. A rejection there could send price back toward the $184 to $185 range.

Two More Charts Worth Preparing For

Onto Innovation (ONTO) carries a $1.1 billion backlog, but the chart has struggled since a weekly topping tail in June. A declining trend line has capped every attempt higher since, and the next test is roughly 50/50. Near term, an inclining trend line connecting the July 29 and September 3 lows produced a bounce today. If that shelf gives way, layered support sits at $256.41 (the bottom of the parallel) and $247.30, near the round $250 level. Drew views that zone as a potentially stronger area for a bounce and a better base for the next attempt at the declining trend line.

Super Micro Computer (SMCI) has broken the uptrend that carried it higher since its summer low. One close below the trend line is a warning; a second would confirm the near-term trend has turned. Drew's view is that the violation warrants exiting an existing position rather than waiting for a deeper decline. He is watching the gap fill at $36.85, just beneath the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement, as an area to reassess the chart for a short-term bounce back toward the broken trend line. SMCI moves quickly once momentum builds, so this one requires close attention.

Key Levels to Monitor

What to Watch: Process Over Prediction

For Rivian, the next few sessions decide the setup. A brief dip toward $13.51 followed by a recovery back inside the channel would keep the bounce thesis intact. A sustained move well below that level would signal that the sixth test finally exhausted the buyers, invalidating the channel and the $15.53 to $15.75 target. Holding the channel floor into earnings would keep the bounce scenario in play.

Step back, and the four charts sit at different stages. Rivian is testing support, SharkNinja is approaching resistance, Onto is balancing between competing trend lines, and Super Micro has already broken a key level. The approach is the same for each: identify the level, understand the likely reaction, and wait for price to confirm the setup. The opportunity is not simply knowing where a stock might turn. It is recognizing when the chart begins to support that turn.

Watch on YouTube

Oil Surges, Gold Tests \$4,100, and the S&P 500 Faces a Key Breakout Level

My Trading Game Plan Revealed | October 12, 2026

The biggest lesson from Monday's market action is that a strong headline does not automatically create a strong trade. Oil is moving higher on renewed geopolitical concerns, gold is testing an important technical level, and the S&P 500 is approaching resistance near its all-time highs. Yet across these markets, Gareth Soloway's message remains consistent: the chart must confirm the move before traders can assign greater conviction to the setup.

During Monday's My Trading Game Plan show, Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, focused on the relationship between geopolitical risk, interest rate expectations, and the technical levels that could determine the market's next directional move. With the bond market closed for the holiday and major bank earnings approaching, the immediate challenge is separating short-term reactions from changes in market structure. Several important charts are approaching decision points, but not all of them have provided confirmation.

Oil's Geopolitical Rally Meets an Important Technical Test

Renewed tensions in the Middle East have pushed oil prices higher, with crude gaining approximately 2.3% following reports of attacks involving Houthi forces and a Saudi Arabian airport. The latest escalation has added a geopolitical risk premium to energy prices, complicating efforts to bring fuel costs lower. Gareth also discussed the Trump administration's reported efforts to increase diesel availability through an arrangement involving Russia, questioning whether the proposed supply would be meaningful relative to global energy consumption.

The more important question for traders is whether the geopolitical rally changes oil's underlying technical structure. Gareth identified \$88.75 as a significant support area, with price action remaining constructive while that level holds. The rising trendline connecting the lows from early September provides another important reference point. A sustained break beneath that trendline would weaken the bullish structure and shift the technical outlook toward the bearish side. Until then, the chart continues to support a neutral-to-higher bias, even if the initial catalyst is geopolitical rather than economic.

This is where headline-driven trading becomes dangerous. A sudden escalation can produce a sharp move in oil, but the size of the reaction does not determine whether the move will continue. The technical structure provides a more useful framework for assessing whether buyers remain in control. For Gareth, the key is not predicting the next geopolitical development. It is identifying the price level where the current market interpretation would need to change.

S&P 500: The 7,818 Level That Could Open the Door to 8,000

Despite strength in oil, S&P 500 futures have remained relatively resilient, trading near unchanged to slightly positive levels during the early session. The index is approaching an important resistance area around 7,818, corresponding to the August 13, 2026, all-time high identified in Gareth's analysis. This level represents the immediate technical hurdle separating the current consolidation from a potential continuation higher.

A confirmed daily close above 7,818 would strengthen the bullish case and bring the 8,000 area into focus as the next major upside objective. However, an intraday move through resistance without a sustained close would carry less weight, particularly if sellers quickly push the index back below the breakout level. Gareth's framework emphasizes confirmation because failed breakouts can leave traders positioned in the wrong direction just as momentum begins to reverse.

Beyond the immediate resistance level, Gareth highlighted a larger technical development that could become increasingly important into early 2027. Converging trendlines are gradually narrowing the S&P 500's neutral trading zone, reducing the space between the boundaries that define the broader bullish and bearish scenarios. If the current lines remain relevant, their projected intersection around January or February 2027 could force a more decisive technical resolution.

The convergence itself does not guarantee an explosive move or establish which direction the market will choose. What it does suggest is that the current neutral structure may become harder to maintain as the boundaries tighten. For longer-term traders, the important development will be whether price confirms a breakout above the upper boundary or loses the lower support structure. The chart is approaching a decision, but the market still needs to make it.

Gold's \$4,100 Support Test Reveals the Market's Inflation Concerns

One of the more interesting developments from Monday's session is the relationship between rising oil prices and weakness in precious metals. Gold and silver have faced selling pressure even though the Treasury market is closed, leaving traders without a fresh session of yield data to confirm the bond market's response. At first glance, that disconnect might appear unusual. Gareth's explanation focused on what investors expect yields to do when trading resumes.

Higher oil prices can contribute to inflation expectations, potentially putting upward pressure on Treasury yields. Because gold does not generate interest income, rising yields can increase the opportunity cost of holding the metal, although real yields, the dollar, and risk sentiment also influence its direction. The market may therefore be anticipating a higher-yield environment before the bond market has reopened. That interpretation helps explain why gold can weaken even without an immediate move in the 10-year Treasury yield.

Technically, gold is testing a significant support area near \$4,100. A confirmed daily close below that level would weaken the near-term structure and bring \$3,950 into focus as the first downside objective. Gareth also identified \$3,500 as a broader potential target if a more substantial correction develops. On the upside, a descending resistance trendline remains an obstacle. A confirmed break above that structure would improve the bullish outlook and could bring the \$4,450 area into consideration.

Silver is experiencing more modest weakness after recovering an important support area during Friday's session. For both metals, the next meaningful test comes when the Treasury market reopens and traders can evaluate whether actual yield movements support the inflation expectations currently influencing prices. If yields fail to rise despite stronger oil, the relationship between precious metals and the bond market could become particularly important. The confirmation matters more than the assumption.

Treasury Yields: A Bearish Technical Signal Beneath Inflation Fears

Although the 10-year Treasury yield is not trading during Monday's holiday session, last week's candlestick structure provides an important counterpoint to the inflation narrative. Gareth identified a major weekly pivot area extending back to the 2007 highs, with yields approaching resistance that has historical significance. The reaction around this area becomes especially interesting when viewed alongside the recent daily and weekly candlestick formations.

The daily chart formed a topping tail on Wednesday, followed by another topping tail on the weekly chart that closed Friday. These formations indicate that yields moved higher during their respective periods but failed to sustain those advances, suggesting selling pressure in yields near resistance. When rejection patterns appear across multiple timeframes, they can strengthen the technical case for a potential reversal, although the patterns alone do not establish a guaranteed outcome or a specific statistical probability.

This creates a divergence worth following. Rising oil prices are encouraging expectations of higher inflation and potentially higher yields, while the Treasury yield chart is showing signs of rejection near major resistance. If yields begin moving lower when trading resumes, that would support Gareth's technical interpretation and potentially relieve some pressure on precious metals. If yields instead break above resistance and sustain the move, the bearish reversal setup would weaken. The next session should help determine which signal carries more weight.

Bank Earnings: Oversold Bounces Do Not Eliminate Longer-Term Risk

The start of major bank earnings introduces another test for traders, with JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup among the institutions scheduled to report Tuesday, followed by Bank of America and Morgan Stanley on Wednesday. Gareth's analysis focused on the possibility that recent selling has created short-term technical opportunities, even as the broader economic environment presents longer-term challenges for financial institutions.

Bank of America (BAC) has pulled back into an oversold technical condition while filling a downside price gap. That combination can create the conditions for a rebound, particularly when selling becomes extended ahead of a major catalyst. Gareth identified the 50% Fibonacci retracement near \$58.80, within the broader \$58 to \$59 area, as an important potential resistance zone. A bounce toward that level would not necessarily indicate a renewed long-term uptrend. It could simply represent a recovery within a larger corrective structure.

JPMorgan (JPM) is showing a related setup after declining toward an area of historical support defined by previous pivot lows. That support may attract buyers looking for a short-term reaction, but earnings can quickly change the technical picture through price gaps and volatility. For both banks, the distinction between a support bounce and a confirmed trend reversal is essential. An oversold reading identifies a condition, not an automatic buy signal.

Gareth also emphasized the longer-term risks facing banks if elevated borrowing costs continue to weigh on loan demand and credit quality. Higher interest rates can benefit net interest income under certain conditions, but those benefits may be offset by weaker borrowing activity, funding costs, and rising credit losses. This creates a situation where short-term technical strength and a cautious longer-term fundamental outlook can coexist. Traders evaluating a bounce need to recognize that the time horizon of the setup matters as much as the direction.

Semiconductors: Why No Trade Can Be the Right Trade

Semiconductor earnings later in the week will provide additional information about technology sector strength, with ASML scheduled for Wednesday and Taiwan Semiconductor scheduled for Thursday. Gareth's technical analysis highlighted two different chart conditions, neither of which justified forcing a position simply because the companies are important to the broader market.

ASML remains between support near \$1,570 and resistance around \$1,870. The stock has struggled to establish a sustained breakout above its previous highs, leaving the current consolidation open to multiple interpretations. One possibility is that the structure develops into a larger bear flag, which would increase downside concerns if support eventually breaks. However, without a confirmed resolution, the stock remains in what Gareth described as no-man's land. The chart has boundaries, but it has not yet provided a compelling directional signal.

Taiwan Semiconductor is approaching a more defined technical support area near \$435, where a previous gap fill and historical pivot levels converge. That combination makes the area worth evaluating for a potential reaction, but price still needs to demonstrate that buyers are defending it. A support level can establish where a setup becomes interesting without establishing that the trade is ready.

The broader lesson is central to Gareth's trading philosophy. A professional trader does not need an opinion on every chart, and an active earnings calendar does not create an obligation to trade. When the technical evidence is mixed or the available reward does not adequately compensate for the risk, remaining on the sidelines can be a deliberate decision. Patience is not a lack of conviction. It is part of maintaining standards for trade selection.

Bitcoin: The \$81,000 to \$87,200 Range Defines the Setup

Bitcoin continues to trade within a broad consolidation, with Gareth identifying \$81,000 as major support and \$87,200 as the resistance level that needs to break for the bullish case to improve. Although Bitcoin has shown some early weakness, the larger technical picture remains defined by these boundaries rather than the smaller moves occurring between them.

A confirmed breakout above \$87,200 would improve the bullish structure and bring the \$95,000 to \$97,000 target zone into focus based on Gareth's measured-move analysis. Conversely, a sustained breakdown beneath \$81,000 would weaken the range and raise the possibility of a decline toward \$75,000. These are conditional scenarios, not predetermined outcomes. Until price moves decisively beyond one of the boundaries, Bitcoin remains range-bound.

The most difficult area for inexperienced traders is often the middle of the range. Price can move sharply in either direction without establishing a sustainable trend, encouraging repeated entries and exits that become costly through losses, spreads, fees, and potentially leverage. Gareth's warning was directed at the temptation to anticipate a breakout before the chart confirms one. Traders who repeatedly chase movement inside consolidation can find themselves reacting to volatility rather than executing a defined plan.

The stronger approach is to recognize where the technical edge may improve. A reaction near established support, a confirmed resistance breakout, or a breakdown followed by acceptance below support provides a clearer framework than taking a position in the middle of an unresolved range. Bitcoin does not need to produce a trade today for the chart analysis to be useful. Knowing where the next meaningful decision may occur is already valuable.

The Real Trading Edge: Selectivity Over Activity

Across equities, commodities, bonds, and cryptocurrencies, Gareth returned to the same principle: a trade should offer a meaningful edge before capital is committed. His preference is to identify setups where technical evidence supports a favorable outcome rather than accepting a roughly even directional proposition simply because the market is moving.

Gareth described looking for setups he assesses as having approximately 70% to 75% odds of success. Those figures represent his trading framework and judgment, not an independently established win rate for the patterns discussed. Actual trading outcomes depend on entry price, risk management, position sizing, execution costs, and market conditions. A favorable-looking chart is not enough by itself, and even a strategy with a relatively high win rate can lose money if losses are substantially larger than gains.

He also explained how selective this process can be. Out of 100 charts reviewed, only a small number may present setups that meet his standards at a given time. That is not a reason to lower the threshold or search for additional trades. It is a reminder that opportunity and activity are not the same thing. The objective is to identify the conditions where the chart, the risk, and the potential reward justify taking a position.

Bottom Line: Let the Levels Confirm the Next Move

Monday's market provides several important technical reference points, but the strongest opportunities may depend on what happens after the initial reactions. Oil needs to defend its support structure, the S&P 500 needs a confirmed close above 7,818 to strengthen the case for 8,000, and gold must hold \$4,100 to avoid opening a deeper downside scenario. The reopening of the Treasury market will also help clarify whether the inflation expectations influencing precious metals are supported by actual yield movements.

Bank earnings and semiconductor results will add another layer of volatility, while Bitcoin remains caught between \$81,000 support and \$87,200 resistance. None of these developments requires traders to predict the outcome before it occurs. Gareth's framework is built around identifying where the market has an opportunity to confirm or invalidate a setup, then evaluating whether the available risk and reward justify action.

The takeaway is straightforward: the market can present important levels without presenting an immediate trade. The edge comes from recognizing the difference.

Disclaimer: Trading and investing involve substantial risk, including the possible loss of principal. This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial instrument. Technical analysis identifies possible scenarios, not guaranteed outcomes. Always conduct your own research and consider your financial circumstances and risk tolerance before making investment decisions.

Published by Verified Investing | U.S. Economic Metrics

Released: October 9, 2026 | Data Period: October 2026 | Source: University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers

Key Takeaways

• Sentiment missed and fell: The headline index dropped to 46.3 in October, down from 48.1 in September, missing consensus of 47.6. Not the headline the press release framing suggested.
• Current conditions collapsed: The current conditions index fell to 44.7 from 50.9 — a 6.2-point drop that accounted for the weakness beneath the headline.. The consensus expected 50.5. That is a 5.8-point miss on what households feel right now.
• Expectations beat: The expectations index rose to 47.3 from 46.3, beating consensus of 45.9. Future-oriented sentiment improved even as present conditions deteriorated sharply.
• 1-year inflation expectations rose: 4.7%, up a tick from 4.6% in September, in line with consensus. Short-run price anxiety is not cooling.
• 5-year inflation expectations moved higher: 3.5%, up from 3.4%. The Fed's long-run anchor is drifting. That is the number that matters most for policy, and it moved in the wrong direction.
• Headline sentiment fell even as expectations improved: The University of Michigan acknowledged the 1.8-point decline in headline sentiment, while noting that inflation expectations rose for the second consecutive month. The more important divergence is within the sentiment data itself: current conditions deteriorated sharply even as forward-looking expectations improved.

October 2026 UMich Report: Why the 46.3 Sentiment Reading Matters

The University of Michigan's Surveys of Consumers produces two numbers the Fed actually reads: inflation expectations. Everything else — the headline sentiment index, current conditions, the forward-looking index — is context. Useful context, but context. The expectations data is where monetary policy lives.

With that hierarchy established, here is what the October release shows: household sentiment is deteriorating in the present tense while inflation expectations are creeping higher on both the short and long end. That combination is uncomfortable for a Fed that hiked 25 basis points on September 16 to 3.75%–4.00% and is now asking whether one hike was enough.

The University of Michigan releases a preliminary and a final reading each month. These are the preliminary October 2026 survey results, released October 9. The final October reading is scheduled for October 23 and may revise the initial estimates.

Current Conditions Slide While Expectations Improve

Consensus expected 47.6. The print came in at 46.3. That is a 1.3-point miss, but the aggregate masks a sharper internal story.

The current conditions index fell from 50.9 to 44.7. That is a 6.2-point drop in a single month, against a consensus of 50.5. Households are feeling the present moment considerably worse than economists expected, and worse than they felt a month ago.

The expectations index went the other way. It rose from 46.3 to 47.3, beating consensus of 45.9 by 1.4 points. People feel worse about today and slightly less pessimistic about tomorrow.

What does that split mean? It is not a recovery signal. Current conditions at 44.7 is deeply depressed. An expectations index at 47.3 is still well below 50. The headline is weak; the internal composition is fractured. Rising energy costs, the Iran war petroleum shock, and a Fed that just raised rates are all landing on household balance sheets in real time. The current conditions reading says households feel that pressure acutely.

5-Year Inflation Expectations Rise to 3.5%: The Number the Fed Cannot Ignore

Here is the buried story.

The 5-year inflation expectations index rose to 3.5% from 3.4%. One tick. Not dramatic in isolation. But the Fed's entire credibility framework depends on long-run inflation expectations staying anchored near 2%. At 3.5%, they are 150 basis points above target — and they moved higher the month after a rate hike.

The 1-year expectation held at 4.7%, ticking up from 4.6%. Short-run expectations are price-driven — gasoline, groceries, the items households encounter daily. With Brent crude running near $104 as of October 9 and petroleum cost pressure still propagating through the supply chain, 4.7% is not surprising. But it is not cooling either.

The combination of 4.7% at one year and 3.5% at five years tells a specific story: households believe near-term inflation is high, and they are beginning to believe that inflation will be structurally higher for longer than the Fed's framework promises. That is de-anchoring in slow motion.

The Fed's September hike was designed partly to prevent exactly this dynamic. The October UMich data suggests it has not worked yet. One hike into a petroleum shock, with services prices at four-year highs, was not enough to move the needle on household price psychology. The 5-year reading at 3.5% — up a tick, not down — is the October print's single most important data point.

Current Conditions at 44.7: The Consumption Signal the Equity Market Should Watch

Current conditions does not influence the Fed's rate path the way inflation expectations do. It influences consumption, and consumption is roughly 70% of U.S. GDP.

A reading of 44.7 is distressed. When the current conditions index falls this sharply — 6.2 points in a single month — it typically reflects a concrete deterioration in household finances: higher borrowing costs biting through variable-rate debt, energy bills rising, or labor market anxiety building. All three are plausible contributors in October 2026.

What this reading does not guarantee is an immediate pullback in retail spending. Households have consistently spent more than sentiment surveys implied over the past four years, partly driven by strong nominal wage growth and the wealth effect from asset prices. But the margin for that divergence is narrowing. The August 2026 personal saving rate was 4.1%, the lowest since November 2022. Households are not building buffers. If current conditions remain this weak through November, the Q4 consumption picture gets complicated.

The current conditions miss — 44.7 versus a consensus of 50.5 — is the single largest surprise in this release in absolute terms. It deserves more attention than the 1.3-point headline miss.

What the October UMich Report Means for Markets and Traders

The following is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

Watch the 5-year expectations trajectory, not the sentiment headline. The Fed is not setting policy based on whether consumers feel good or bad. It is watching whether long-run price expectations stay anchored. At 3.5% and rising, the pressure to keep policy restrictive — or hike again — is incrementally higher after this print. The October 27–28 FOMC meeting is the next catalyst. This data does not force a second hike, but it reduces the argument for signaling an imminent pause.

The current conditions collapse is a consumption watchpoint. A 6.2-point drop in one month is not noise. Watch October retail sales and credit card spending data for confirmation or reversal. If spending holds despite the sentiment deterioration, the divergence between psychology and behavior continues. If spending rolls over, the Q4 GDP growth picture weakens materially from the Q2 real 2.2% annualized pace.

Rate-sensitive sectors face a dual headwind. Weak consumer sentiment and sticky long-run inflation expectations together argue against a near-term pivot. Housing, autos, and consumer discretionary — all rate-sensitive — get no relief from this print.

What would change the thesis: A final reading (if this is the preliminary) that revises current conditions materially higher would reduce the alarm. A 5-year expectation that reverses back to 3.4% or below in November would give the Fed more room to signal stability. Neither is the base case from today's data.

The September 16 hike did not cool household inflation psychology in October. That is the sentence that matters. The next question is whether the November UMich print shows the same or worse. If 5-year expectations hit 3.6%, the conversation about a second hike becomes considerably louder before year-end.

Source: University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers, October 2026, released October 9, 2026. Data available at sca.isr.umich.edu.

S&P 500, Bitcoin, Treasury Yields and Oil Test Key Technical Levels

My Trading Game Plan Revealed | October 9, 2026

Friday's market setup was less about chasing the latest headline and more about determining which moves actually changed the technical structure. AI stocks were hit with renewed volatility, Treasury yields reversed from an important area, Bitcoin suffered a sharp intraday flush, and several commodities tested major support or resistance. Across all of them, Gareth Soloway's framework came back to the same principle: a dramatic move is not automatically a confirmed move.

That distinction matters because markets routinely trade through important levels intraday, only to reclaim them before the close. The headline may create the initial reaction, but the chart determines whether the underlying setup has actually changed. For traders, the job is not to predict every reaction. It is to identify the levels that define confirmation, invalidation, and the next higher-probability move.

AI Stocks and Semiconductor Rotation: What the Selloff Really Showed

The AI trade came under pressure after reports surrounding OpenAI's revenue outlook triggered renewed selling across semiconductor and AI-related stocks. The immediate move was significant, but the more useful signal came from what happened elsewhere in the market.

As AI names weakened, capital rotated into areas that had previously lagged, including defensive stocks and several major banks. That suggested the market was not simply moving into broad risk-off mode. Money was being repositioned.

That changes the read because sector rotation can tell traders more than the headline itself. If investors were abandoning equities altogether, weakness would likely spread much more broadly. Instead, the market showed a willingness to move capital from one area to another.

By Friday morning, the iShares Semiconductor ETF (SOXX) and other AI-related trades were attempting to stabilize. That does not mean the sector is automatically headed back to new highs. It means sellers had not yet established a clean technical breakdown.

Gareth's larger point was that traders can get trapped by debating whether a headline is fair, exaggerated, or fundamentally justified. The chart does not need that debate resolved. If support breaks and confirms, the setup changes. If price reclaims the level, the breakdown has failed.

That is the framework that matters.

10-Year Treasury Yield at 5.24%: Why This Level Matters for Stocks

The most important macro chart from Friday's session may be the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield.

After pushing higher, the yield reversed and moved back toward 5.24%, creating a daily topping-tail formation. That is a meaningful first signal because it shows buyers were unable to maintain the move higher, but Gareth wanted more than a single daily candle.

The weekly close matters next.

A weekly close at approximately 5.24% or lower would add a second layer of confirmation by creating a similar rejection on the weekly chart. That would put daily and weekly momentum in alignment and strengthen the case for yields moving lower over the coming weeks.

This is where the Treasury chart begins to connect directly with the equity market.

If the 10-year yield begins moving back below 5%, some of the valuation pressure that higher yields have placed on equities could ease. That would give the S&P 500 another potential tailwind as it works toward Gareth's broader upside target near 8,000.

The important point is not simply that lower yields are bullish. The reason yields are falling still matters, and equities will ultimately have to confirm the move on their own chart. But from a technical perspective, a confirmed reversal in the 10-year would remove one of the market's larger recent headwinds.

S&P 500 Outlook: 8,000 Target Meets Major Resistance

The S&P 500 recently pushed through its prior all-time high before experiencing a relatively shallow rejection. So far, that pullback has not materially damaged the larger bullish structure.

That keeps Gareth's upside target near 8,000 in play.

However, the market is also approaching a longer-term resistance trend line tied to the June 2026 highs. That makes the area around 8,000 more than just a psychological target. It is also where the index begins running into a larger technical obstacle.

The setup remains constructive while price continues to hold its broader trend, but traders should not assume that reaching 8,000 automatically means the index will accelerate through it.

The closer price gets to major resistance, the more important the reaction becomes.

A clean breakout and hold would strengthen the bull case. A rejection could shift the risk-reward and force a more defensive read.

That is why targets are not predictions. They are levels where traders reassess.

U.S. Dollar Strength and the Commodity Market Outlook

The U.S. Dollar Index remains strong, trading near levels the original analysis identified as the highest since April 2025.

That strength matters because commodities priced in dollars can face additional pressure when the dollar rises. However, Gareth's framing was important: DXY strength does not necessarily mean the underlying U.S. fiscal picture has improved. The index measures the dollar relative to other major currencies.

His description of the dollar as the "best house on a nasty block" captures the relative nature of the move.

For traders, the takeaway is simple. Dollar strength is part of the macro backdrop, but individual commodity charts still determine the trade.

Oil, gold, silver, and natural gas are each approaching their own technical decision points.

Crude Oil Support at \$88.75: Breakdown or Bounce?

Crude oil remains near a critical support area around \$88.75.

As long as that level holds, the possibility of another move toward \$100 remains intact. A confirmed daily close below \$88.75 would change the structure and shift attention toward lower support.

Gareth's downside target in that scenario is approximately \$78 per barrel.

The distinction here is confirmation.

Trading below \$88.75 intraday is not necessarily enough. What matters is whether oil closes beneath the level and then begins accepting price below support.

If that happens, the chart has changed.

If oil tests the level and buyers reclaim it, support is still doing its job.

This is exactly the type of setup where traders can avoid unnecessary guessing. The chart has already identified the decision point.

Gold and Silver Technical Analysis: Why Confirmation Still Matters

Gold briefly moved below an important trend line before recovering back above it. Under Gareth's confirmation framework, the initial move was not enough to establish a confirmed breakdown because price failed to remain below support.

Silver produced a similar setup.

It moved beneath an important support area but then showed signs of reclaiming the level rather than extending lower.

Neither recovery guarantees that gold or silver will rally from here. That is not the point.

The important lesson is that an intraday violation and a confirmed breakdown are two different things.

Markets frequently probe below support, trigger stops, and then recover. Waiting for confirmation helps separate a temporary flush from an actual structural change.

For both metals, the setup remains intact as long as buyers continue defending the relevant trend lines. A confirmed close beneath support would change the read.

Natural Gas Wedge Pattern: Watching for a Confirmed Breakout

Natural gas remains trapped inside a tightening wedge, with descending resistance above and rising support underneath.

That type of compression usually tells traders that volatility is being stored rather than resolved.

The recent rally reached the descending resistance line before inventory data helped trigger a reversal. The important part of that sequence is that the technical resistance was already visible before the headline arrived.

The news provided the catalyst. The chart provided the level.

If natural gas eventually confirms a breakout above the wedge, Gareth's measured-move analysis suggests a potential upside target roughly 40% to 44% above the breakout area.

That is a technical projection, not a guaranteed return.

The trade does not exist because the target is attractive. It exists only if price confirms the breakout.

Until then, the better trade may simply be patience.

Verizon Stock Support Near \$41.50 After Telecom Selloff

Telecom stocks came under pressure following concerns about potential competition from Starlink in the cellular market.

Verizon (VZ) fell toward \$42.50 before recovering toward \$43.50, but Gareth identified a stronger technical support area closer to \$41.50.

That level becomes more important when viewed on the longer-term chart.

Previous resistance around that area was eventually broken, which creates the potential for that former resistance to act as support when price returns from above. Gareth often refers to that relationship through his River Theory framework.

The distinction between a trade and an investment is important here.

A technically attractive support zone can produce a bounce even if the longer-term fundamental story has become more complicated. A short-term setup does not automatically mean the stock has become an attractive long-term holding.

Around \$41.50, the chart is offering a defined area to judge whether buyers are willing to defend the stock.

That is the information traders need.

Delta Air Lines Stock: Key Support Levels at \$78 and \$76.35

Delta Air Lines (DAL) also sold off following its latest earnings update, with the stock initially moving toward \$78 before recovering near \$80.

The first notable technical area is the gap fill around \$78.

Gareth identified another level near \$77.80 for traders willing to act earlier, but the stronger technical area sits lower near \$76.35.

That level combines a gap fill with a previous pivot high that later transitioned into support.

That confluence is what makes the lower level more interesting.

The first support level reached is not always the best one. A stronger setup often appears where several technical signals come together.

For Delta, \$76.35 provides the cleaner area to evaluate whether selling pressure is finally beginning to exhaust itself.

The level creates the setup. The reaction confirms it.

Bitcoin Technical Analysis: \$81,000 Holds the Bull Flag Together

Bitcoin delivered one of the more dramatic moves of the session, dropping toward \$80,000 and triggering significant liquidation activity across the crypto market.

But the low itself was not the most important part of the chart.

Bitcoin recovered and closed back above approximately \$81,000, the level Gareth was using to evaluate a potential breakdown from the existing bull flag.

That recovery matters.

Because the daily candle reclaimed the breakdown area before the close, the move below \$81,000 did not meet Gareth's confirmation requirement.

The chart has become less clean, but the larger bullish setup has not yet been invalidated.

That keeps the possibility of an upside resolution alive.

The risk is also clearly defined.

A confirmed close below the \$81,000 area would weaken the bull flag and bring Gareth's next downside target near \$75,500 into focus.

Until then, the difference between a flush and a breakdown remains important.

Bitcoin can experience extreme intraday volatility without necessarily changing its larger technical structure.

That is why traders have to separate emotion from confirmation.

Trading Psychology: Why Confirmation Matters More Than Headlines

The common thread through Friday's analysis was not AI, Treasury yields, oil, or Bitcoin.

It was process.

Sharp market moves naturally create emotional pressure. Traders begin questioning their thesis, reacting to headlines, or assuming that a fast move must also be an important one.

Gareth's framework is designed to slow that reaction down.

His casino analogy captures the idea well. The house does not need to win every hand. It needs a repeatable edge and the discipline to apply that edge consistently.

Trading is not a casino, and technical analysis does not guarantee profitable outcomes. But the analogy is useful because traders also have to think in terms of repeated decisions rather than individual wins and losses.

The goal is not certainty.

The goal is to identify the level, understand what confirms the setup, know what invalidates it, and manage risk when the chart proves the thesis wrong.

That is what allows a trader to respond to the market instead of reacting to it.

Key Market Levels Traders Should Watch Next

Friday's market produced plenty of volatility, but the more important signal came from where that volatility stopped.

The 10-year yield is attempting to confirm a reversal near 5.24%. The S&P 500 still has a path toward 8,000 but is approaching larger resistance. Crude oil is testing \$88.75 support. Gold and silver have not yet confirmed their recent breakdown attempts. Bitcoin reclaimed \$81,000 and kept its broader structure alive.

Across each market, the framework is the same.

The initial move gets attention. Confirmation determines whether the setup actually changed.

That is the advantage of defining levels before the market reaches them. Traders do not have to guess whether every headline matters. They can let price answer the question.

Trading involves substantial risk and may not be suitable for all investors. This material is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.

OpenAI Shakes Tech Stocks, but the Market's Recovery Faces a Critical Test

Trading the Close Market Review | October 8, 2026

The biggest development in Thursday's market wasn't the initial selloff following headlines about OpenAI's revenue. It was how quickly buyers returned, and whether that recovery was enough to repair the technical damage. Technology stocks came under pressure as investors reassessed expectations for AI infrastructure spending, but the rebound into the close suggested buyers weren't ready to abandon the sector. The question now is whether that buying can carry the major indices back above resistance.

During Thursday's Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek focused on the technical levels separating a temporary shakeout from a more meaningful decline. The S&P 500's failure to reclaim a key neckline, the possibility of a reversal in Treasury yields, and several individual stocks approaching important support and resistance zones provided a framework for what traders should watch next. The lesson was straightforward: Headlines can create volatility, but price action determines whether the market is actually changing direction.

OpenAI's Revenue Headlines Test the AI Trade

The afternoon's volatility began with reports suggesting OpenAI's annualized revenue was running closer to \$50 billion, compared with earlier expectations around \$70 billion. The apparent gap raised questions about the pace of AI monetization and whether the enormous investment flowing into data centers could generate the returns investors have been anticipating.

That concern quickly spread to technology and AI infrastructure stocks. The market has spent considerable time pricing in continued growth in computing demand, so any indication that revenue expectations might be overstated can trigger selling across companies tied to that investment cycle.

Drew emphasized an important qualification. OpenAI's revenue reporting may not be directly comparable with metrics used by other technology companies, particularly where third-party marketplace activity is treated differently. That accounting distinction matters when evaluating the size of the apparent shortfall. It does not eliminate the underlying question about AI spending, but it provides context for why the initial market reaction may have been excessive.

The recovery that followed was therefore important. Buyers stepped in after the initial decline, suggesting the headline alone wasn't enough to force a sustained breakdown. However, recovering from an intraday low is different from reclaiming resistance. That distinction leaves the charts, rather than the revenue debate, as the immediate guide for traders.

SPY's 775.21 Neckline Becomes the Key Test

The S&P 500 ETF (SPY) fell toward 770 during the afternoon selloff before recovering to approximately 773.93. Although buyers absorbed a significant portion of the decline, the ETF remained below the 775.21 neckline of an inverse head and shoulders formation that Drew has been tracking.

That level is important because an inverse head and shoulders pattern generally reflects an attempt by buyers to establish a higher low and reverse a prior decline. A sustained move above the neckline would strengthen the bullish case. Remaining below it, particularly after an unsuccessful recovery attempt, leaves the pattern unconfirmed and raises the possibility of another test of support.

For the next session, 775.21 becomes the immediate line in the sand. A convincing reclaim would suggest buyers are regaining control of the near-term structure. Continued rejection would keep the downside gap near 764 in focus, where a previous pivot area adds technical significance.

The Nasdaq displayed similar instability, with the Composite falling toward 27,069 before recovering. Drew also identified a developing bear flag on the hourly QQQ chart, suggesting the rebound still needs confirmation before traders can assume the selling pressure has passed. Separately, he highlighted an important Nasdaq Composite gap area near 28,867, where a rising trend line dating back to the March lows could provide another technical reference.

The broader takeaway is that the market showed resilience, but not a confirmed reversal. Buyers defended the lows, yet the major technical obstacles remain overhead. Until those levels are reclaimed, traders have reason to treat the recovery as a developing setup rather than an established bullish breakout.

Treasury Yields Could Determine Whether the Rally Broadens

While technology headlines dominated the afternoon, Drew identified another important variable beneath the surface: the 10-year Treasury yield.

Rising yields have created an uneven environment for equities. Large technology companies have helped support the major indices, while many smaller companies have struggled with the implications of elevated financing costs. Drew noted that during a recent rally, more than 70% of Nasdaq constituents were trading below their 50-day moving averages, illustrating how strength in the headline index can conceal weakness across individual stocks.

The technical picture in Treasury yields is now worth watching closely. Recent daily candles have developed topping tails, indicating that buyers pushed yields higher but were unable to maintain those levels through the close. This type of rejection can precede a reversal, although additional confirmation is necessary.

Drew identified 5.28% as the critical threshold.

"What we need to remain underneath is 5.28%, all right, go ahead and write that down."

A weekly close below that level would reinforce the developing rejection pattern. If yields subsequently begin trending lower, the shift could relieve some pressure on rate-sensitive stocks and improve the conditions for broader participation in an equity rally.

There is an important qualification, however. Falling yields are not automatically bullish. If yields decline because investors anticipate a sharp economic slowdown, the implications for corporate earnings could offset the benefit of lower borrowing costs. The reason yields are falling matters alongside the technical signal.

For now, the relationship between Treasury yields and market breadth deserves as much attention as the major indices themselves. A sustained decline in yields, combined with improving participation outside mega-cap technology, would provide stronger evidence of a healthier rally.

Chipotle and AI Infrastructure Show Why Resistance Matters

The same principle applies to individual stocks. A sharp price movement can attract attention, but its significance depends on where it occurs within the larger chart structure.

Chipotle Mexican Grill (CMG) rallied approximately 6.21% amid takeover speculation involving Starbucks. The move was notable, but Drew focused on the stock's location relative to a longer-term declining parallel channel that dates back to June 2024.

After repeatedly trading beneath that channel, Chipotle's rebound brought price back toward its underside. Former support can become resistance following a breakdown, making this a meaningful test of whether buyers have enough strength to change the prevailing trend.

The level Drew highlighted was 33.50. A sustained reclaim above that area would improve the bullish case and suggest the rebound may have more room to develop. Failure to clear it would leave the stock vulnerable to renewed selling, particularly if the takeover speculation fails to produce a concrete development.

Bloom Energy (BE) offered another example of the relationship between headlines and technical structure. Shares initially sold off with other AI infrastructure names before producing a notable bottoming tail on the 10-minute chart. That recovery indicated buying interest, but the broader setup remains dependent on whether support holds.

Drew has been monitoring a bull flag structure developing since September, with particular interest in the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement. If price approaches that area around mid-October, the convergence could create a potential support test worth evaluating. The timing and price must align, and buyers would still need to demonstrate a reaction before the setup becomes more compelling.

Should the pattern resolve higher, Drew identified potential resistance and target areas at 236, 240, 246.96, and 268. Those levels provide a framework for assessing the trade, not an expectation that every target will be reached.

Nebius Group (NBIS) faces a different technical challenge. Shares are testing parallel channel support near 214, with a break potentially exposing the previous low around 205. A recovery would shift attention back toward overhead resistance near 256.57. The stock's next meaningful signal will come from whether buyers defend the channel or allow the breakdown to develop.

Across all three charts, the lesson is consistent. A rally into resistance and a decline into support require different responses. The location of price within the broader structure often matters more than the size of the day's move.

Rollins Demonstrates the Value of Technical Confluence

One of Drew's most useful educational examples came from Rollins (ROL), which advanced approximately 4.5% during the session. Rather than focusing exclusively on the day's gain, he explained why the stock's larger technical structure deserved attention.

"I don't like to take trades with just one single factor, even though this is a very strong factor."

The weekly chart contains a historical pivot dating to April 22, 2019. That level, near 29.32, previously acted as resistance before price eventually broke above it. A return to the same area creates the possibility of a breakout-retest setup, where former resistance is tested as support.

The second factor comes from Fibonacci analysis. Measuring the advance from the 2020 pandemic lows to the subsequent highs places the 78.6% retracement near 30.25. Combined with the historical pivot, this creates a broader support zone around 29.32 to 30.25.

That overlap is what makes the setup interesting. Two independently identified technical levels are pointing toward a similar area, increasing its relevance for traders monitoring a potential reversal. Oversold conditions provide additional context, although they do not guarantee that selling has ended.

If buyers establish support and price begins recovering, Drew identified 35.83 as an initial upside reference, followed by resistance around 37.98, 43.36, and 45. These levels provide a framework for evaluating a potential rebound while recognizing that the setup would weaken if price fails to defend the underlying support zone.

This is where technical analysis becomes more than drawing lines on a chart. A single support level can fail. A Fibonacci retracement can be breached. Even an oversold stock can continue declining. When several factors converge, traders have a more defined area to evaluate, but confirmation and risk management remain essential.

The edge is not in predicting that a bounce must happen. It is in identifying where a trade may become attractive, what would confirm the idea, and where the original thesis would no longer hold.

Oil, Natural Gas, and Precious Metals Remain at Important Levels

Outside equities, Drew reviewed several commodity markets where technical patterns are approaching potential decision points.

US oil continues to trade within a broader bear flag structure, with support near 86.90. Geopolitical developments have contributed to price swings, but the technical pattern has yet to establish a convincing bullish breakout. As long as price remains within the flag, the risk of another move lower remains part of the setup. A sustained break above resistance would require reassessing that bearish interpretation.

Natural gas declined approximately 2.58% following inventory data, reinforcing the importance of position sizing in a market known for abrupt reversals. Drew referred to the commodity by its familiar trading nickname, the "Widowmaker," because apparently attractive setups can reverse sharply and expose poorly managed positions.

The longer-term technical level he highlighted was 3.59, with October serving as an important period for evaluating the potential breakout structure. Rather than assuming support will hold, traders should recognize that natural gas frequently moves through widely watched levels before establishing direction.

Precious metals presented a divergence. Gold gained approximately 0.5% and continued consolidating without making new lows, while silver fell about 1.2% and approached a potentially important breakdown.

Silver is testing the midpoint of a parallel channel. A confirmed daily close below that support would increase the relevance of a measured-move objective near 53.26, which also aligns with a larger head and shoulders neckline. The broader 50 to 53 region could attract attention from longer-term buyers because of overlapping technical levels, but a bullish reversal would still require evidence that selling pressure is subsiding.

The difference between gold's relative stability and silver's weakness is worth monitoring. When closely related markets begin moving differently, that divergence can provide information about risk appetite and the strength of the prevailing trend.

Bitcoin's Pullback Has Not Yet Broken Its Bullish Structure

Bitcoin declined approximately 1.9% during the session, but Drew's analysis emphasized the importance of viewing that move within the larger breakout structure.

The cryptocurrency remains inside the range of a previous strong bullish candle, creating an inside-bar consolidation. Such patterns can reflect a temporary pause as traders digest an earlier move rather than an immediate reversal of the trend.

Drew described the formation as a staircase, with each successful breakout potentially establishing a new level of support.

"As long as it remains in that area, just think of it like steps on a staircase, guys."

The critical reference is 80,837, the low of the previous breakout candle. As long as Bitcoin maintains that level, the current consolidation can still be interpreted as constructive within the broader bullish pattern.

A break below 80,837 would weaken that interpretation and require a reassessment of the setup. If buyers defend support and price resumes its advance, the larger head and shoulders neckline near 89,500 remains an important upside reference.

The lesson is not that every pullback should be bought. It is that a decline must be evaluated against the structure it is testing. A modest move lower inside a broader bullish formation carries different implications from a confirmed break of the support that defines the pattern.

What Traders Should Watch Next

Thursday's recovery prevented the afternoon selloff from developing into a more decisive decline, but the market still has work to do before the bullish case strengthens.

For SPY, the immediate test remains 775.21. Reclaiming that neckline would improve the short-term outlook, while continued rejection keeps the 764 gap area in focus. On the macro side, a weekly close below 5.28% in the 10-year Treasury yield would strengthen the developing reversal signal and could improve the backdrop for stocks outside the largest technology companies.

Individual equities will require the same discipline. Chipotle must prove it can reclaim 33.50, Bloom Energy needs a confirmed reaction at support, and Rollins illustrates why multiple technical factors are more useful when paired with evidence of buying interest. Bitcoin's 80,837 support and silver's channel midpoint offer additional signals about whether recent selling is corrective or developing into something more significant.

None of these levels guarantees an outcome. Their value comes from giving traders specific conditions to monitor instead of reacting to every new headline.

The Bottom Line

The OpenAI revenue headlines created the volatility, but the market's reaction provided the more useful information. Buyers stepped in after the selloff, yet SPY remained below a key neckline, and the broader equity market still faces questions about participation and the direction of Treasury yields.

Drew's framework for the next session is built around confirmation. A rebound is encouraging, but it becomes more meaningful when resistance is reclaimed, support holds, and related markets begin supporting the same interpretation.

That is the advantage of approaching volatility with a plan. The objective isn't to predict every headline or catch every intraday reversal. It is to understand where the market's technical structure changes, identify setups with defined risk, and remain patient when the evidence is incomplete.

Crypto markets sold off hard and fast today. Bitcoin printed a large red one-hour candle, and the major altcoins dropped between roughly 4% and 7% in about half an hour. The move came alongside renewed escalation headlines out of the Middle East. Moves that fast tend to produce emotional decisions, and this one is no different.

The more useful question is where it is likely to find buyers. Bitcoin is pulling back into a zone that used to be resistance and has since turned into support, and that zone lines up with a descending trend line. When the market leader is testing a level like that, the altcoins tend to follow Bitcoin's lead, only with bigger moves. Each of them has its own defined support below.

The key question is whether Bitcoin can hold its former resistance zone as support. Nick sees the strongest potential for a bounce where the bottom of that zone converges with the descending trend line. If Bitcoin continues lower, the support levels across the altcoins become the next areas to watch.

Bitcoin: Former Resistance Turned Support

To understand today's move, zoom out from the one-hour chart. Bitcoin is trading inside a rectangle defined by two reference points: the November wick low, which marks the bottom of the zone, and the May high, which marks the top.

That rectangle has a history. Price pressed against it repeatedly as resistance before it finally closed a daily candle inside the zone. That close changed its role. Former resistance became support, and Bitcoin bounced off the top of the range before today's sell pressure pushed it back down.

The Descending Trend Line Confluence

The second element is a descending trend line that shows up clearly on both the four-hour and one-hour charts. It previously acted as support during a pullback, stopping the decline when price wicked into the rectangle.

The line is now converging with the bottom of the support zone. When horizontal support and a trend line meet at the same price, that area carries more weight than either level would alone. If Bitcoin falls back into that confluence, Nick sees it as one of the stronger areas for a potential relief bounce.

Altcoins: Higher Beta, Defined Levels

When Bitcoin drops 3% or 4%, altcoins often drop 5% to 10%. Today fit that pattern. Ethereum fell about 3.9% in 36 minutes, Solana about 4%, XRP more than 4.5%, AVAX about 6.6%, and Cardano nearly 7%.

The size of the move matters less than where each asset sits relative to its own structure.

Ethereum: Bottom of the Bull Flag

Ethereum broke out of a bull flag on the daily chart. The pattern's measured target sits near $3,200, which also serves as a possible resistance area in the coming weeks. Before that comes into play, ETH needs to resolve its current range. The bottom of the flag gives support near $2,357–$2,360.

Solana: The $100 Psychological Level

Solana broke out above a descending trend line that had acted as resistance through repeated tests. On a retest, that same line now sits just below $100, around $96–$97, and drifts lower over time. The $100 mark itself is a strong psychological level, likely to attract both buying and selling activity.

XRP: Trend Line Support Near $1.28

XRP failed to close a four-hour candle above near-term resistance. The more important reference is a trend line drawn from the August peak through a subsequent resistance point. Extending that line forward puts potential support near $1.278, just below $1.30. That is the area to monitor if Bitcoin's weakness continues to pressure XRP.

Cardano: Multi-Month Support Under Pressure

Cardano was the weakest of the group. It failed its retests, rolled over, and is now heading toward a support level on the daily chart that dates back to July and was retested in August and September. That multi-month area is the next support Nick is watching if weakness continues. A successful retest there could put the higher range back in play.

AVAX: Testing $10

AVAX was trading almost exactly at $10 during the analysis, putting it at a major psychological level. Round numbers like $1, $10, and $100 tend to bring heavy volume, and there is potential for a bounce around that price. Prior four-hour wick lows identify another support area slightly below $10 if selling continues.

Zcash: A Signal That Played Out

Zcash had shown a bearish RSI divergence, with price making higher highs while RSI made lower highs. That divergence preceded a short setup that went on to play out. Support from prior wicks now sits just above $1,000, near $1,047–$1,050.

Key Levels to Monitor

What to Watch Next

Bitcoin is the deciding factor. A hold where the bottom of its rectangle meets the descending trend line keeps the bounce setup in play and makes the altcoin levels above credible areas for a reaction. A sustained move below that support zone would weaken the bullish bounce thesis and put additional pressure on the altcoin support levels identified above.

Also watch the headlines. Today's move coincided with geopolitical news, so any change in tone out of the Middle East could speed up or reverse the move.

Process Over Reaction

Fast sell-offs push traders into reactive decisions. Today's structure offers a framework instead: defined support, not a guaranteed bounce.

That framework starts and ends with Bitcoin. If the bottom of its former resistance zone holds where it meets the descending trend line, the altcoin support levels become more meaningful places to watch for a reaction. If it gives way, those same levels become the next tests.

Watch on YouTube

S&P 500 Holds Near Record Highs as Treasury Yields Flash a Reversal Signal: Gareth Soloway's Trading Game Plan

October 8, 2026 | Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist, VerifiedInvesting.com

The market has plenty of reasons to sell off. Oil prices are rising on renewed geopolitical tensions, Treasury yields remain elevated, and earnings season is exposing just how aggressively Wall Street has priced in corporate growth. Yet the S&P 500 continues to trade within striking distance of its all-time highs. That resilience was a central focus of Gareth Soloway's October 8 My Trading Game Plan, where the charts are telling a more constructive story than the headlines might suggest.

The more significant development may be taking place in the bond market. A sharp reversal in the 10-year Treasury yield is raising the possibility that yields have reached a near-term peak, potentially easing one of the biggest pressures facing equities. Meanwhile, crude oil, precious metals, natural gas, Bitcoin, and individual stocks are approaching technical levels that could define their next moves. The common thread across these markets is straightforward: headlines create volatility, but price action determines whether a setup is worth trading.

S&P 500 Technical Analysis: Bullish Structure Holds Near All-Time Highs

The S&P 500 continues to demonstrate strength despite a difficult macroeconomic backdrop. Overnight, rising crude oil prices helped push Treasury yields higher, a combination that would normally weigh on equities. Instead, S&P 500 futures recovered above the prior session's lows, reinforcing the idea that buyers remain willing to step in when prices pull back. That response carries more weight when viewed against the broader chart.

Just two sessions ago, the S&P 500 established a new all-time high. The index is now trading approximately 0.5% to 1% below that level, a relatively shallow retreat considering the surrounding uncertainty. Markets that remain near their highs despite unfavorable news are demonstrating underlying demand. This does not guarantee another breakout, but it makes an immediate bearish reversal harder to justify without additional technical evidence.

Gareth highlighted a developing structure that could initially resemble a double top but may ultimately resolve into a bullish cup and handle formation. The distinction comes down to what happens after the second test of resistance. A shallow pullback followed by another push higher would strengthen the bullish interpretation, while a breakdown through the developing support structure would change the outlook. Rather than labeling the pattern prematurely, the better approach is to let price confirm which formation is actually developing.

This is the classic market behavior known as climbing a wall of worry. Conflict involving Iran, political uncertainty ahead of the midterm elections, instability in France, and elevated bond yields all provide reasons for investors to question the rally. Yet those concerns have not produced a sustained breakdown in the S&P 500. Gareth's framework remains constructive while the technical structure holds. The important signal is not how many bearish headlines exist, but whether sellers can finally force the market below support.

10-Year Treasury Yield Reversal: Daily Topping Tail Signals a Potential Peak

While equities remain resilient, the 10-year Treasury yield may be providing the more consequential technical signal. Yesterday, the yield briefly surged to 5.365%, exceeding previous short-term highs near 5.35% and 5.36%. That breakout failed to hold, with yields reversing sharply and finishing the session at 5.286%. The resulting daily candle formed a pronounced topping tail, suggesting that buyers of yield were unable to maintain control at elevated levels.

A topping tail develops when price pushes significantly higher during a session but closes near the lower portion of its trading range. In this case, the rejection occurred near a multidecade extreme, making the signal particularly noteworthy. The initial breakout attracted momentum, but the reversal showed that the market was unwilling to sustain those higher yields. That does not establish a permanent top, but it creates a meaningful warning for traders positioned for continued upside.

The weekly chart now becomes the next confirmation point. Gareth identified the 5.26% to 5.27% area as an important level to watch heading into the end of the week. Additional downside into that zone could produce a weekly topping tail alongside the existing daily reversal. When bearish reversal signals align across multiple timeframes, the technical case for a more sustained pullback becomes stronger. Gareth characterized that combination as a particularly powerful signal, estimating that the odds of additional downside could exceed 80% if the weekly formation confirms.

The fundamental backdrop also helps explain the reversal. Strong demand at a roughly \$30 billion Treasury auction supported bond prices, which move inversely to yields. Federal Reserve minutes also reinforced a more patient policy outlook, with the market interpreting the discussion as reducing the likelihood of an October rate hike and shifting attention toward December. Upcoming PCE and CPI inflation readings remain important, but the chart has already registered a rejection of higher yields. For equities, confirmation of that reversal could remove a significant source of pressure, particularly if the S&P 500 continues holding near its highs.

Crude Oil Price Outlook: \$88.75 Support Determines the Next Major Move

Crude oil is once again reacting to geopolitical developments, climbing approximately 3.67% and moving back into the low \$90s. The latest catalyst came from presidential comments suggesting that an agreement with Iran was unlikely and that military escalation remained possible. While the headline was significant, Gareth focused on something more revealing: the market's reaction was relatively contained compared with the kind of surge similar developments might have produced earlier in the conflict.

That response suggests traders may already be pricing a substantial geopolitical risk premium into crude oil. A few months ago, comparable escalation headlines might have triggered a much larger move. Today, the advance has been more restrained. The implication is not that geopolitical risks have disappeared, but that markets are becoming more accustomed to them. When increasingly serious headlines produce progressively smaller reactions, it is worth asking whether much of the expected risk has already been reflected in price.

The technical chart provided an additional clue before the latest news arrived. Earlier in the week, crude oil tested an ascending trend line and appeared vulnerable to a breakdown. Buyers defended that support before the session ended, and a subsequent test produced another successful hold. Those repeated defenses were the breadcrumbs Gareth emphasized. The chart was showing demand at a specific technical level before the geopolitical catalyst gave traders a new reason to buy.

For the bearish setup, \$88.75 remains the line in the sand. A confirmed daily close below that level would break the existing support structure and open the door toward Gareth's downside target near \$78 per barrel. Until that happens, the ascending trend line remains intact and traders have little technical justification for assuming a major breakdown is underway. The lesson is to recognize the headline without allowing it to override the chart.

Earnings Season Analysis: Why Strong Results Can Still Send Stocks Lower

Earnings season is reinforcing another important market principle: strong financial results do not automatically produce higher stock prices. Samsung reportedly delivered earnings growth of approximately 800%, an extraordinary headline by almost any conventional measure. Yet shares declined roughly 2.5% to 3% as investors compared those results with expectations that had climbed even higher, reportedly into the 850% to 900% range.

The market was not necessarily rejecting Samsung's business performance. It was reacting to the difference between what the company delivered and what investors had already priced into the stock. That gap between expectations and reality is especially important when valuations and sentiment have become stretched. A company can report outstanding growth and still disappoint traders if the anticipated result was even stronger.

Taiwan Semiconductor offered a similar example after releasing impressive preliminary revenue figures while its shares traded modestly lower. Gareth identified a potential intraday trading opportunity around a gap-fill level referenced during the show near 4.59, although the exact quoted level and instrument require confirmation before publication. The broader setup illustrates how earnings-related volatility can create technical opportunities independent of whether the underlying financial report appears bullish or bearish.

Pepsi provided a different perspective on the earnings environment. The company reported solid organic growth and results above earnings and revenue expectations, but reduced its forward guidance as transportation and other operating costs increased. Higher diesel prices are particularly relevant for a business that depends on moving products across a large distribution network. Gareth interpreted the company's apparent reluctance to pass all those costs along to consumers as a potential sign of demand sensitivity. That raises an important question for the broader market: how much additional inflation can companies absorb before margins or consumer spending begin to suffer?

These reactions reinforce why Gareth places so much emphasis on technical analysis and trading psychology. Day traders cannot rely on whether a headline sounds favorable. They need a defined setup, an entry, a target, and a point where the trade is no longer valid. Position sizing and emotional discipline matter just as much, particularly when price moves against the obvious interpretation of the news. The goal is not to win an argument with the market. It is to recognize what the market is actually doing and manage the trade accordingly.

Natural Gas Price Forecast: \$3.18 to \$3.19 Resistance Could Trigger a Breakout

Natural gas has delivered five consecutive advancing sessions, bringing prices into a resistance zone that could determine whether the rally has another leg higher. Gareth noted that members of the Smart Money Commodity group had an opportunity to secure profits on half their position while maintaining exposure with the remainder. That approach reduces some risk after a strong move without completely abandoning the possibility of a breakout.

The chart shows a descending trend line connecting several previous high pivots, with natural gas now testing resistance between \$3.18 and \$3.19. A decisive move above that area would break the declining resistance structure and create a potential path toward \$3.33. The significance of the level comes from the repeated reactions along the trend line. Each successful rejection has reinforced resistance, making a confirmed break more meaningful if buyers can finally push through it.

The next catalyst is the natural gas inventory release scheduled for 10:30 a.m. ET. Inventory data can produce sharp short-term volatility, particularly when price is already sitting against a major technical boundary. For traders, the priority is not predicting the inventory number but watching whether the resulting move confirms a breakout or produces another rejection. A brief spike above resistance is less convincing than a move that holds. This is where the chart must confirm the trade.

Gold and Silver Technical Analysis: Breakdown Confirmation Becomes Critical

Precious metals are showing a different technical picture. Gold recently closed below an important ascending trend line, putting the existing bullish structure under pressure. However, Gareth emphasized that an initial break is not necessarily sufficient to confirm a sustained move lower. The next session's closing price will help determine whether sellers have established control or whether the breakdown proves temporary.

For gold, a daily close below the previous session's low would strengthen the bearish interpretation. Conversely, a recovery back above the broken trend line would suggest buyers are attempting to reclaim the support structure. That distinction matters because failed breakdowns can reverse quickly, trapping traders who entered on the initial move without waiting for confirmation. The next close, rather than the first violation of support, is the more useful signal.

Silver is showing similar weakness, with price testing and beginning to slip beneath its own ascending trend line. Gareth identified \$55 as the first significant downside target if the breakdown confirms, followed by \$50 if selling pressure accelerates. Those levels represent the next areas where traders would look for a potential reaction rather than guaranteed destinations. A confirmed breakdown would favor the bearish scenario, while a recovery above the trend line would weaken it.

The important takeaway across both metals is that confirmation should take priority over anticipation. A chart can look bearish intraday and still recover before the close. Traders who wait for the market to establish whether support has genuinely failed are working with more information than those reacting to the first move through a line.

Tesla Stock Technical Analysis: \$400 Resistance Tests the Trading Channel

Tesla continues to trade within a well-defined parallel channel, with price repeatedly respecting its upper and lower boundaries. That consistency gives traders a useful framework for identifying where the risk/reward changes. The stock is now approaching the upper portion of the channel, with the psychologically and technically important \$400 area representing a major resistance level.

Until Tesla establishes a confirmed breakout above that resistance, Gareth's preferred technical interpretation remains a potential rejection from the upper boundary. The reasoning is based on the existing pattern rather than a fundamental judgment about the company. When a stock has repeatedly reversed from the same channel resistance, the burden of proof rests with buyers to demonstrate that the structure has changed.

A sustained break above \$400 would require reassessing the setup and could signal that the established channel is giving way to a stronger advance. A rejection, on the other hand, would preserve the existing range-trading framework. The key is not assuming the stock must reverse simply because it has reached resistance, but recognizing that the level offers a clear decision point.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: \$87,200 Resistance and \$81,000 Support Define the Range

Bitcoin remains trapped between two significant technical levels, leaving traders without a confirmed directional advantage in the middle of the range. Gareth identified \$87,200 as the major upside resistance and \$81,000 as the critical downside support. Until price breaks one of those boundaries, the market is offering more uncertainty than conviction.

A confirmed breakout above \$87,200 would shift the technical outlook toward the bullish side, opening a potential advance into the \$95,000 to \$97,000 resistance zone. That scenario would indicate buyers have absorbed the supply that has repeatedly limited upside progress. The breakout would be the signal that changes the setup, rather than simply another attempt to rally within the established range.

The bearish alternative begins with a break below \$81,000. Losing that support would expose Bitcoin to a potential decline toward \$75,500, an area Gareth associated with the base of the previous bull flag consolidation. Such a move would suggest that the range had resolved lower and that sellers were gaining control of the near-term structure.

With Bitcoin trading between those levels, Gareth's approach is to remain patient rather than force a position. There is no requirement to trade every market or anticipate every breakout. Waiting for confirmation may mean missing the first portion of a move, but it can also help avoid repeated false signals while price remains range-bound. In this environment, patience is part of the trading strategy, not an absence of one.

Gareth Soloway's Market Outlook: Respect the Trend Until the Charts Break

The defining feature of today's market is the gap between the uncertainty reflected in the headlines and the more selective signals emerging from the charts. The S&P 500 remains close to record highs despite rising energy costs and geopolitical pressure. The 10-year Treasury yield has produced a meaningful daily reversal that could become more significant if the weekly candle confirms. Together, those developments suggest the broader equity outlook remains more constructive than the prevailing news cycle might imply.

The individual trading setups require a more conditional approach. Crude oil needs to break \$88.75 before the larger bearish target near \$78 comes into play. Natural gas must clear \$3.18 to \$3.19 to strengthen the case for \$3.33. Gold and silver need confirmed closes to validate their emerging breakdowns, while Tesla must prove it can overcome \$400 resistance. Bitcoin remains a waiting game between \$87,200 and \$81,000, with the next confirmed break likely to provide the more meaningful directional signal.

The bottom line from Gareth's October 8 Trading Game Plan is that market strength should be respected until the charts provide evidence that it is failing. Bearish headlines alone are not enough to justify fighting an established trend, just as a promising breakout attempt is not enough to justify entering before confirmation. The advantage comes from knowing which levels change the setup, recognizing when the market is rejecting a narrative, and having the discipline to wait until price provides a reason to act.

Precious metals sold off sharply on Wednesday. Gold fell about 2.1% at its low, roughly $88 an ounce, before recovering some of the loss during the session. Silver dropped close to 2.8% and recovered less. Both moves followed daily bear flags, so the technical setup had already pointed toward weakness.

The pressure came from the bond market. The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield rose to 5.365%, its highest level in 24 years, last seen in 2002. As bond yields climb, the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets such as gold and silver increases. That relationship is a key driver behind Wednesday's weakness.

The trend in yields matters, but the bigger signal is where the selling stopped. Gold and silver both fell into long-term trendline support and bounced. Whether those trendlines hold will shape the next few weeks for precious metals, and it gives traders a clear framework for deciding when to act and when to wait.

Why Rising Treasury Yields Are Pressuring Gold and Silver

The 10-year yield has not spiked. It has moved up gradually, with intraday wicks reaching slightly higher each session. Earlier in this move, a pullback toward the rising trendline on the daily chart looked possible. Instead, yields bounced and closed higher, and they have kept edging up since.

That slow, steady pattern matters. A one-day spike in yields can reverse quickly. A gradual climb to multi-decade highs shows ongoing repricing in the interest rate environment, and it keeps pressure on precious metals for as long as it continues.

If yields keep rising, the next major level on the chart is 5.426%, a level from early 2002. A push into that area would keep the yield pressure on precious metals in focus. A stall or reversal below it would ease one of the main headwinds for gold and silver.

Gold Price Analysis: Trendline Support From the April 2025 High

On the daily chart, gold's decline ran into a long-term trendline drawn from the April 21, 2025 high. That line runs through earlier price action and has caught several wicks. Wednesday's bounce came directly off it.

The $4,099 Swing-Low Pivot

The near-term level to watch is the swing-low pivot at $4,099. After the bounce from trendline support, the question is whether gold can close above it. A close above that level would strengthen the near-term bounce from trendline support. A break below the trendline would put lower support zones back in focus, with the daily bear flag still in play.

Gold Support Levels and Buy Zone

If gold breaks the trendline, there is consolidation below that should offer support. A move to around $4,023 would still keep price above the $4,000 level. Below that, the levels to watch are $3,895 and $3,700. Jake sees that area as the more attractive buying zone on gold. These are not levels to chase toward. They are places to wait for.

Silver Price Analysis: Trendline Support From the November 2025 Low

Silver followed the same pattern: a daily bear flag, then a sell-off into trendline support. This trendline starts at the November 2025 low and has been tested repeatedly with tails. One test briefly broke below the trendline before price reclaimed it. Combined with the repeated touches, that gives silver a cleaner support structure than gold.

Silver Resistance at $61 and $64–$65

Silver recovered less than gold on Wednesday. The first test is the pivot at $61.02. Silver needs to get back above it for the near-term picture to improve.

Above that, resistance is heavier. A downsloping trendline from the March 2, 2026 high has capped rallies by catching the tops of recent wicks. It converges with a prior pivot high, creating a resistance zone between $64.36 and $65.28. Even if silver recovers, that area should remain a major resistance zone.

Silver Downside Target if Support Breaks

The support trendline has been tested often but not since early August. A clean break would put the $54.46 area in play. Jake sees that area as a more attractive buying opportunity.

Gold and Silver Key Support and Resistance Levels

Outlook for Gold and Silver: What Treasury Yields Signal Next

The 10-year yield remains the directional anchor. Another push toward 5.426% would keep pressure on gold and silver and make their current trendline tests more important. Gold needs to defend its $4,099 pivot, while silver faces its first recovery test at $61.02.

If those structures fail, the lower support zones are more interesting than chasing a bounce. The opportunity isn't simply that metals are selling off. It's knowing which levels offer a more attractive setup if the selling continues.

Watch on YouTube

Treasury Yields Hit 5.365%, but Friday's Close Could Change the Market Setup

Trading the Close Market Review | October 7, 2026

The 10-year Treasury yield pushed to a new near-term high of 5.365% on Wednesday, putting pressure on equities and precious metals. Yet beneath that move, a potentially important reversal signal is developing. For traders watching the S&P 500, Nasdaq, and gold, the most consequential development may not be today's yield high, but where the 10-year finishes the week.

During today's Trading the Close, Verified Investing Pro Trader Drew Dosek identified a potential weekly topping tail in the 10-year yield, developing alongside a sleeper hold pattern. The combination creates a scenario worth monitoring into Friday. If yields reverse and confirm the pattern, several markets that struggled today could find room to recover. If they don't, traders need to respect the possibility that the pressure continues.

That distinction shaped Drew's broader market read. Several bullish patterns remain intact, but many still lack confirmation. The opportunity is in recognizing which setups are developing and which have actually earned a trade.

The 10-Year Yield: Why Friday's Close Matters More Than Today's High

The 10-year Treasury yield reached 5.365% today, extending an advance that has become an increasingly important headwind for stocks. Higher yields raise borrowing costs and make future corporate earnings less attractive when discounted against available bond returns. That relationship helps explain why equities have struggled to sustain their recent upside momentum.

But Drew's focus was not simply on how high yields had climbed. It was on the developing reversal structure.

"I've got something very interesting to show you on the 10-year yield, something that we can carry in through Friday with us, and something we're going to be monitoring very closely," Drew explained.

The daily chart has already produced a topping tail, showing that yields retreated after reaching higher levels. More importantly, the weekly chart is threatening to form a similar candle. Drew identified 5.28% as the key Friday closing threshold. A weekly close at or below that level would confirm the topping-tail structure he is watching.

The potential reversal also aligns with a sleeper hold pattern, a technical setup taught at Verified Investing. Previous occurrences of this pattern have coincided with fading upward momentum and periods of sideways movement. The combination strengthens the case for watching a possible yield pullback, although neither pattern guarantees an immediate reversal.

This is where the broader market implications become important. If yields confirm the weekly topping tail and begin declining next week, the S&P 500, Nasdaq, and precious metals could benefit from reduced interest-rate pressure. A failure to confirm would leave that potential catalyst unresolved.

For now, the trade is not to assume yields have topped. It is to recognize that Friday's close could materially change the near-term outlook.

S&P 500 and Nasdaq: Buyers Defend Support, but Confirmation Is Missing

The S&P 500 provided an important example of why intraday weakness does not always translate into a completed bearish setup. SPY opened with a gap lower, slipped beneath the neckline of its developing inverse head and shoulders pattern, and formed a short-term bear flag. Early price action suggested sellers might finally gain control.

Instead, the selling faded around 11:30 AM, allowing SPY to recover above the gap-down level and preserve the broader bullish structure. That recovery mattered because it prevented the morning breakdown from gaining traction. It did not, however, establish a confirmed breakout.

Drew's inverse head and shoulders measured move target remains $800.92, with trendline resistance at $794.64 standing between current price action and that objective. The distinction between a pattern remaining intact and a breakout being confirmed is central to the setup.

"We'd like to see a breakout candle like this, but we want to see the candle the following day push up higher and close above," Drew explained.

That follow-through has not arrived. Until SPY can push decisively above resistance and sustain the move, traders must account for another rejection or a return toward the neckline. The bullish target remains valid as a conditional objective, not an outcome the market has already confirmed.

The Nasdaq presented a similar picture. The index finished down 0.22%, following yesterday's prominent topping tail, but recovered toward its intraday highs and defended support near 27,722. That recovery showed buyers were still willing to defend an important level despite the pressure from Treasury yields.

The next meaningful upside test sits near the psychological 28,000 level. A confirmed reversal in yields could help the Nasdaq challenge that area, but holding 27,722 remains important to the near-term bullish case.

Taken together, the indices are showing resilience rather than decisive strength. Buyers are defending the structures they need to defend, but neither chart has removed the need for confirmation.

Semiconductors: Resistance Is Testing the Strength of the Rally

Semiconductors offered a more cautious signal. SMH declined 1.18% as the sector continued struggling near a technically important resistance area. After advancing through the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement, the chart has spent several sessions stalling around 635.84, echoing an earlier reaction near 607.58.

That repeated behavior is significant because it shows how established technical levels can influence price action even during strong advances. The sector has not necessarily entered a sustained decline, but momentum is meeting resistance where traders have reason to reassess risk.

Drew emphasized that individual indicators should not carry the entire decision. Moving averages provide useful context, but he prefers setups supported by multiple technical factors, including Fibonacci retracements, parallel channels, and sleeper hold patterns.

The importance of that approach was evident in SMH's earlier reaction around the 50% midline of a parallel channel established through the July and September price structure. When separate technical references converge, the resulting area deserves more attention than a level supported by only one indicator.

Individual technology names reinforced the need for selectivity.

META has recovered into its rising parallel channel but is now developing a bear flag following an extended advance. Drew's warning was straightforward: traders who chase stocks after substantial runs often enter just as the risk of a technical pullback increases.

"Gravity wins for huge moves up and then technical bounces win for huge moves down," Drew said.

For META, the first meaningful support area sits between $685 and $692, centered near previous resistance at \$690. If that zone fails, the lower boundary of the parallel channel around \$668 becomes the next level to watch. Neither support area guarantees a bounce, but both provide a more structured framework than buying simply because a stock has been strong.

NVIDIA is approaching a different test. NVDA briefly moved above the upper boundary of its parallel channel dating back to 2024 but failed to close above it. Like the 10-year yield, the stock is threatening to form a weekly topping tail. A confirmed rejection would raise the risk of a pullback, while renewed strength could bring resistance near $250.81 into focus.

Broadcom, meanwhile, is consolidating beneath a declining trendline. A confirmed breakout would put the upper boundary of its rising parallel channel near $391.81 in play.

The broader lesson is that strong sectors can remain technically vulnerable at resistance. The better entry often comes after the market either confirms the breakout or pulls back into a support area where risk can be more clearly defined.

Gold and Silver: Similar Reactions, Different Technical Messages

Precious metals also reflected the pressure from rising Treasury yields, although gold and silver are not presenting identical setups.

Gold traded below the $4,104.14 support area and reached an intraday low near \$4,066 before recovering enough to leave a pronounced lower wick on its daily candle. That reaction indicates buyers were willing to step in at lower prices, even as yields continued rising.

The recovery does not establish that gold has bottomed. It does, however, provide an early sign of demand that could become more meaningful if Treasury yields reverse. Drew's broader upside reference remains the lower boundary of a parallel channel dating to April 2025, currently near $4,384.

Silver's recovery was less convincing. Although it also formed a lower wick, the chart continues to carry both a bear flag and a head and shoulders structure. The bearish measured move points toward $53.26, while a break above the neckline near $66.50 would challenge that downside setup.

What made silver particularly interesting was the location of today's support. Price reacted around the midpoint of a long-term parallel channel whose origins stretch back to January 2008.

"We start this parallel back here in January of 2008. That's just remarkable, folks," Drew observed.

The lesson is not that a trendline drawn nearly two decades ago controls the market. It is that long-term chart structures can remain relevant when price repeatedly respects their boundaries. The more meaningful the historical reactions, the more reason traders have to monitor those levels when price returns.

Gold currently has the stronger recovery signal, while silver still needs to overcome its bearish structure. A yield reversal could support both metals, but their individual charts should determine how much confidence traders place in that scenario.

Oil and Natural Gas: Conflicting Patterns Require Different Trade Plans

Energy markets presented two distinct technical situations, highlighting why traders cannot apply the same approach to every chart.

US Oil continues to carry a longer-term bear flag, suggesting downside risk, alongside a larger inverse head and shoulders pattern with a measured move target near \$116. The bullish structure has a neckline around \$78.06, but the immediate question is whether oil can maintain support within its rising parallel channel.

Today's reaction around $86.90 showed buyers defending the lower channel boundary. Drew identified $89.31 as the level oil needs to reclaim on a daily closing basis to strengthen the bullish case. Until that happens, the larger upside target must be weighed against the shorter-term bearish structure.

Natural gas offered a clearer example of confirmed momentum. Following its breakout, Drew took profits on his BOIL position rather than assuming the move would continue without interruption. The decision reflected a principle he repeatedly emphasizes: taking profits into strength and waiting for a better entry can be more productive than chasing an extended move.

For a potential re-entry, natural gas has a declining trendline from March 9 near $3.22, with the $3.24 to $3.25 area offering a nearby support test. If price pulls back into that zone and buyers confirm support, the next resistance sits near $3.60, followed by the cup-and-handle measured move target around $3.89.

The key is the reaction at support. A pullback into the zone is not, by itself, confirmation that the next advance has begun. Traders still need evidence that buyers are defending it.

RTX and Curtiss-Wright: Oversold Does Not Automatically Mean Buy

Outside the major indices, Drew highlighted potential swing opportunities in aerospace and defense, where extended selling has brought several stocks toward important technical areas.

RTX has declined for nine consecutive weeks, with its daily RSI falling below 20. That reading reflects an extreme oversold condition, but it does not guarantee an immediate recovery. Stocks can remain oversold while their downtrends continue.

An aggressive trader might look for a short-term bounce toward the broken trendline near $194, but Drew's more compelling support area sits around $170. That level combines a gap fill with the 50% Fibonacci retracement measured from the April 2025 lows, creating a multi-factor zone worth monitoring.

The distinction is between identifying a stock that has fallen substantially and identifying a price where the technical evidence improves. Waiting for a support test and confirmation may mean missing an early bounce, but it also reduces the temptation to enter solely because the stock appears cheap.

Curtiss-Wright (CW) presents a similar situation. Its weekly RSI has declined to 28.52, while price approaches an area of previous pivot highs. With this week's low at $502.31, Drew identified a possible move beneath the psychological $500 level as an area to watch for a reversal.

The 61.8% Fibonacci retracement sits lower at $473.65, providing another reference if selling continues. Should buyers establish a convincing reversal, the chart offers a potential recovery objective near $608.

Both stocks illustrate the same trading principle. An oversold reading identifies a condition, not a complete trade. The location of support, price reaction, and available upside relative to downside risk determine whether the opportunity is worth taking.

Bitcoin: Consolidation Continues After September's Breakout

Bitcoin declined 2.36% during today's session, but the broader chart remains in a consolidation phase following its September 21 breakout candle.

That sideways movement has not produced the sustained bullish follow-through traders would prefer. Buyers need to demonstrate that the breakout can develop into a larger advance rather than simply holding price within a range.

Drew identified the rising trendline near $89,440 as an important reference for the bullish structure. The key question is whether Bitcoin can sustain strength above the relevant resistance structure and invalidate the lingering head and shoulders concern.

A confirmed bullish resolution would improve the case for a move toward and potentially above $100,000. Continued weakness, however, would keep the consolidation unresolved and leave the bearish pattern in consideration.

For now, Bitcoin is another example of a market where patience has more value than anticipating a breakout before the chart confirms it.

The Bottom Line: Friday's Yield Close Is the Market's Next Test

Wednesday's market action was not a clean bearish breakdown, but it was not a confirmed bullish continuation either. SPY defended its developing inverse head and shoulders structure, the Nasdaq held an important support level, and gold attracted buyers after trading lower. At the same time, semiconductors struggled at resistance, silver retained its bearish patterns, and several individual stocks remained vulnerable to additional selling.

The common thread is the 10-year Treasury yield.

If the yield closes Friday at or below 5.28%, confirming Drew's potential weekly topping tail alongside the sleeper hold setup, the case for a near-term pullback in yields becomes stronger. That could improve the environment for equities and precious metals, particularly where bullish technical structures have survived the recent pressure.

If yields fail to confirm the reversal, traders should be more cautious about assuming those markets are ready for sustained upside moves.

The individual trade setups follow the same discipline. SPY needs breakout follow-through above $794.64. Natural gas needs to defend support on a pullback. RTX and Curtiss-Wright need convincing reactions at their respective technical zones. NVIDIA needs Friday's candle to clarify whether its channel rejection is developing into something more meaningful.

Drew's message was to distinguish between a chart that looks promising and one that has provided enough evidence to act.

The levels are established. The patterns are developing. The next step is to let price confirm the opportunity.

Bullish reversal structures are forming across a wide range of stock charts. SpaceX, Constellation Energy (CEG), Micron (MU), and SanDisk (SNDK) are all showing versions of the same inverse head and shoulders structure, although the quality of those patterns varies considerably. SpaceX has already broken out. CEG is still waiting on a trigger. Micron and SanDisk are messier, holding their necklines but without the clean shape of the others.

None of these charts is operating in a vacuum. The 10-year Treasury yield is sitting near 5.29%, pushing through its 2007 high of 5.289% and printing levels not seen since 2002. The bounce in the semiconductor names fizzled as the 10-year pushed to new highs, and as long as yields keep climbing, many of these patterns will have difficulty breaking out.

The thesis: the setups are real, but the 10-year yield is the gatekeeper. Traders who read the bond market alongside their stock charts will have a clearer view of which breakouts are likely to hold.

How an Inverse Head and Shoulders Measured Move Works

The measured move is calculated by taking the distance from the low of the head to the neckline, then projecting that distance from the point where price breaks the neckline. That gives the trade a defined profit target before entry.

The pattern also carries its own invalidation. If price breaks out and then posts two daily closes back below the neckline, the structure and its target are negated. A setup with both a target and a failure point lets risk be sized in advance rather than managed on emotion.

SpaceX Inverse Head and Shoulders Breakout Targets $218.35

SpaceX has the cleanest pattern in the group. Price broke the neckline on Friday, October 2, and extended higher on Monday, flipping that neckline from resistance into support.

The more patient entry comes on a pullback. If price retests the $154.87–$155 zone over the next several sessions and holds it as support, that would keep the $218.35 measured-move target in play. Two daily closes back below the neckline would invalidate the setup.

Constellation Energy Tests a $300 Inverse Head and Shoulders Breakout

Constellation Energy (CEG)

CEG jumped on news of an agreement with Google to provide power for its data centers. The agreement supports $4.3B that CEG will invest to upgrade its capacity. The move pushed price into the top of a bear flag that began with the September 8 decline, challenging that bearish structure without yet negating it.

A daily close above $300 triggers the inverse head and shoulders breakout, with a measured-move target of $391.50. A close above the September 8 high at $305.80 fully negates the bear flag. Until those closes happen, the headline-driven pop is a test, not a confirmed breakout.

Micron Holds Key Support as Its Bullish Pattern Weakens

Micron's pattern is an inverse head and shoulders in spirit only: a very short left shoulder, a head, and what is almost a double right shoulder. The neckline has held, but it has been tested repeatedly, and price traded beneath it intraday today. Each test weakens the level.

Price is holding near $1,083. A breakout would put the 50% line of the parallel channel near $1,300 in play, which would be a new all-time high. Daily closes below $1,035.50 increase the probability of a move down toward the lower boundary of the channel. Continued sideways chop would keep pressure on a support level that has already been tested repeatedly.

SanDisk Reclaims Its Neckline With $2,625 Target in Play

SanDisk mirrors Micron's structure, with a short left shoulder and a doubled right shoulder. It closed below the neckline yesterday, putting the pattern at risk of confirming a breakdown today. Instead, price recovered and is trading comfortably back above the neckline near $1,663. A sustained breakout carries a measured-move target of $2,625.02, near the top of the parallel channel.

What the 10-Year Treasury Yield Means for These Stock Setups

The breakout-and-retrace in Micron and SanDisk had room to carry price toward the channel midpoints and, in SanDisk's case, eventually toward the $2,625 measured-move target. Instead, the bounce fizzled as the 10-year yield pushed to new highs.

A pullback in yields was anticipated last week. Instead, the 10-year recovered quickly and kept climbing. On the daily chart it is overbought, which argues for consolidation back toward the 5% level before any further advance. On the monthly chart, the structure looks like consolidation ahead of a breakout, with the next key Fibonacci target at 6.249%.

Those two readings frame the risk for equities. If yields consolidate toward 5%, that could give these inverse head and shoulders patterns the room they need to play out. If the 10-year keeps marching higher, many of them will have difficulty breaking out.

Key Levels to Watch in SpaceX, CEG, Micron, SanDisk and the 10-Year Yield

• 10-year yield near 5%: A pullback toward this level would ease pressure and give bullish patterns room to play out.
• 10-year yield continuing higher: Sustained strength toward 6.249% would make breakouts harder to sustain.
• SpaceX $154.87–$155: A successful neckline retest supports the $218.35 target.
• CEG $300 / $305.80: Daily closes above these levels trigger the breakout and negate the bear flag.
• MU $1,035.50: Daily closes below this level raise the probability of a move lower.
• SNDK $1,663: Holding above the neckline keeps the $2,625.02 target in play.

The 10-Year Yield Could Decide Which Breakouts Hold

Chart patterns give traders structure: an entry zone, a target, and a level where the idea is wrong. That structure does not override the macro environment. With the 10-year yield at its highest level in more than two decades, even well-formed bullish setups need confirmation before they deserve conviction.

The disciplined approach is to let the necklines and the bond market confirm together. Wait for daily closes, respect the invalidation levels, and keep one eye on the 10-year. The patterns define the opportunity. Yields will likely define the timing.

Watch on YouTube

The biggest question facing markets this morning is not whether yields are rising. They are. The more important question is whether those rising yields are finally strong enough to break chart structures that, so far, continue to hold.

The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield pushed above 5.3% Wednesday as a global bond selloff intensified, with French government bonds under particular pressure from fiscal and political concerns. The Wall Street Journal That move pressured U.S. equities after the S&P 500 had just set a fresh record Tuesday.

For Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at VerifiedInvesting.com, that creates the defining tension in today's market: the macro backdrop is becoming increasingly difficult, but price has not yet confirmed the bearish outcome that backdrop might suggest.

That distinction matters across nearly every chart he is watching.

The Bond Market Is Becoming the Pressure Point

The 10-year Treasury yield is again pressing toward 5.35%, putting borrowing costs and equity valuations back in focus.

France is part of the story. Fiscal concerns and political unrest have pushed French yields sharply higher and widened the spread between French and German government debt. At the same time, U.S. Treasury yields have moved back toward multidecade highs.

But Gareth sees something larger developing underneath those individual catalysts: competition for capital.

SpaceX, for example, is reportedly seeking \$40 billion in financing led by Apollo Global Management to fund purchases of Nvidia chips. The proposed package includes roughly \$10 billion in bank loans and \$30 billion in investment-grade debt.

For Gareth, issuance on that scale helps illustrate why the supply side of the bond market matters.

"When you look at yields, and yields are staying high, why? Because there's an overabundance of debt being sold, not only US Treasuries, but then tons of debt coming out of the private sector or companies like SpaceX… investors can be picky and choosy about what they buy."

His point is not that one corporate financing deal determines Treasury yields. It is that governments and corporations are increasingly competing for investor capital at a time when debt issuance is already enormous. More supply can give buyers greater leverage to demand attractive yields.

And today's economy carries considerably more debt than it did during previous high-rate periods. That makes the market's sensitivity to borrowing costs an important part of the current macro framework.

The S&P 500 Has Not Broken

This is where the charts complicate the bearish macro story.

The S&P 500 traded above its August 13 record Tuesday and closed at a new all-time high of 7,818.93 before pulling back Wednesday as Treasury yields moved higher.

That pullback matters, but it has not yet broken the larger bullish structure.

Gareth continues to watch the 8,000 area as a potential upside technical objective because two long-term trend lines converge near that zone. One connects a series of major highs beginning in 2024. Another extends from the 2020 COVID low through subsequent major pivots.

That second line carries particular weight because of its age.

"The general rule of thumb is that a trend line that goes back further has more weight to it."

Two independently derived trend lines converging around the same area make 8,000 more significant than an arbitrary round-number target. It is better viewed as a major resistance zone if price gets there, not as a guaranteed destination.

For now, that leaves the S&P caught between two forces: deteriorating pressure from yields and a chart that has not yet surrendered its bullish structure.

The Macro Warning Is Bigger Than Today's Selloff

Gareth's longer-term concern extends well beyond Wednesday's trading.

The IMF is warning about elevated public debt and risks surrounding the enormous capital requirements of the AI buildout, while geopolitical tensions continue to complicate the global outlook.

Gareth views developments like the turmoil in European bond markets as "breadcrumbs," smaller signs of the structural debt problem he believes could become much more serious toward the end of the decade.

He has repeatedly tied that concern to a potential 100-year economic cycle around 2029 and 2030, roughly a century after the beginning of the Great Depression.

That is Gareth's macro framework, not a forecast the current charts have confirmed. The distinction is important.

His longer-term concern can be significant while the S&P remains bullish today. A trader does not have to choose between those two ideas. The chart determines when the longer-term thesis starts becoming relevant to current positioning.

Gold Is Losing the Near-Term Fight With Yields

Gold offers another example of fundamentals and price action pulling in opposite directions.

China's central bank added approximately 740,000 ounces of gold to its reserves in September, bringing holdings to 77.47 million ounces and extending its buying streak to 23 consecutive months.

That provides a longer-term fundamental tailwind for gold. It has not prevented near-term weakness.

A stronger dollar and elevated Treasury yields increase the opportunity cost of holding a non-yielding asset such as gold. Gareth is therefore letting the chart dictate his near-term view rather than assuming central-bank buying must immediately translate into higher prices.

His first major line in the sand is \$4,100.

"If it breaks \$4,100, we're likely headed to \$3,950, which is that previous low from June, July this year. And if we break \$3,950, \$3,500 is still that level."

The hierarchy is straightforward: \$4,100 is the immediate test, \$3,950 becomes the next major support if that level fails, and \$3,500 remains Gareth's deeper long-term accumulation zone for physical gold.

Silver is showing similar stress below \$60. Gareth is watching the current ascending trend line first, followed by approximately \$55 if that support fails.

Below that sits the much bigger \$50 level.

That area carries long-term significance because it represents the former ceiling around the major 1980 and 2011 highs. After silver finally broke through that multi-decade resistance, a future retest of the breakout zone would become technically important.

Oil Shows Why the Close Matters

Oil provided perhaps the cleanest example of Gareth's broader trading philosophy.

During Tuesday's session, crude appeared to be breaking major support. Traders who treated the intraday move as confirmation, however, were early. Oil recovered enough into the close to preserve the structure.

The key level now sits around \$88.75.

A confirmed daily close below that ascending trend line would materially weaken the chart and put the \$78 to \$79 area back in focus as the next downside objective.

Until then, support is still support.

That is the difference between anticipating a breakdown and trading one that has actually confirmed.

Bitcoin Still Has One Level That Matters Most

Bitcoin is facing the same test.

Despite today's weakness, Gareth still reads the broader structure as a bullish consolidation as long as Bitcoin holds above approximately \$81,000.

"As long as we hold 81, neutral to bullish bias has to be maintained on a probability factor. Regardless what I might think, I'm actually in the camp that I think we're due for a bigger pullback. But until the charts confirm it, it's just speculation on my part."

That may be the most important lesson from today's Game Plan.

Gareth personally believes Bitcoin could be due for a larger pullback. The chart has not given him confirmation.

A daily close below \$81,000 would change that read by invalidating the current bullish structure and putting the next major support around \$75,500 back in focus.

Until then, personal bias remains secondary to price.

Three Stock Levels on Gareth's Radar

The same framework produces several individual stock setups.

Palo Alto Networks (PANW) is approaching a major resistance zone around \$440 to \$445. Gareth derives that area from a parallel channel built from major pivot lows and projected through the upper boundary. A test of that zone would put a potential rejection setup on his radar.

Bank of America (BAC) is approaching a daily-chart gap near \$52.37. Rather than assuming the gap must produce a bounce, Gareth is watching the level as a potential reaction zone if price reaches it.

Micron (MU) is compressing between two trend lines, with approximately \$1,000 acting as the more important support. A confirmed daily close below that level would materially weaken the current structure and shift attention toward lower support.

These setups differ in direction, but the process is identical: identify the level first, then wait for price to confirm the reaction.

The Fed Minutes Are the Next Catalyst

The next macro test comes at 2:00 p.m. ET, when the Federal Reserve releases minutes from its September 15-16 meeting. The September meeting produced a 25-basis-point rate increase, and today's minutes could provide more detail on how policymakers are thinking about additional tightening.

With the 10-year yield already above 5.3%, any meaningful shift in the market's interpretation of the Fed could quickly feed back into bonds, the dollar and equities.

That makes yields the market's directional filter this afternoon.

The Bottom Line

The macro story looks increasingly uncomfortable. The charts are not yet confirming the worst-case interpretation.

That is the tension traders need to respect.

The S&P 500 is pulling back from record territory, but its larger structure remains intact. Gold and silver are weakening despite continued central-bank demand for gold. Oil threatened a breakdown but failed to confirm it. Bitcoin looks vulnerable, yet remains above the level Gareth needs to see break before shifting his technical bias.

The common thread is confirmation.

Rising yields may ultimately force a larger repricing across risk assets. Gareth's longer-term macro framework argues that the global debt problem will eventually become much harder for policymakers to contain. But neither argument is enough to override the chart today.

For now, the important numbers are the ones that can change the read: roughly 5.35% on the 10-year Treasury yield, \$4,100 on gold, \$88.75 on oil, \$81,000 on Bitcoin and the current bullish structure in the S&P 500.

The macro narrative tells traders where the pressure is building. Price tells them when it actually matters.

Read the currency board right now and it looks like four separate setups: a euro that has lost its trend line, a pound that can't reclaim broken support, USD/JPY pushing back toward the trend line broken during the intervention period, and a USD/CAD breakout looking for a retest. Look a little closer and they share a common thread in the U.S. dollar.

Since early September, the U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) has rallied roughly 3.9% off a long-term ascending trend line, reaching 102 and trading near 101.8 at the time of Jake's analysis.

The cleaner way to read these charts is to start with the dollar, then use the individual pairs to see whether that move is confirming or beginning to stall. The DXY is now pressing into a resistance zone where two separate technical factors converge, which makes it the most useful reference point on the board.

The DXY: Trend Support Held, Now Comes the Test

The structure behind the rally matters. The ascending trend line beneath the dollar has been tested repeatedly. Price pierced it, reclaimed it, broke below it again, and then turned it back into support. That's a line the market has respected, and it remains a key reference for the larger structure. It's well below current price, though, so it's a backstop rather than a near-term level.

Above, the picture is more crowded. An upsloping trend line drawn from the March 13, 2026 high, connecting five touches since, capped Monday's push. Just above it sits the large pivot top at 102.992. Together, they form a dual-factor resistance zone guarding the 103 handle.

At the time of Jake's analysis, the dollar was consolidating on the top of a pivot at 101.977 and looked set to close below it. That's not a breakdown, but it is a pause right where momentum needed to continue.

DXY Key Levels

• Resistance: 102.992 pivot high, plus the rising trend line from March 13
• Current pivot: 101.977
• Near-term support: 101.627
• Deeper support: 100.617 low pivot
• Long-term cap: A multi-year trend line that would come into play near 106–107. This is not a near-term level, but it marks where an extended dollar move would meet major structural resistance.

Euro and Pound: The Mirror Image

When the dollar rallies, the European currencies tend to absorb the pressure, and the charts reflect it.

The euro has broken a sequence of supports. A former resistance line flipped to support, then failed. A bull flag resolved higher, retested its breakout line, and broke down from it. Most recently, an ascending trend line catching higher lows gave way last Thursday, and attempts to reclaim it since have been rejected.

The euro found some support today off a shelf of pivots near 1.12067. If that gives way, the next major shelf sits at 1.10956.

The pound is in a similar position. It broke below a downsloping trend line late in September, was sharply rejected on the retest, and is now struggling to reclaim that former support. The 1.32–1.33 area is the main resistance the pound needs to recover. Near-term support sits at 1.32077, the level that held today.

For both, dollar strength is keeping pressure on broken technical structures. A meaningful reclaim of those former support levels would be the first sign that the current weakness is changing.

USD/JPY: Working Back Toward the Intervention Break

USD/JPY is climbing with the dollar, but it carries an additional complication: the trend line broken during the intervention period. The pair is now working to recover some of that move.

A sharp candle recently erased a cleaner bull-flag picture, but the structure still allows for a push higher. The first resistance is the consolidation top at 158.880. Beyond that, price would need to reclaim the broken trend line, which sits roughly between 159.378 and 159.500 depending on timing. Above that, the next resistance is noted at 164.14.

On the downside, near-term support comes in at the wide-range candle near 157.662, with deeper support at 155.525.

USD/CAD: Breakout Waiting for Confirmation

USD/CAD has pushed through a trough that had acted as heavy resistance. The question now is whether that level holds on a retest.

• Retest support: 1.41834. A bounce here would give the move room to extend.
• Next major resistance: 1.43239, a candle high that has repeatedly produced wicks and flipped between support and resistance.
• Downside if the retest fails: 1.39780 pivot top, then the broken downsloping trend line near 1.39162.

What to Watch Next

The level that matters most isn't on any of the currency pairs. It's 102.992 on the DXY, with the March trend line just beneath it.

• Continued dollar strength: A clean move through that zone and into the 103 handle could keep pressure on the euro and pound and support tests of the upper USD/JPY and USD/CAD levels.
• Signs of a pause: A close below 101.977, followed by a test of 101.627 or 100.617, could give the euro and pound room to attempt reclaims of broken structure and put the USD/CAD retest at 1.41834 under closer scrutiny.
• Longer-term support: If DXY eventually gives back more of the rally, the ascending trend line that launched the September move remains the larger structural level to watch.

Closing Thought

The common mistake in a dollar-driven market is treating each pair as an independent trade. When one currency is the source of the move, the euro's breakdown, the pound's failed reclaim and USD/CAD's breakout can all be expressions of the same position. Stacking them without recognizing that is concentrated dollar exposure, whether it looks diversified or not.

The dollar has the momentum for now, but DXY is pressing directly into resistance that has already stopped it once. That's where discipline matters. Let the DXY show its hand at 102–103, define risk at the levels on each chart, and account for the combined dollar exposure rather than treating each setup as an independent trade.

Watch on YouTube

S&P 500 Hits New Highs, but Market Breadth Is Flashing a Warning

The S&P 500 and Nasdaq are pushing into record territory, but Drew Dosek sees a very different market underneath the headline indices.

Roughly 70% of stocks in the major indices are trading below their 50-day moving averages, even as a concentrated group of mega-cap technology and semiconductor names continues to pull the cap-weighted averages higher. That divergence was the most important signal in Tuesday's Trading the Close.

It does not mean the rally has to end tomorrow. In fact, Drew's technical targets suggest the major indices can still push higher. But it does mean traders should separate price strength in the indices from strength in the market itself.

And the 10-year Treasury yield may ultimately decide which one wins.

S&P 500 and Nasdaq Rally as Market Breadth Weakens

New all-time highs normally suggest broad risk appetite. This market is telling a different story.

About 70% of stocks within the major indices are currently below their 50-day moving averages. That means much of the market is struggling even as the S&P 500 and Nasdaq continue higher.

The reason is concentration. Mega-cap technology and semiconductor stocks have enough weight to push the indices upward while weakness spreads underneath them.

Drew highlighted just how unusual that setup has become.

"The rareness as I'm talking about with the breadth of the market has only occurred three times guys, it's only occurred three times. The dot-com bubble in 2021 and in 2024."

The takeaway is not that history has to repeat exactly. It is that this degree of divergence deserves attention because the index price alone is giving traders an incomplete picture.

The 10-year Treasury yield, currently around 5.289%, helps explain the split. Higher yields raise the cost of capital and tend to hit smaller and more debt-dependent companies harder than cash-rich mega-caps.

That creates the market's central tension: the stocks carrying the indices can keep carrying them for a while, but the higher yields remain, the harder it becomes for the rest of the market to participate.

S&P 500 Technical Setup Still Points Higher

Weak breadth is a warning. It is not, by itself, a sell signal.

That distinction matters in Drew's current S&P 500 setup. The index has triggered a large inverse head and shoulders pattern with a measured move target near 800.92.

The important level underneath the move is 775.18, the neckline of the pattern. As long as the S&P 500 holds that area on a closing basis, the bullish setup remains intact.

A daily close below 775.18 changes the picture. That would invalidate the breakout and remove the 800.92 measured move target.

The Nasdaq is showing a similar setup, although its inverse head and shoulders pattern is less clean. Its technical target sits just above 28,000, leaving roughly another 500 points of potential upside from current levels.

That is why Drew is not fighting the rally simply because the internals look weak. The divergence raises risk, but price still has to confirm the reversal.

Semiconductor Strength Is Keeping the Rally Alive

Semiconductors remain one of the clearest explanations for why the indices have been able to ignore weak breadth.

The VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) confirmed a breakout on September 18 and later reached its 61.8% Fibonacci retracement at $607.58, measured from the prior high to the July 29 low.

SMH is now working through the 78.6% retracement, with its all-time high around $672 still above.

That puts the semiconductor sector within striking distance of another breakout and makes it an important confirmation signal for the broader tech rally.

But here again, yields matter. A retreat in the 10-year could give technology room to continue toward Drew's upside targets. Continued pressure higher in yields would make the market increasingly dependent on a narrowing group of leaders.

That is not necessarily where the rally ends, but it is where the margin for error gets smaller.

AI Power Demand Creates a Second Major Market Theme

While breadth and yields define the near-term index setup, another theme is developing on a much longer timeline: the amount of electricity required to support AI infrastructure.

Constellation Energy (CEG) announced a $4.3 billion agreement with Google, while Vistra (VST) received a conditional $4.2 billion Department of Energy loan. For Drew, those developments fit a larger structural story.

AI data centers are only part of the demand equation.

"AI data centers aren't going to be the only things causing a big drain on the power supply here in the United States. It's going to be all these new gadgets that come along with it too."

Robotics and other AI-driven technologies could add another layer of electricity demand on top of data-center expansion. At the same time, building generation capacity and upgrading the grid can take years.

That mismatch between rapidly growing demand and slower-moving supply is why power and nuclear names remain important charts to watch.

Constellation Energy, Vistra and Cameco Levels to Watch

Constellation Energy closed near $300.41, the neckline of a large inverse head and shoulders pattern. A confirmed daily close above that level would trigger the pattern, with a measured move target near $391.

Before that target comes into play, Drew is watching resistance around $327, followed by roughly $345 at the midpoint of the stock's rising parallel channel.

Vistra surged 10.77% Tuesday and is approaching a declining neckline dating back to January. The breakout area sits around $164.20 to $164.32.

The size of Tuesday's move makes confirmation especially important. Rather than chasing an extended stock, Drew's preferred setup would be a confirmed breakout followed by a successful retest of the trend line.

Cameco (CCJ) presents the other side of the energy trade. The stock rallied 6.35%, but its weekly chart still contains a potentially bearish head and shoulders pattern.

The key neckline sits at $85.61. A confirmed breakdown would put the bottom of its broader parallel channel near $40.47 into play. Bulls need CCJ above declining resistance around $102.99 to weaken that bearish structure and reopen a path toward $118.

The three charts tell the same broader story in different ways: the fundamental power-demand thesis may be strong, but the entry still comes from price.

Oil Holds $86.86 Support as Natural Gas Tests a Breakout

Oil provided one of Tuesday's cleaner examples of why waiting for a technical level matters.

Drew had been watching $86.86 as support. Price briefly moved four cents through that level before reversing sharply higher.

The larger chart remains constructive. Oil is trading within a parallel channel while an inverse head and shoulders pattern points toward approximately $116.51, with nearby resistance around $116.42.

The reaction at $86.86 reinforces the level, but the more important lesson is how price behaved there. Traders who anticipated support had a defined area to judge the trade rather than chasing the reversal after it was already underway.

Natural gas is approaching a similar decision point at $3.22. A confirmed daily close above its declining trend line would trigger a breakout setup with Drew watching approximately $3.60 next.

The word confirmed matters.

An intraday move through a trend line is not enough. Drew wants the closing candle to prove that price can hold beyond the level before treating it as a legitimate break.

Gold and Silver Remain Under Technical Pressure

Precious metals have not yet produced the same constructive setup.

Gold continues to consolidate with a bearish tilt. Drew is watching $4,104 as near-term support. If that fails, the next significant level comes in around $3,947.

Silver also remains vulnerable. Its current structure includes a bear flag, with the downside measured move pointing toward approximately $53.26.

Neither chart requires traders to predict the next move. The levels define when the existing setup remains valid and when the market begins telling a different story.

Bitcoin Faces a Major Weekly Decision at $89,400

Bitcoin may be approaching one of its more important technical tests of the year.

On the weekly chart, BTC is sitting near the lower boundary of a large parallel channel. Losing that support would materially weaken the structure and could open substantially lower levels, including the $50,000s and potentially below $40,000.

The bullish trigger is much clearer: $89,400.

A confirmed break above $89,400 would give bulls a significant technical green light and shift attention toward the channel's 50% midpoint above $100,000.

Until one side confirms, Bitcoin is sitting at a decision point rather than presenting a completed trade.

Why Confirmation Matters More in a Narrow Market

That same principle connects nearly every chart Drew discussed Tuesday.

When market breadth is weak, yields are elevated and individual stocks are making large moves, anticipating a breakout becomes more dangerous. Price can briefly cross a technical level and reverse before the close.

As Drew explained while discussing natural gas:

"I know my thing with TA. That's not gonna get me out because price can whip right back over that line the next day."

Seagate (STX) is a good example. The stock fell 9.18% and closed below an inclining parallel channel that had supported price since March.

The next major support area sits near $748.21, where a gap fill and 50% Fibonacci retracement converge. If buyers defend that area, STX could eventually retest the broken channel near $834.75.

But the setup is at $748.21, not simply "after a 9% decline."

That is the difference between reacting to price and waiting for price to reach an area where risk can actually be defined.

What Traders Should Watch Next

Tuesday's new highs do not tell the entire story.

The S&P 500 and Nasdaq still have bullish technical structures and identifiable upside targets. Semiconductors remain strong enough to keep supporting those moves. But underneath the indices, roughly 70% of stocks trading below their 50-day moving averages shows how narrow the advance has become. Pasted markdown

That puts three signals at the top of the board heading into the next session: market breadth, the 10-year Treasury yield and confirmation at the major index levels.

If yields ease and participation begins to broaden, the S&P 500's path toward 800.92 becomes easier to sustain. If yields keep climbing while breadth deteriorates further, the mega-cap leaders will have to do even more work to keep the indices elevated.

For now, Drew's framework is not to predict which outcome has to happen. It is to know the levels that tell you when it is happening.

That is especially important in a market where the index can look strong while most of the stocks underneath it are saying something else.

Options Edge

For traders looking to apply defined-risk options strategies around technical setups, Verified Investing recently launched Options Edge with Jake Sweeney, Gareth Soloway and Drew Dosek.

The service uses calls, puts and multi-leg strategies to structure trades around specific market setups while defining risk before entering the position.

Gold has cooled after its run higher, and the pullback is taking on a recognizable shape. After a rejection at the top of its wedge pattern, price moved lower and has started to consolidate sideways. That structure is a bear flag, and it generally resolves in the direction of the move that came before it.

The question the market is now asking is whether gold can hold $4,000. That level matters for several reasons at once. It lines up with the lower trend line of gold's wedge, sits among a dense cluster of prior pivots, and is a psychological round number that traders and institutions are watching closely.

The thesis is straightforward: the near-term structure leans lower, but the downside is defined. Silver is showing a similar bear flag, while platinum's more important signal is a larger head-and-shoulders pattern. In each case, the bearish structure points toward established support below. For disciplined traders, the work right now is less about predicting the next leg and more about knowing where the charts begin to offer a more interesting case for a bounce.

Why Gold's Structure Leans Bearish

A bear flag forms when a sharp decline is followed by a shallow, sideways consolidation. The pause reflects hesitation, not reversal. Sellers have stepped back, but buyers have not shown enough strength to reclaim the prior range. When that pause resolves, it more often resolves to the downside.

What makes gold's setup notable is where the flag is forming. Price was rejected at the upper boundary of a wedge that has framed the trend for some time. A flag building beneath a rejected resistance level tilts near-term probabilities lower and puts the bottom of that wedge back in focus.

Hold: The Case for Support at $4,000

The lower trend line of the wedge has been a reliable support boundary, and it meets price right around $4,000. When trend line support, prior pivots, and a major round number converge in the same area, that zone can attract buyers.

If gold works its way down to $4,000, the conditions are in place for a bounce. That does not make a bounce certain. Gold first has to reach the level, and then buyers have to defend it. But the confluence gives the level more weight than an arbitrary number on a chart.

Fold: What Happens If $4,000 Breaks

If $4,000 fails, the wedge support has given way. Lawton's next area of interest would be closer to $3,500, where he says he may begin looking at gold from the long side. That is a meaningful gap, which is why the reaction at $4,000 matters so much. It is the level that separates a pullback within a trend from a deeper reset.

Silver and Platinum Reinforce the Bearish Metals Read

Gold is not the only precious-metal chart leaning lower. Silver and platinum have their own bearish structures, with both pointing toward established support if the current weakness continues.

Silver has already broken down from a head-and-shoulders pattern, and a potential bear flag is now forming. Its measured move projects toward roughly $55, alongside a cluster of pivots in the $55–$56 range. That zone should find support, though it still needs to prove itself when price arrives.

Platinum also shows a bear flag, but the more important pattern is a larger head-and-shoulders top. The measured move from that pattern points to approximately $1,538, which lines up closely with a prior pivot low.

Key Levels to Monitor

What to Watch Next

Gold remains the directional anchor. A downside break from the current consolidation would keep the bear flag intact and put the $4,000 wedge support back in play. That is where the chart gets more interesting.

Lawton expects that area to attract buyers because the lower trend line, prior pivots, and psychological $4,000 level all converge there. Silver near $55–$56 and platinum near $1,538 provide secondary levels to watch if weakness spreads across the metals complex.

The key is not simply whether gold reaches $4,000. It is what happens when it gets there. A defense of that level keeps the larger wedge structure intact and opens the door to a bounce. A decisive break changes the picture and puts Lawton's next area of interest, closer to $3,500, on the radar.

Watch on YouTube

Bitcoin has staged a strong recovery from its lows, and the rally is now getting close to the level that matters most.

Near $89,363 sits the rising neckline of the head-and-shoulders pattern that Bitcoin broke on its weekly chart. Drew Dosek sees that retest as the next major decision point. His preferred bullish outcome isn't an immediate breakout. He would rather see Bitcoin reach the neckline, pause and build a base.

That distinction matters because Bitcoin has rallied almost directly off its lows. Price may react at $89,363. If it can absorb that reaction while holding the $80,524 support below, a consolidation would preserve the recovery and give Bitcoin time to build momentum for another attempt at the neckline.

The rally matters. What Bitcoin does when it reaches resistance matters more.

Bitcoin Never Completed the Bearish Pattern

The backdrop is a large head-and-shoulders pattern on Bitcoin's weekly chart. The left shoulder, head and right shoulder formed around a rising neckline that eventually broke to the downside.

That breakdown produced a measured-move projection near $37,000.

Bitcoin never got close.

Instead, price reached the bottom of a longer-term parallel channel and spent roughly a month and a half around that support before turning higher. That channel kept the decline from turning into the much larger move the head-and-shoulders pattern implied.

Now Bitcoin is heading back toward the neckline it broke, and it is coming almost straight off its recent lows. That makes the reaction at the neckline more important than simply touching it.

The Bullish Case Doesn't Require an Immediate Breakout

Two levels define Drew's Bitcoin framework:

• $89,363 is the test.
• $80,524 is the support that gives Bitcoin room to work.

Drew notes that when price rallies straight off the lows into a key neckline, a fade in that area is common. He would be surprised, though, to see Bitcoin hit the neckline and then break below the horizontal support near $80,524.

That creates a fairly wide consolidation zone between roughly $80,500 and $89,400. If Bitcoin spends time inside that range, it wouldn't damage the bullish recovery. In Drew's view, it could strengthen it.

There are two possible paths. Bitcoin could break the neckline on the first attempt, or it could consolidate first and then make a healthier push higher. Drew leans toward the second, because he believes it gives Bitcoin a better chance of keeping its gains.

If Bitcoin eventually gets back above the neckline, the chart opens up considerably. In that scenario, Drew sees price pushing through $100,000, with the next resistance near $105,000.

The order of events is what matters: rally into resistance, hold the underlying support, build momentum, then attempt the breakout.

Ethereum Has Its Own $3,000 Test

Ethereum is following a similar roadmap, although it doesn't have Bitcoin's head-and-shoulders neckline.

Its key longer-term structure is a parallel channel dating back to June 2022. Ethereum broke beneath the bottom of that channel near $1,800, tried to reclaim it and was rejected toward $1,500 before recovering.

The next major test sits just above $3,000. Drew identifies $3,041.67 as resistance because it marks the high of the weekly candle from the week of January 26, and it also lines up with a rising trend line. With two technical references meeting in roughly the same area, he expects significant resistance there.

Before Ethereum gets there, Drew wants to see price hold and consolidate above the $2,400 area, the level of the red weekly candle from September 7. Doing so would let Ethereum build the momentum to attack $3,000.

If Ethereum breaks through that resistance and consolidates above it, Drew's next reference is about $3,600, the midpoint of the longer-term parallel channel.

Bitcoin and Ethereum share the same broader question: can each one hold its recovery long enough to build momentum before challenging major overhead resistance?

HYPE Shows What Strong Momentum Looks Like

HYPE provides the contrast.

Unlike Bitcoin and Ethereum, HYPE has already broken through a major declining trend line drawn from its previous all-time highs in June. It never came back to retest that line. Instead, price pushed into the upper half of a rising parallel channel and has largely stayed there.

The level that controls Drew's near-term read is the channel midpoint near $89.14. HYPE briefly slipped beneath it and quickly recovered, and a later dip found support at the midpoint again.

The warning sign would be consecutive daily closes below $89.14, with price continuing to slide. That would shift attention toward the lower half of the channel and potential support near $78.17.

On the upside, the all-time high is the immediate resistance. If HYPE breaks through it, the upper boundary of the channel near $110.52 becomes the next target.

HYPE is the momentum chart of the group. Bitcoin and Ethereum are approaching tests, while HYPE shows what sustained strength after a breakout can look like.

Zcash May Need More Time

Zcash is at a very different stage of its setup.

It spent time inside a relatively ordinary sideways channel, then accelerated sharply higher. Drew compares the move to how many tech stocks, especially the memory names, broke out earlier in the year. He drew a steeper secondary parallel channel to capture that momentum, and price recently broke beneath its lower boundary.

The reaction after that breakdown is what Drew is watching now. Zcash tested the bottom of the broken channel the very next day and has since formed a bear flag sitting right on top of prior pivot highs.

His preferred setup isn't an immediate move. Drew would like to see the flag keep developing for roughly another seven to eight days, similar in length to the earlier bull flag on the chart. If the bear flag eventually resolves lower, Drew sees the top of the older parallel channel near $1,047 as the next support area, where he would watch for another bounce.

That makes Zcash the least mature setup of the four. Its pattern is still forming.

Bitcoin, Ethereum, HYPE and Zcash: Key Levels to Watch

Bitcoin remains the directional anchor.

A reaction at $89,363 wouldn't automatically undermine the recovery. Drew's preferred bullish path actually allows Bitcoin to stall there, as long as the pullback or consolidation keeps respecting $80,524.

Ethereum has a similar job between $2,400 and $3,041.67. For HYPE, the $89.14 channel midpoint gives the clearest read on whether its momentum is intact. Zcash needs more time for its bear flag to develop.

The four charts aren't all bullish or bearish at the same time. They are at different stages of their structures. Bitcoin is approaching the test, Ethereum is building toward one, HYPE has already broken out and is trying to hold its momentum, and Zcash is still developing its pattern.

For Bitcoin especially, the next signal may come from whether it can pause at resistance before trying again.

Watch on YouTube

Breakouts Are Holding. Now Traders Need to Let Price Come Back to Them

The NASDAQ pushed to another all-time high Monday, while the S&P 500 extended Friday’s breakout above a declining trend line. The headline is straightforward: stocks are moving higher.

The more useful signal is how those breakouts are behaving.

Across several of the charts Pro Trader Drew Dosek covered during Monday’s Trading the Close, price is either confirming a breakout, building a recognizable continuation pattern, or approaching the retest that often follows the initial move. That creates opportunity, but it also creates one of the easiest mistakes for traders to make: chasing price after the move has already become obvious.

Drew’s framework into the close was much simpler. Let the breakout prove itself, identify the level that should become support, then see whether price gives you the retrace.

S&P 500 and Nasdaq Breakouts Hold Above Key Technical Levels

The S&P 500 gained 0.67% Monday and, more importantly, continued to hold above the declining trend line that had contained price over the previous several sessions.

Friday delivered the initial breakout. Monday provided another close above the line.

That matters because one candle through resistance can be noise. Consecutive closes begin to establish something more meaningful: former resistance has a chance to become support.

Thursday may have provided an early clue. The S&P sold lower before reversing sharply and leaving behind a large lower wick. Drew noted that it resembled a bottoming tail, even though it did not form at the textbook location traders would normally expect.

“That looks like a bottoming tail, and it is acting like one for at least the following two trading days, pushing price up,” Drew said.

The lesson is not to force a candlestick label onto the chart. It is to watch how price behaves afterward. Buyers defended the weakness, and the next two sessions validated that defense.

Now the S&P is developing a potential inverse head and shoulders pattern. A close through the neckline would trigger the setup and produce a measured move toward 800.92. If the market pulls back first, the more important test comes around the former declining trend line near 765.42.

That is where the breakout becomes more useful to a trader. A controlled retrace into former resistance would test whether buyers are actually willing to defend the move.

The NASDAQ is already further along. It pushed to new all-time highs Monday and has extended farther away from its breakout area rather than immediately retesting it. On the weekly chart, Drew identified the 28,000 to 28,200 area as the next major resistance zone.

The trend remains bullish, but the farther price stretches from support, the less attractive the entry becomes.

10-Year Treasury Yields and the U.S. Dollar Remain Firm

There is another important piece of Monday’s market structure: Treasury yields remain elevated.

The 10-year Treasury yield pushed to a new high for the year before backing off. Normally, persistent strength in yields would deserve attention as a potential headwind for equities. Yet stocks continue to hold their bid.

Drew connected some of that resilience to instability overseas, particularly in Europe. His argument is that uncertainty abroad can attract capital toward the relative liquidity and perceived safety of U.S. assets.

That creates an unusual combination. Yields can remain elevated, the U.S. dollar can stay firm, and U.S. equities can still attract capital.

For traders, the important point is not that higher yields suddenly do not matter. It is that price is telling us they are not currently enough to break the equity trend.

That relationship deserves attention if it changes. If yields continue higher while equities begin failing breakout levels, the market would be sending a very different message.

For now, it has not.

Gold, Silver and Oil Test Key Support and Resistance Levels

The same pattern-recognition theme appears across commodities, but not every setup is equally bullish.

Gold remains inside a bear flag while also developing the broader shape of a possible inverse head and shoulders pattern. That makes the neckline critical. Bulls still need a breakout through the declining neckline before the larger bullish structure becomes actionable. A failure of the developing right shoulder below the head would instead invalidate the setup.

Support just below \$4,000 remains an area Drew is watching for long-term bulls seeking a better entry.

Silver is more vulnerable. It has already broken a smaller head and shoulders pattern to the downside, putting the 50% level of its parallel channel near $58.92intofocus.Ifthelargerbearishstructurefollowsthrough,Drew’smeasuredmovepointstowardthelow-$55 area.

The distinction between the two metals is useful. A pattern taking shape is not the same thing as a pattern triggering. Until price confirms the neckline break, traders have a possibility, not a trade.

Oil reinforces the same lesson.

U.S. Oil fell 2.24% Monday as a large bear flag continued to develop. A broader inverse head and shoulders structure still carries an upside target near \$116, but the immediate chart favors watching support around \$86.90 first. If buyers defend that area, a move back toward \$108 becomes more credible.

Natural gas is showing the opposite behavior. After briefly closing below support last Thursday, sellers failed to generate follow-through. Price instead reclaimed the trend line and bounced sharply. The next test is declining resistance around \$3.23 to \$3.24.

A breakdown without follow-through is information. So is a breakout without follow-through. Drew’s approach is to make price prove which side actually has control.

Bitcoin Faces a Bullish Short-Term Setup and Bearish Macro Pattern

Bitcoin may be the cleanest example of why timeframe matters.

In the near term, Bitcoin is consolidating around \$86,500 in what Drew sees as a potential cup-and-handle structure. Sideways action after an advance can be constructive because it allows an extended move to digest without immediately giving back the breakout.

Zoom out, however, and the picture becomes considerably less comfortable.

A much larger head and shoulders structure remains visible on the chart, with a bearish measured move toward \$37,000 if the pattern ultimately triggers. Drew identified \$89,543 as an important level for bulls to reclaim if they want to begin neutralizing that larger bearish setup.

That leaves Bitcoin caught between a constructive short-term consolidation and a potentially dangerous macro structure.

Political uncertainty adds another variable as traders look toward November’s midterm elections and the future of U.S. crypto regulation. But the chart still provides the decision points. Rather than guessing which catalyst wins, traders can watch whether Bitcoin can reclaim resistance or begins confirming the larger bearish structure.

General Mills Nears Its Head and Shoulders Price Target

Individual stocks provided some of Monday’s clearest examples of Drew’s broader lesson.

General Mills (GIS) is approaching the conclusion of a head and shoulders setup Drew has tracked since 2024. The original measured move projected \$30.26, a target that once appeared distant. With GIS now around \$31.68, price has nearly completed the move.

More important than the accuracy of the target is how price got there. GIS broke its neckline, retested it, failed to reclaim it, and continued lower. That sequence is exactly why Drew places so much emphasis on the retest after a technical break.

Now the setup is changing. GIS is approaching a significant support zone around \$30.70 to \$30.90, reinforced by an 88.6% Fibonacci retracement and historical pivots. After such a vertical decline, Drew sees room for a technical bounce toward \$35.54 if buyers begin defending that support.

The same logic works in the opposite direction on bullish breakouts.

One of Monday’s strongest individual-stock setups broke through overhead resistance after holding an inclining trend line last week. The chart now carries an inverse head and shoulders structure with a measured target near \$217, but Drew does not want traders chasing an extended move.

Instead, he is watching the 61.8% retracement near \$179.49.

“It likes to retrace back down to the neckline and then bounce, our signature breakout retrace bounce play,” Drew said.

That is the setup worth remembering from Monday’s show.

The initial breakout attracts attention. The retrace often creates the trade.

Western Digital Stock Reaches a Critical Technical Inflection Point

Western Digital (WDC) offers a slightly different setup because neither side has established control yet.

After last week’s sharp decline briefly broke a long-term inclining trend line, WDC gapped higher Monday and reclaimed that support. But price remains underneath declining resistance extending from July.

That leaves WDC compressed between support and resistance.

Drew identified \$550.63 as the upside target if price can break through the declining trend line. A failure back below support near \$427.41 would instead put the bullish recovery in serious trouble.

There is no reason to predict which side wins while price remains trapped inside the structure. The edge comes from waiting for confirmation.

Key Market Levels for Traders

Monday’s new highs are bullish, but the better lesson is not simply that stocks went up.

Breakouts across the market are beginning to hold, and multiple assets are developing recognizable technical structures around those moves. That gives traders clearly defined levels for confirmation, support and invalidation.

It also makes patience more important.

When price breaks through a major neckline or trend line, chasing the first extension usually means accepting worse risk-reward precisely when FOMO is highest. Drew’s breakout-retrace-bounce framework turns that impulse around: let price break, let the market prove the level matters, then watch whether former resistance becomes support.

The S&P 500’s 765.42 area, the NASDAQ’s extension toward 28,000 to 28,200, Bitcoin’s \$89,543 resistance and WDC’s tightening apex all give traders concrete levels to watch next.

The biggest AI names have rallied since Nick Valdez highlighted them following last week's White House meeting. That makes the next part of the move more important than the first.

Momentum has already done its job. Now several of these stocks are approaching levels where the charts can start separating continued strength from a rally that is simply running into resistance.

Palantir offers the clearest example. Its first upside target near $195 has already been reached and rejected. But zooming out reveals a larger inverse head-and-shoulders structure that could put roughly $263 to $264 in play if the breakout develops. Nvidia is showing a looser version of the same setup, while Microsoft, Meta and Apple are approaching their own defined resistance.

The takeaway is not that the AI rally has to stop here. It is that the easy part of the move may be behind these stocks. From here, the reaction at resistance matters more than the headline that helped put them on the radar.

Palantir (PLTR) Hits $195 as a Larger Bullish Pattern Develops

Palantir was one of the stocks Nick highlighted on September 30, with an upside level near $195. Price reached that area and rejected on Friday.

That level carried more than one technical reference. It also lined up with a gap fill from September 26 and brought price back toward the area reached on September 24.

Reaching a target and pulling back from it does not automatically damage the larger bullish structure. In this case, the higher-timeframe chart may be setting up something more important.

Nick reads Palantir as an inverse head and shoulders, with a left shoulder, lower head and right shoulder forming beneath an ascending neckline.

The standard measured-move technique takes the distance between the neckline and the bottom of the head and projects that distance above the breakout point. On Palantir, Nick's measurement points toward approximately $263 to $264.

That is a projection, not a destination price has already confirmed.

PLTR Inverse Head-and-Shoulders Puts $263 to $264 in Focus

The neckline is what makes the larger target relevant.

The cleaner sequence would be a breakout above that resistance, followed by a pullback that successfully retests the former neckline as support. That would give traders more evidence that the pattern is resolving rather than merely testing resistance.

If price breaks out and then loses the neckline on the retest, the bullish read becomes less convincing.

There is another reason the $263 to $264 area deserves attention if Palantir eventually gets there. Nick is watching whether the measured-move projection converges with a longer-term ascending trend line. If those two independent resistance references meet in roughly the same area, the confluence would strengthen the case for watching for a reaction there.

That makes Palantir the most complete setup in this group: an initial target has already been reached, a larger pattern is developing, and the chart gives traders clear conditions for determining whether that next target remains in play.

Nvidia (NVDA) Tests Resistance With a $276 Measured Move

Nvidia is pressing into a prior pivot resistance area while developing what Nick describes as an inverse head-and-shoulders pattern "in spirit."

That distinction matters.

Palantir presents the cleaner structure. Nvidia's pattern is less textbook, so its measured move deserves less weight until price confirms the breakout.

If that happens, Nick's projection points toward approximately $276, representing roughly another 20% of upside from the area he was analyzing.

For a company already carrying a multitrillion-dollar valuation, that would be a substantial move. But Nick's point is that Nvidia has demonstrated the ability to make similarly aggressive advances before. He highlighted a prior stretch in which the stock gained roughly 43% in about 43 days.

The precedent does not mean another large move will happen. It means the size of the projection alone is not enough to dismiss the setup.

The pivot resistance comes first. Until Nvidia clears it, $276 remains a potential measured-move objective rather than an active target.

Microsoft, Meta and Apple Approach Key Resistance Levels

The rest of the group does not need to be forced into the same pattern. Their value comes from giving traders defined levels where the current momentum can be tested.

Microsoft is approaching a descending trend line extending from July 2025. Nick places that resistance near $541. Price has rallied from its September 30 area, but the descending trend line remains the more important test. Clearing it would strengthen the case that the longer-term structure is changing. Rejecting there would keep that overhead resistance intact.

Meta Platforms is approaching a prior pivot high near $796, almost directly beneath the psychological $800 level. That combination makes the upper-$790s to $800 area worth watching. Meta has been moving higher since the September 30 session, but the reaction at that prior high will say more about the next leg than the rally into it.

Apple is pushing back toward approximately $347, the area that rejected price on September 22. Nick sees that resistance potentially creeping toward $350 as the move develops. A return to that zone puts Apple back at a place where sellers have already shown themselves once.

The common thread is simple: these stocks have momentum, but momentum is now meeting structure.

Chipotle (CMG) Shows Why Fibonacci and Gap Confluence Matters

Nick's Chipotle setup provides a useful example of what he wants to see when identifying an important technical level.

Before Chipotle pushed down toward the level, Nick highlighted an area around $30. The level combined two separate technical factors: a gap fill from June 22 and the 0.786 Fibonacci retracement of the prior move.

Price reached the area and bounced sharply before beginning to flatten out.

The lesson is not that two technical factors guarantee a reaction. It is that independent references converging around the same price can give a level more weight than either factor would have on its own.

That same logic is what makes Palantir especially interesting. If its $263 to $264 measured move eventually converges with the ascending trend line Nick is watching, the level gains significance through confluence.

Key Stock Levels to Watch

Palantir's neckline and Nvidia's pivot resistance are the first confirmation points. Beyond them, Microsoft near $541, Meta around $796 to $800, and Apple around $347 to $350 are different setups with the same question: What happens when momentum reaches a level where sellers have previously had an advantage?

That reaction is the next signal.

AI Stocks Face a Critical Resistance Test

The White House meeting provided Nick with a group of AI-linked stocks to put on the radar. The rally since then has brought several of those charts to a more useful stage of the trade.

Palantir has already reached its first objective and is developing a larger inverse head-and-shoulders setup. Nvidia may be building a similar, though less textbook, pattern. Microsoft, Meta and Apple are moving toward established resistance.

A rally into resistance is information. The reaction at resistance tells traders considerably more.

Watch on YouTube

Published by Verified Investing | U.S. Economic Metrics

Released: October 5, 2026 | Data Period: September 2026 | Source: Institute for Supply Management

Key Takeaways

• Headline near consensus, but the split underneath is the story: The ISM Services PMI came in at 54.9 in September, one tenth below the consensus expectation of 55.0 and down 0.5 from August's 55.4 — a negligible miss that will consume most of the headline coverage.
• Prices Paid accelerated when the street expected stability: At 74.0, services Prices Paid jumped 1.4 points from August's 72.6, against a consensus forecast of 72.9. That is a meaningful upside miss on the sub-index that matters most to the Fed right now.
• Business Activity fell hard, New Orders held: Business Activity dropped 5.2 points to 56.5, well below the consensus of 61.5. New Orders slipped only 1.1 points to 59.8, against a consensus of 60.3. The gap between a still-robust forward-demand signal and a sharply lower output reading is the tension that defines this print.
• Employment crossed back into expansion: Services Employment rose to 50.1 from August's 47.8 — crossing the 50 threshold and beating consensus of 48.0 by 2.1 points. That is a reversal worth watching, but it is not the lead story.
• Prices Paid at 74.0 is not a blip: The index has now run above 72 for two consecutive months. At this level, services inflation is not cooling — it is re-accelerating. The manufacturing-to-services cost pipeline remains pressurized.
• The October 27–28 FOMC meeting arrives with this data in hand: A Fed that hiked to 3.75–4.00% in September and is now looking for evidence that one hike was sufficient will not find comfort in a 74.0 Prices print.
• What to watch next: October ISM Services Prices (released November 4), October CPI (released November 10), and whether the Business Activity rebound or the Prices pressure proves more durable.

September 2026 ISM Services Report: Why the 54.9 Composite Understates the Problem

The ISM Services PMI has been above 50 — in expansion — for all of 2026. September continues that run at 54.9. The composite is fine. That is the press line. It is also the wrong place to look.

The services sector covers roughly 70% of U.S. economic output. The composite PMI tells you whether it is expanding or contracting. The sub-indices tell you how — and in September, the how is uncomfortable. Business Activity fell sharply. Prices Paid moved higher. New Orders stayed resilient. Employment flipped back to expansion. Four sub-indices, four different signals, pointing in four different directions. The job is to rank them.

Here is the rank: Prices Paid at 74.0 is the number that matters. Everything else is context.

The Federal Reserve raised rates to 3.75–4.00% on September 16. One hike in a year dominated by a petroleum cost shock and a tariff environment still in flux. The implicit question at every data release since then is whether one hike was enough. A services Prices Paid index running at 74.0 — and accelerating — does not support a yes answer.

ISM Services Prices Paid at 74.0: The Sub-Index the Fed Cannot Dismiss

The consensus expected Prices Paid to come in at 72.9, essentially flat from August's 72.6. Instead it printed 74.0 — a 1.1-point upside miss. That is not a rounding error on a volatile series. It is a re-acceleration.

Services inflation has been the Fed's specific problem throughout this cycle. Goods prices can swing fast in either direction. Services prices are sticky — they embed in labor contracts, lease agreements, and service fee structures that do not reprice monthly. When the ISM Services Prices Paid index sits at 74.0, it is telling you that a broad cross-section of service-sector purchasing managers are still paying significantly more this month than last month.

For context: A reading above 50 indicates prices are increasing, and readings in the 70s represent historically elevated pricing pressure. September's 74.0 was the highest since July 2022. The index has now printed at 72.6 and 74.0 in back-to-back months. This is not a trend that is breaking. It is a trend that is building.

The chart above captures the divergence that defines this report. Prices Paid at 74.0 alongside Employment barely above the 50 threshold creates a stagflationary tension at the sector level: price pressure is intensifying while the employment signal remains weak despite September's rebound. That combination limits the Fed's degrees of freedom: they cannot ignore the price pressure, and they cannot accelerate tightening without risking the labor side.

The manufacturing-to-services pipeline is relevant here. ISM Manufacturing Prices Paid has run hot through 2026 — the petroleum cost shock from the Iran war landed first in goods production and logistics, then propagated into service-sector input costs with the typical 1–3 month lag. That pipeline has not cleared. A manufacturing price shock that started arriving in service-sector costs in Q2 is still passing through in September. Expecting services Prices Paid to cool while the upstream pipeline remains pressurized is wishful reading of the data.

Business Activity Falls 5.2 Points to 56.5, but New Orders Hold at 59.8

The headline composite's 0.5-point decline from 55.4 to 54.9 obscures a much larger move inside the report. Business Activity — the output sub-index, analogous to Production in the manufacturing report — dropped 5.2 points, from 61.7 to 56.5. Consensus expected it to hold near 61.5. This is the largest single sub-index miss in the report.

A drop of that magnitude in Business Activity would normally dominate the post-release narrative. It deserves attention. But it needs to be read alongside New Orders, which came in at 59.8 — down only 1.1 points from 60.9, and only 0.5 points below consensus expectations.

New Orders can lead Business Activity by 1–2 months. When orders stay robust and output falls, the most natural interpretation is a timing or capacity issue, not a demand collapse. Service-sector firms are seeing strong incoming demand but producing less of it in September. That could reflect tightening capacity, disrupted delivery chains, or a deliberate inventory-like adjustment. It is not, by itself, a signal that services demand is rolling over.

The chart tells the story visually. The composite PMI line has been trending in a stable expansion band. New Orders remains well above it — a forward signal that the demand pipeline supporting services activity has not deteriorated. September's Business Activity weakness looks more like an air pocket than a trend change, at least through the lens of orders.

The question is whether the October print validates that interpretation. If Business Activity bounces back toward the 60s while New Orders holds, the September output weakness was noise. If Business Activity stays suppressed and New Orders starts following it lower, that changes the read.

September 2026 ISM Data vs. Consensus: What the Street Got Right and Wrong

| Sub-Index | August 2026 | September Consensus | September Actual | Miss/Beat | |---|---|---|---|---| | Composite PMI | 55.4 | 55.0 | 54.9 | Miss −0.1 | | Prices Paid | 72.6 | 72.9 | 74.0 | Beat +1.1 | | Business Activity | 61.7 | 61.5 | 56.5 | Miss −5.0 | | New Orders | 60.9 | 60.3 | 59.8 | Miss −0.5 | | Employment | 47.8 | 48.0 | 50.1 | Beat +2.1 |

Source: ISM / consensus via third-party economic calendar. Official ISM figures are authoritative.

The street's collective read on this report was essentially: composite holds, prices stable, business activity holds, orders slip slightly, employment barely in contraction. What actually happened: composite missed slightly, prices re-accelerated sharply, business activity fell hard, orders slipped modestly, employment crossed into expansion. The misses and beats nearly cancel at the headline level — and that is exactly why reading only the composite PMI this month produces a misleading picture.

Services Employment Crosses to 50.1: Real Signal or Statistical Noise?

Employment's move from 47.8 to 50.1 is a notable directional shift. For two consecutive months, the services Employment sub-index sat in contraction territory. September's reading crosses back above 50 and beats consensus of 48.0 by 2.1 points — the largest sub-index beat in the report.

The question is whether this is signal or noise. A single month's crossing of the 50 threshold, from a weak prior position, is not a trend. But it is a data point that complicates the Fed's read. If labor demand in services is stabilizing or recovering at the same time services inflation is accelerating, the stagflation read softens slightly — you need both price pressure and labor weakness to make the full case.

One month of 50.1 does not resolve that tension. It extends it. Watch October's Employment sub-index. If it holds above 50 or rises further, the labor side of the stagflation thesis starts to look less convincing. If it reverts back to the mid-40s, September's reading was a statistical bounce, and the structural weakness in services hiring remains intact.

For NFP context: services sector employment at barely-expansion levels is consistent with a labor market that is not deteriorating rapidly but is also not adding jobs with any confidence. The services Employment sub-index has now oscillated either side of 50 for three months. That is not strength.

What the September ISM Services Report Means for Markets and Traders

The following is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

The September ISM Services print hands markets a clean contradiction: the services economy is still expanding at a solid pace, demand is intact, employment just crossed back into growth — and inflation inside that expansion is getting worse, not better.

Here is what to watch and how to frame it:

1. The October 27–28 FOMC meeting. The Fed hiked in September with a 74.0 Prices Paid print now in the data flow. Powell's successor Kevin Warsh inherited an economy where services inflation is re-accelerating one month after the hike. The base case before this report was a hold in October. A Prices Paid print at or above 74 does not change that expectation — but it removes any credible case for signaling a cut cycle at the October meeting. Watch the statement language, not the rate decision.

2. Rate-sensitive sectors and the short end. A services sector where demand (New Orders at 59.8) is healthy and prices (74.0) are accelerating is not a rate-cut environment. The front end of the curve should price this accordingly. If the 2-year is already pricing significant cuts through 2027, this data argues against that positioning.

3. Watch the Business Activity rebound. The 5.2-point drop in Business Activity to 56.5 was the surprise in this report. If it bounces in October — toward the 60–62 range, consistent with where New Orders is running — then September was an air pocket and the services expansion is intact. If Business Activity stays suppressed while Prices hold above 72, the stag half of stagflation gets a data point and the growth half weakens.

4. October CPI on November 10. Services Prices Paid running at 74.0 in September is the upstream signal for October's services CPI component. If the CPI services print comes in hot, this ISM read will look prescient. That is the confirmation data point for the Prices acceleration thesis.

5. Employment sub-index durability. One month at 50.1 does not change the employment picture. October ISM Services Employment (released November 4) is the test. Sustained expansion above 50 modifies the stagflation read. A reversion to the 47–49 range confirms the services labor market remains under pressure.

6. The thesis that changes. The dominant read here is services inflation accelerating inside a still-expanding sector — pressure on the Fed, pressure on rate-sensitive assets, no near-term catalyst for a cut. That read changes if: October Prices Paid falls back below 70, Business Activity recovers strongly, and Employment holds above 50. All three together would indicate September was a noisy month with an inflationary quirk, not a regime signal. Absent all three, the pressure is real.

The composite PMI at 54.9 is fine. That is not the trade. Prices at 74.0, re-accelerating against consensus, one meeting before the Fed has to say what comes after the September hike — that is where September's data actually lives.

Source: Institute for Supply Management — ISM Services PMI Report on Business®, September 2026, released October 5, 2026. Available at ismworld.org.

Rising Yields Are the Signal the S&P 500 Is Ignoring

The most important chart in this morning’s market may be the 10-year Treasury yield.

Geopolitical and political uncertainty continues to build around the world, the type of backdrop that would normally increase demand for U.S. Treasuries and push yields lower. Instead, the opposite is happening. The 10-year yield pushed through 5.3% this morning and reached 5.311%, challenging a resistance area that dates back to 2007. At the same time, the U.S. dollar continues to strengthen while the S&P 500 remains roughly 1% from its all-time high.

That disconnect is the game plan. Stocks have not broken, but the pressure surrounding them continues to build. Until price confirms otherwise, the S&P 500 deserves the benefit of the doubt. But the combination of rising yields, a stronger dollar, deteriorating market breadth and weakening commodity charts is giving traders plenty of reasons to pay attention beneath the headline index.

10-Year Treasury Yield Breaks Above 5.3% as U.S. Dollar Strengthens

The 10-year Treasury yield pushed to 5.311% this morning, putting it against a technical area with very little recent precedent. The resistance being tested goes back to the 2007 peak. A sustained breakout above it would force traders to look back roughly 24 years, toward 2002, for comparable levels.

What makes the move more important is the backdrop. With political and geopolitical uncertainty elevated, Treasury demand would normally increase as investors seek safety. Bond prices would rise and yields would fall. That has not happened.

As Gareth explained during the show, “All of this unrest with political stuff going on, you would think that would increase the demand for bonds, U.S. Treasuries, and drive yields down. But it’s not happening yet, at least. And that is going to be problematic for the markets.”

The dollar is reinforcing that signal. The DXY has pushed above 102.5 and reached a 17-month high. Higher yields and a stronger dollar both tighten financial conditions. Neither guarantees that stocks have to fall immediately, but together they raise the hurdle for risk assets to keep moving higher.

That makes upcoming economic data especially important. ISM services and the Fed minutes could either reinforce the move in yields or finally give bonds a reason to catch a bid.

S&P 500 Holds Near Record Highs as Equal-Weight RSP Weakens

The headline S&P 500 continues to resist the pressure. Futures were down only modestly this morning, and the index remains roughly 1% below its all-time high. Technically, that keeps the broader bullish structure intact.

The more revealing chart may be the Equal Weight S&P 500 ETF, RSP.

Unlike the standard S&P 500, where trillion-dollar companies can dominate index performance, RSP gives each component roughly the same influence. That removes some of the masking effect created by mega-cap technology stocks and gives traders a cleaner look at market breadth.

That chart has been considerably weaker.

Gareth continues to watch roughly $205 on RSP as a major support area. A move into that level would put the equal-weight index more than 8% below its August near-term high, even while the headline S&P remains close to record territory.

That is the divergence that matters. The market has not confirmed a broad risk-off move because the S&P 500 itself continues to hold. But fewer stocks are carrying the rally. If yields remain elevated and breadth continues to deteriorate, the burden increasingly falls on the mega-cap leaders to keep the index afloat.

Brazil ETF EWZ Breaks Out as Alibaba and Baidu Build Technical Setups

Not every market is struggling under the current macro backdrop. Brazil produced one of the strongest technical moves on Gareth’s screen this morning, with the EWZ ETF jumping roughly 13% following the election result.

The move broke EWZ out of a long-term wedge stretching back toward the 2010 high. That does not mean chasing a 13% gap higher. The more interesting setup comes if price eventually retraces toward the breakout area and proves that former resistance has become support.

Petrobras showed a similar structure, gaining roughly 8% after breaking above a parallel channel that had contained price since 2025. In both cases, the initial breakout has already occurred. The next question is whether a pullback creates a cleaner entry with defined risk.

China is presenting almost the opposite setup. Instead of breaking out after strength, several Chinese names are attempting to build structures after prolonged weakness.

Baidu is testing the lower end of a major parallel channel, while Alibaba has broken a descending trendline and returned to test the breakout area. Around \$100, Alibaba also has ascending and descending trendlines converging, with a potential larger inverse head and shoulders developing in the background.

The important word is potential. The pattern does not become actionable simply because it resembles an inverse head and shoulders. Confirmation still requires a neckline breakout. Until then, the chart is building a setup, not completing one.

Intel Stock Drops Toward Key Support at $107 to $108.50

Intel was down roughly 4% to 5% this morning following reports that Elon Musk’s Terafab project could use Taiwan Semiconductor rather than Intel for wafers and chips. The headline is negative, but for a trader the more useful question is where the selling runs into technical support.

Gareth identified a gap fill near $108.50 that overlaps with previous pivots. Combined with additional support near $107, that creates a defined zone between approximately $107 and $108.50.

“There is a gap fill at $108.50 right here, which actually is very enticing because it’s also this pivot here,” Gareth said. “This whole area between this $108.50 and $107 level, a huge amount of support on Intel for today’s day trading day.”

That is where patience matters. A stock being down sharply does not make it a buy. The trade becomes more interesting when price reaches a predetermined area where multiple technical signals converge. Instead of guessing where the selloff ends, the chart gives traders a zone where the risk/reward begins to improve.

Gold and Crude Oil Test Major Support as Breakdown Risk Builds

Gold remains above its longer-term trendline, so support still gets the benefit of the doubt. The problem is what price is doing directly on top of that support.

After last week’s selloff, gold has begun forming inside bars following a down candle, creating a potential bear flag. As long as the long-term trendline holds on a daily closing basis, the support remains valid. A confirmed break changes the structure.

“If we break down, you’re likely going back down below $4,000,” Gareth said. “If that breaks, you have $3,500 or so written all over gold.”

Silver is dealing with a similar decision, holding longer-term support while consolidating after weakness. Neither metal has confirmed the breakdown yet. That distinction matters because support is support until price proves otherwise.

Oil may be even closer to forcing a decision. Crude has spent much of the year around the $90 to $95 range and is now repeatedly testing a critical trendline near $89.

Gareth compared the repeated tests to trying to break down a door. The first hit may do very little. Hit it enough times, however, and the structure weakens.

That is exactly what traders need to watch at $89. Buyers have defended the level repeatedly, but every test potentially consumes more of the demand sitting there. If \$89 finally gives way, the chart opens the door to roughly $79 to $78. Natural gas, by contrast, has recovered above short-term support and maintains the stronger technical posture within energy.

Bitcoin Tests $87,300 Resistance With $98,000 Target in Play

Bitcoin has one of the cleanest if/then setups on the board.

The upside level is $87,300. Bitcoin has tested that resistance multiple times, but a breakout should not be assumed before price confirms it. A daily close above $87,300 would trigger the pattern and put the measured move around $97,000 to $98,000.

If Bitcoin rejects resistance, $81,300 becomes the level that needs to hold. That area previously acted as resistance and has the opportunity to become support following the breakout.

“Essentially, we break here. You probably go to $97,000, $98,000,” Gareth explained. “On the other side, if we come down here, we’ve got to hold support, or it goes back to $75,000 or so.”

That gives traders a defined map instead of a prediction. Above $87,300 on confirmation, the chart opens toward $97,000 to $98,000. Below $81,300, the recent structure begins to fail and roughly $75,000 comes back into play.

Rising Treasury Yields Put S&P 500 Resilience to the Test

The S&P 500 is still holding up, so the charts have not given traders permission to declare the rally over. But the signals underneath the index are becoming harder to ignore.

The 10-year yield above 5.3% is the centerpiece. It is rising despite a backdrop that would normally favor Treasury demand, while the dollar strengthens and the equal-weight S&P materially underperforms the headline index. Gold and oil are sitting on important support, and Bitcoin is compressed between two levels that should define its next major move.

That does not mean front-running a breakdown. It means recognizing where the pressure is building and knowing exactly what would confirm it.

For now, the market’s message is unusually clear: the headline indexes are holding, but the internals are being tested. If yields continue higher and support begins breaking elsewhere, the S&P 500’s resilience becomes much harder to sustain.

Published by Verified Investing | U.S. Economic Metrics

Released: October 2, 2026 | Data Period: September 2026 | Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Key Takeaways

• Headline payrolls came in at +29,000 in September, a decisive downside miss against consensus expectations of +90,000 and less than a quarter of August's +133,000. The three-month average has dropped to 50,700 — roughly a third of the pace that characterized this labor market twelve months ago.
• Government shed 17,000 jobs, removing the cushion sector that has padded weak private prints throughout the post-pandemic cycle. Private payrolls carried the entire report at +46,000. That is near stall speed for an economy this size.
• Wage growth decelerated sharply. Average hourly earnings rose just +0.13% MoM against a +0.3% consensus — less than half the expected pace. Year-over-year earnings growth slipped to 3.02%, down from 3.11% in August and below the 3.2% the Street had penciled in.
• Unemployment rose to 4.2% as labor-force participation increased from 61.6% to 61.8%. The labor force expanded by 485,000, while employment rose by 406,000 and unemployment increased by 78,000. That makes the household survey less uniformly weak than the payroll headline.
• The October 27–28 FOMC meeting arrives in roughly three and a half weeks. The Fed hiked on September 16 with August payrolls then reported at +162,000. Today's report revised August down to +133,000. This is the first post-hike jobs report. A +29,000 print moves the burden of proof back onto anyone arguing for another increase.

September 2026 Jobs Report and the +29,000 Payroll Gain

The Bureau of Labor Statistics Nonfarm Payrolls report counts the net change in paid employees across all nonfarm establishments in the U.S., released on the first Friday of the following month. It is the most market-moving single release on the monthly economic calendar. A strong print shores up Fed hawkishness. A weak one reprices rate expectations within minutes of release.

This one is weak. Not ambiguously soft. Not mixed.

September's +29,000 is among the lowest single-month readings outside of pandemic distortions and post-hurricane rebuilding periods in the past decade. It arrives at a specific moment: the Fed hiked rates on September 16, raising the target range to 3.75%–4.00%. Chair Warsh and the committee now have a live question in front of them — was one hike enough, or did they move into a labor market already in deceleration?

The data released today makes the second scenario look more credible.

Nonfarm Payrolls Miss Expectations as Hiring Slows

What everyone will focus on: The miss. Consensus expected +90,000 and got +29,000 — a 61,000 shortfall. That alone sends equity futures lower, Treasury yields down, and rate-cut probability higher within minutes. The unemployment rate nudging to 4.2% and wages printing at +0.13% MoM compound the picture. The initial read will be: bad number, dovish reaction, watch for a policy pivot.

What matters more: The composition underneath the headline tells a structural story, not a single-month blip.

Government shed 17,000 jobs in September. That means private payrolls carried the entire report at +46,000 — and even that number struggles to qualify as healthy in an economy of this size. The three-month average of 50,700 is running at roughly a third of the pace the labor market was printing twelve months ago. Weather events and seasonal anomalies can distort one month. They cannot explain a trend line that has been moving in one direction across three consecutive prints.

Then there is the wage signal. A +0.13% monthly gain in average hourly earnings is not a rounding error — it is a genuine deceleration. Year-over-year earnings growth at 3.02% is moving away from the 4%+ territory that anchored the Fed's case for sustained restriction. When job creation falls and wage growth falls simultaneously, the argument for holding rates at 3.75%–4.00% requires very specific evidence about lagged price pressures. That evidence just got harder to assemble.

Private Payrolls and Government Jobs Show a Weaker Labor Market

Government employment — federal, state, and local — has been one of the most reliable sources of payroll support throughout the post-pandemic period. Local government and healthcare repeatedly padded headlines in months when private sector growth disappointed. September reversed that pattern.

Government contracting while private payrolls are already weak is a double-subtraction problem. There is no cushion sector absorbing the slack. The +46,000 in private payrolls is the actual signal the private economy produced this month — and at that pace, even if government holds flat in October, the headline will struggle to reach 70,000.

The three-month average of 50,700 reflects this deterioration in full. The labor market needs somewhere between 100,000 and 150,000 jobs per month to absorb new workforce entrants at a stable unemployment rate. Running at 50,700 means the pool of people competing for positions is growing faster than positions are being created. That is not a neutral reading of the labor market.

Wage Growth Slows to 3.0% as Average Hourly Earnings Cool

The +0.13% MoM print on average hourly earnings deserves its own section because it changes the inflation calculus more than the headline payroll miss alone. The consensus was +0.3%. August came in at +0.319%. September's reading is not a slight underperformance — it is a near-60% deceleration from the prior month's pace.

Year-over-year, earnings growth sits at 3.02%, below the 3.11% August reading and well under the 3.2% consensus estimate. The direction matters as much as the level.

Wage growth above 4% was the Fed's primary justification for sustained restrictive policy through 2025. As that number compresses toward 3%, the real-rate argument for holding at 3.75%–4.00% becomes increasingly strained. The transmission mechanism is direct: if wages are decelerating and job creation is near stall speed, consumer spending — roughly two-thirds of GDP — faces a simultaneous demand headwind. Real final sales to private domestic purchasers came in at 4.6% annualized in Q2 2026. A labor market running at 50,700 monthly average with wages at 3.02% YoY makes sustaining that 4.6% pace into Q4 increasingly difficult.

Unemployment Rate Rises to 4.2% as Labor Force Participation Increases

The unemployment rate at 4.2% is not dramatic in isolation, and the mechanism behind the move is softer than the payroll headline. Participation rose from 61.6% to 61.8%. The labor force grew by 485,000, the household survey counted 406,000 more people employed, and the number of unemployed rose by 78,000. Part of the tick up came from people coming back into the job market and not all of them finding work yet. That is a different signal than outright job loss.

U-6 at 7.6% captures the fuller picture: unemployed plus marginally attached workers plus those working part-time for economic reasons. It edged down from 7.7% in August, so the broadest slack measure is not deteriorating in step with the headline rate.

The Black unemployment rate jumped to 7.0% in September from 6.0% in August — a demographic cohort that historically moves early when the broader cycle turns. The number marginally attached to the labor force fell to about 1.5 million. Read together with higher participation, the household survey looks mixed rather than uniformly weak: more people in the labor force, more employed, and some newcomers still looking. The weakness in this report is concentrated in the payroll survey, which is the number the Fed and the market weight most.

What the September Jobs Report Means for the Federal Reserve

The September 16 rate hike to 3.75%–4.00% was decided with August's +133,000 print as the labor market backdrop. The committee saw a resilient job market and moved. Sixteen days later, the first post-hike jobs report shows +29,000 and a tick up in unemployment.

This is the classic risk of hiking into lagging data. The September payroll survey reference period is the pay period including September 12. The Iran War energy shock — now in its seventh month — cumulative tariff pressure, and the weight of 3.75%–4.00% policy rates were already embedded in business hiring decisions before the September 16 meeting took place. The BLS data simply confirmed what the private sector had already decided.

The October 27–28 FOMC meeting is now consequential in a way it was not three weeks ago. The committee will have October CPI and several additional weeks of jobless claims data before they decide. September PCE does not arrive until October 29 — after the meeting. The Fed makes the October decision without it. What they will have is one month at +29,000, a three-month average of 50,700, wages at 3.02% YoY, and an unemployment rate moving in the wrong direction.

A +29,000 print moves the burden of proof back onto anyone arguing for another hike. The "one hike was enough" camp just received its strongest data point of the cycle.

What the September Payroll Report Means for Markets and Traders

The following is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

The front end of the Treasury curve is the first signal. A +29,000 print with wages at +0.13% MoM reprices 2-year yields sharply. Watch whether that move holds through the session — a sustained break lower confirms the market is pricing a genuine policy shift, not just a knee-jerk reaction to a single data point.

Watch Fed funds futures pricing for October 27–28. Before this print, the question was whether the September hike was a one-and-done or the start of a new cycle. If October meeting futures move to 25%+ cut probability, that is a structural repricing of the rate path, not a positioning blip.

Equity sector implications are not uniform. Rate-sensitive sectors — utilities, REITs, homebuilders — benefit directly from dovish repricing. Financials face a more complex read: lower rates compress net interest margins, and a softening labor market adds credit quality concerns. Do not assume financials rally in line with the broad market on this number.

The three-month average of 50,700 is the number to track going forward. One weak month invites questions about survey timing, seasonal adjustment quirks, and sector distortions. Three consecutive months averaging below 60,000 is a labor market deterioration thesis. The October jobs report — released November 6 — is the confirming or disconfirming print. If October comes in below 80,000 and the three-month average drops further, the Fed's subsequent meeting enters the active policy conversation.

Watch October CPI (released before the FOMC meeting) alongside wages. The primary case for sustained restriction was that wage growth was running hot enough to keep services inflation elevated. At 3.02% YoY and decelerating, that case needs fresh evidence from the price side. If CPI shows services price pressure independently sustaining above 4%, the Fed has cover to hold. If it follows wages lower, the October decision becomes genuinely contested.

The most important caveat: revision risk. NFP is regularly revised in the subsequent month's release, and a number this far below trend invites scrutiny of whether the initial print was distorted by survey timing or sector composition. If November's release revises September meaningfully upward — toward 80,000 or above — the labor market deterioration narrative loses its anchor. Until that revision arrives or fails to arrive, the data says what it says: +29,000, three-month average 50,700, wages decelerating.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics — The Employment Situation, September 2026 (released October 2, 2026)

This article is published for educational and informational purposes only. Nothing contained herein constitutes investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Please consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decisions.

Private Hangars, Public Markets: The Bet Behind Sky Harbour

Sky Harbour Group came public with a proposition that sounded simple enough: private aircraft need somewhere to live, hangar capacity is constrained at many important airports, and owners will pay for a better solution. The difficult part was everything required to turn that proposition into a scalable public company. Unlike a software business that can add customers without pouring concrete, Sky Harbour had to secure airport ground leases, finance construction, build campuses, attract tenants, and wait for those assets to begin producing recurring revenue. That made the company less a bet on private aviation alone and more a test of whether a fragmented piece of aviation infrastructure could be standardized and scaled.

That distinction is the key to understanding the SKYH story. Investors looking only at quarterly revenue were always going to see an incomplete picture because revenue follows construction rather than leading it. Investors focused only on the size of the private aviation market could make the opposite mistake, giving too much credit for demand before Sky Harbour proved it could turn that demand into occupied hangars. The real thesis sits between those two views: Sky Harbour has spent its public life trying to convert scarce airport real estate into a repeatable network of income-producing infrastructure.

The company has made meaningful progress on that conversion. What began as a capital-intensive development story has increasingly become an operating one, with revenue climbing as campuses move from construction into service. But that evolution does not eliminate the original risk. It changes what investors should measure.

A SPAC Runway Into A Difficult Market

Sky Harbour completed its business combination with Yellowstone Acquisition Company on January 25, 2022, with its Class A shares beginning trading on NYSE American under SKYH the following day. The timing mattered. The SPAC boom was already losing momentum, investors were becoming less willing to fund distant growth stories on narrative alone, and rising interest rates were about to make capital considerably more expensive. Sky Harbour entered public markets just as the market was becoming more skeptical of companies that needed years of investment before their economics could be judged. SEC

That environment exposed the central tension in the business almost immediately. Sky Harbour describes itself as a Home Base Operator, developing, leasing, and managing hangars designed specifically for aircraft based at an airport rather than transient traffic. The opportunity comes from a real physical constraint: desirable airport land is limited, while the business aviation fleet and the size of newer aircraft have increased demand for suitable hangar space. Sky Harbour has explicitly identified those trends as drivers of its market opportunity. SEC

But scarcity does not automatically create shareholder value. A company still has to acquire the right locations, build at acceptable costs, lease the finished space, and finance the process without allowing the capital structure to overwhelm the economics. That was arguably the part of the original story easiest to underestimate. Sky Harbour was not simply selling premium hangars. It was attempting to assemble a national infrastructure platform one airport at a time.

The SPAC transaction itself reinforced that lesson. Approximately $123.1 million of Yellowstone shares were redeemed in connection with the transaction, while a $45 million PIPE investment helped fund the combination. Sky Harbour therefore arrived in public markets with both an ambitious development plan and an early reminder that access to capital would be inseparable from the operating story. SEC

The Market Had To Learn To Watch The Doors, Not The Blueprints

For an asset-heavy development company, the period between announcing a project and earning revenue from it can be long. That created an unusual problem for SKYH investors. A new airport agreement could expand the future opportunity without materially changing current revenue. Construction progress could represent genuine execution while still consuming cash. Even a completed campus did not finish the job because the economics ultimately depended on leasing and utilization.

That is why the most important early milestones were not simply additions to the development pipeline. They were conversions from plans into operating assets.

The financial statements eventually began showing that conversion. Sky Harbour generated $609,000 of revenue in the fourth quarter of 2022. By the fourth quarter of 2024, quarterly revenue had reached $4.642 million, roughly 7.6 times the earlier level. Full-year 2024 revenue reached $14.761 million. The numbers were still small in absolute terms, but the direction mattered because revenue was beginning to demonstrate what completed campuses could contribute. Channelchek

That is a much more useful way to frame Sky Harbour's early public years than simply calling it a high-growth company. Growth was the output. The underlying signal was that capital previously trapped in development was beginning to produce revenue.

The model also became easier to understand. Rental revenue can accumulate as additional hangars enter service, while the company can apply what it learns about design, construction, tenant demand, and airport selection to later campuses. If that process becomes repeatable, scale is not merely about owning more square footage. It is about shortening the distance between acquiring a site and turning that site into a productive asset.

Capital Was Never A Side Story

There is another side to that flywheel. Every new campus requires money before it generates money.

That makes Sky Harbour fundamentally different from businesses where rapid revenue growth can largely finance the next stage of expansion. For much of its public life, the company has had to build the asset base ahead of the income statement. Financing therefore cannot be treated as a footnote to the growth story. It is one of the variables that determines whether the growth story works.

That became particularly visible in late 2024. Sky Harbour raised approximately $75.2 million across two equity closings during the fourth quarter, providing additional capital as the company continued expanding its network. The financing strengthened the company's ability to keep building, but it also illustrated the trade-off investors have to monitor: additional capital can accelerate development while equity issuance can dilute existing shareholders. SEC

This is where investor psychology around SKYH can become distorted. A new development announcement can look bullish because it expands the potential network. A financing can initially look negative because it adds shares. Neither interpretation is sufficient on its own. The more important question is what return the company ultimately generates from the capital it raises and deploys.

For Sky Harbour, capital efficiency is therefore part of the product. If each round of financing produces campuses that lease successfully and contribute durable cash flow, raising capital can support a larger operating base. If development slows, costs rise materially, or occupancy disappoints, the same capital intensity becomes a weakness.

From Development Story To Operating Proof

By 2025, the numbers had begun to shift the discussion again. Sky Harbour reported $27.54 million in full-year revenue, up from $14.761 million in 2024. Rental revenue accounted for $21.588 million of the 2025 total, while fuel revenue contributed $5.952 million. The significance was not simply that annual revenue increased approximately 87%. More of the company's previously promised network was now showing up in reported operations. SEC

That is an important inflection point in the IPO-to-impact story. Early investors largely had to underwrite what Sky Harbour intended to build. As more campuses become operational, investors have more evidence with which to judge what the model actually produces.

The latest reported results extend that trend. For the second quarter of 2026, Sky Harbour reported $9.855 million in total revenue, including $7.030 million of rental revenue and $2.825 million of fuel revenue. Revenue for the first six months of 2026 reached $18.580 million, compared with $12.180 million in the first six months of 2025. SEC

Those numbers do not settle the investment case. They make the next phase easier to measure.

The question is gradually moving from can Sky Harbour build operating campuses? toward can those campuses mature fast enough, and with attractive enough economics, to support the next stage of expansion?

That is a much higher-quality question for investors because it relies less on projections and more on observable execution.

What SKYH Investors Can Still Misread

The easiest mistake with SKYH is to treat every piece of news as equally important.

A new ground lease is not the same as a completed campus. A completed campus is not the same as a leased campus. Revenue growth is not automatically the same as improving capital efficiency. And access to financing is useful only if the capital ultimately creates sufficient economic value.

The operating sequence matters: secure the site, finance it, build it, lease it, stabilize it.

Each step removes a different type of risk. A signed ground lease reduces site-acquisition uncertainty but introduces development risk. Construction progress reduces development uncertainty but leaves leasing risk. Occupancy begins converting the project from a development asset into an operating asset. Eventually, a mature portfolio should make the economics of the entire platform easier to judge.

Investors should therefore resist the temptation to measure Sky Harbour using a single headline metric. Revenue matters, but so do the amount of capital required to produce that revenue, the pace at which newly delivered capacity leases, construction timing, liquidity, and the economics of additional locations.

That framework also helps separate company-specific execution from macro noise. Higher rates can increase financing pressure and influence how investors value asset-heavy growth companies. Construction costs can change project economics. Private aviation activity can affect tenant demand. Those factors matter, but none replaces the company-level question of whether Sky Harbour can repeatedly convert airport access into occupied, cash-generating infrastructure.

The Tape Still Trades Faster Than The Business

There is a natural mismatch between SKYH as a stock and Sky Harbour as a company. The stock can reprice in minutes. The underlying business develops in quarters and years.

That matters for traders because relatively smaller companies can experience sharper moves around earnings, financing announcements, development milestones, and changes in expectations. A single announcement can alter the perceived timeline for future cash generation even when little has changed operationally that day.

The result is a stock where the tape can temporarily tell a more dramatic story than the business.

For traders, that makes liquidity, volume, reaction to corporate catalysts, and broader rate sensitivity worth watching alongside the fundamentals. For longer-horizon investors, the better question is whether price movement is being confirmed by a meaningful change in the development-to-revenue cycle. A large move without a change in that framework may say more about positioning and liquidity than about the value of the underlying hangar network.

That does not make price action irrelevant. It means the chart and the operating story should answer different questions.

The Next Test Is Capital Efficiency

Sky Harbour's progress has not removed the capital question. In August 2026, the company completed another registered direct offering, selling 4 million Class A shares at $10 per share for \$40 million in gross proceeds. Management said the proceeds were intended for general corporate purposes. SEC

That financing provides another example of the tension investors have faced since the company entered public markets. More capital can support additional growth, but the market eventually needs evidence that an expanding asset base is creating value faster than the capital base is expanding.

This is why the next stage of the story should be judged less by the number of announced projects and more by conversion. How quickly do campuses move from construction to revenue? How effectively does available space lease? How much incremental cash generation follows each wave of investment? And as the network grows, does the existing portfolio begin funding a larger portion of the next one?

Those are the measurements that can determine whether Sky Harbour remains primarily a developer dependent on outside capital or matures into the infrastructure platform envisioned when it entered public markets.

The Bottom Line On Sky Harbour

Sky Harbour's public-market journey is ultimately a lesson in the difference between scarcity and execution.

The original thesis identified a genuine constraint: desirable hangar capacity at important business aviation airports is difficult to create. But recognizing scarcity was never enough. Sky Harbour had to secure airport relationships, finance construction, deliver campuses, attract tenants, and demonstrate that the process could be repeated across markets.

The company is further along that path than it was when it entered public markets in 2022. Revenue has moved from hundreds of thousands of dollars per quarter to millions, and the discussion has increasingly shifted from whether there is a business behind the blueprints to how efficiently that business can scale. SEC

That shift is the real IPO-to-impact story.

For investors, the lesson extends beyond SKYH. Asset-heavy growth companies often look weakest precisely when they are spending the most and strongest after earlier investments finally reach the income statement. The job is not to reward spending simply because management calls it growth, nor to reject investment simply because it consumes cash. The job is to follow the conversion.

For Sky Harbour, that means watching the path from ground lease to construction, construction to occupancy, and occupancy to durable cash generation. If that chain continues to strengthen, the business becomes easier to value on what it produces rather than what it promises. If the chain breaks, headline growth in the development pipeline matters much less.

The hangars are the physical assets. The conversion cycle is the investment story.

Weak Jobs, Falling Yields and the S&P 500’s Path Toward 8,000

The September jobs report looked ugly on the surface. Nonfarm payrolls increased by just 29,000, unemployment ticked up to 4.2%, and average hourly earnings rose only 0.1% for the month. Yet S&P 500 futures rallied sharply after the release.

That reaction tells you what matters more than the headline.

The market is not simply trading weaker employment. It is trading what weaker employment could mean for interest rates, Treasury yields, and ultimately equity valuations. That was the central framework in this morning’s My Trading Game Plan Revealed: if the labor market continues to cool without falling apart, pressure on the Federal Reserve to raise rates immediately decreases. At the same time, the 10-year Treasury yield is showing its first meaningful rejection from a major multi-decade resistance zone.

For Gareth Soloway, that keeps the broader equity setup bullish. The S&P 500 remains pointed toward roughly 8,000 unless the chart begins showing evidence that the structure has changed.

Why Did Stocks Rally After a Weak Jobs Report?

September nonfarm payrolls increased by only 29,000, well below expectations around 90,000. The unemployment rate moved from 4.1% to 4.2%, while average hourly earnings increased just 0.1% month over month. July and August payroll growth was also revised down by a combined 60,000 jobs. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Under different conditions, that combination might have triggered concerns about economic deterioration. Instead, equity futures accelerated higher. Shortly after the report, S&P 500 futures were up roughly 0.8%, while Nasdaq 100 futures were up about 1%. MarketScreener Canada

The reason is the Fed.

The labor market is weakening enough to reduce the urgency for another immediate rate hike, but the headline payroll number was still positive. That creates the type of cooling scenario equity bulls want to see: slower hiring and softer wage growth without an outright contraction in payroll employment.

The market’s rate expectations shifted accordingly. Futures pricing following the report put the probability of an October Fed hike below 20%, although expectations for a possible December increase remained substantially higher. Reuters

That distinction matters for Gareth’s game plan. The bullish argument is not simply that weak jobs are good for stocks. The argument is that softer employment data can remove pressure from yields, and lower yields can give equities more room to run.

What the 10-Year Treasury Yield Signals for the Stock Market

The clearest confirmation came from the bond market.

The 10-year Treasury yield pushed above 5.3% on Thursday, reaching its highest level since 2002, before reversing. Following Friday’s employment report, the yield dropped toward 5.18%. Trading Economics

The level itself matters, but the weekly candle matters more.

Gareth has repeatedly emphasized that resistance should be respected until price proves it can hold above it. The 10-year yield pushed through a major historical resistance area this week, but so far it has failed to confirm the breakout. Instead, the move is creating the possibility of a weekly topping tail.

That is the signal Gareth is watching.

A topping tail forms when a market pushes above resistance and then gets rejected before the candle closes. On a weekly chart, after testing a major long-term level, that rejection becomes more significant. It does not guarantee that yields have peaked, but it changes the near-term setup.

If the 10-year closes the week with that rejection intact, the move above resistance begins to look more like a failed breakout than the start of another sustained leg higher.

That would be constructive for equities.

The S&P 500 remains in an uptrend, and Gareth continues to work with an upside target near 8,000, where price would run into a larger ascending trend line. His framework remains straightforward: stay bullish until the chart provides a reason not to be.

As Gareth put it, “I’m going to maintain my bullish bias until the chart tells me otherwise.”

What Nike’s Price and Volume Action Showed Before Earnings

Nike provided a very different lesson.

The company reported adjusted earnings of $0.48 per share, while revenue came in around $11.2 billion. More importantly, Nike projected fiscal 2027 adjusted earnings of just \$1.15 to $1.35 per share and said revenue is expected to decline by a high-single-digit percentage. Nike Investor Relations

The stock sold off sharply in premarket trading, but Gareth’s focus was on what happened before the earnings release.

Late in Thursday’s session, Nike abruptly rolled over after grinding higher for much of the day. The decline was accompanied by a dramatic expansion in volume. Gareth highlighted a progression in 10-minute volume from roughly 45,000 shares to 70,000, 143,000, 380,000, 627,000 and eventually more than one million shares.

That does not establish why the selling occurred or who was behind it. It does show that something changed in the order flow before the earnings release.

That is the useful lesson for traders.

Price and volume can reveal changes in positioning before the fundamental explanation becomes obvious. You do not need to know who is selling to recognize that unusually aggressive selling has entered the market.

After the earnings decline, Gareth is watching a much larger technical structure. Nike is approaching historical support dating back to 2012 and 2013, with approximately \$32 and then $28 standing out as the levels that could define the longer-term setup.

The stock is damaged. The question now is whether those historical levels begin absorbing the selling.

The Oil Price Level to Watch

Crude oil delivered another important technical decision point.

Oil fell sharply Friday as markets reacted to discussions surrounding a potential coordinated release of European energy reserves. France has proposed a 50-million-barrel release as part of broader discussions over emergency supplies. Financial Times

For Gareth, the political negotiations are secondary to the chart.

The level that matters is approximately $88.80.

That area represents an ascending trend line built from multiple pivot lows. As long as crude holds it on a daily closing basis, support remains intact. A confirmed daily close below $88.80 would change the structure and open the door to a much larger downside move.

Gareth’s next major technical zone would then sit around $77 to $78.

That makes \$88.80 the decision point. Traders do not have to predict the outcome of reserve negotiations or geopolitical developments. They can wait for the chart to confirm whether support survives them.

Natural gas is in a similar confirmation phase after breaking an important trend line. Gareth is looking for spot natural gas to regain roughly 2.85 before treating the recent weakness as repaired.

Is Gold Still Bullish, and Why Is Silver More Vulnerable?

Falling Treasury yields are helping gold, but the larger chart is what keeps Gareth constructive.

Gold continues to hold a major rising trend line stretching back to May 2025. As long as that structure holds, the broader bullish setup remains intact.

The risk is time.

If gold cannot generate a meaningful bounce and instead begins moving sideways along support, the pattern could evolve into a bear flag. In other words, touching support is not enough. Gareth wants to see buyers respond to it.

Silver carries an additional complication because it trades as both a precious metal and an industrial commodity. If weaker employment is the beginning of a deeper economic slowdown, weaker industrial demand could create a headwind that gold does not face to the same degree.

Copper reinforces that concern. Its chart remains technically weak, giving Gareth a reason to stay cautious on the industrial side of the metals complex even while gold continues to hold its larger bullish structure.

What Weak Payroll Growth Could Mean for the Fed

The biggest takeaway from this morning is that the market is showing traders which transmission mechanism matters right now.

Weak payroll growth reduced expectations for an immediate Fed hike. That pushed Treasury yields lower. The 10-year is simultaneously rejecting a major long-term resistance area. Lower yields then relieve some of the valuation pressure on equities, allowing the S&P 500’s existing uptrend to remain intact.

Nike’s unusual volume revealed a change in positioning before the earnings reaction. Oil’s $88.80 level gives traders a defined point where the technical structure changes. And for Gold’s trend line, the reaction from support will tell traders whether buyers still control the larger trend.

That is the game plan: Identify the level that tells you when the market’s behavior has changed.

For the S&P 500, Gareth remains bullish with roughly 8,000 as the larger upside target. For the 10-year yield, the weekly rejection is the confirmation to watch. For crude, $88.80 is the line in the sand.

Yields Are Still in Control as Stocks Fight Back Into the Close

Stocks fought back from their intraday lows today, but the most important chart was not the S&P 500, Nasdaq, or even the semiconductor sector.

It was the 10-year Treasury yield.

The 10-year pushed as high as 5.342%, reaching levels not seen since 2002, before finally showing signs that the relentless move higher may be getting stretched. That matters because equities are trying to stabilize at the same time yields are testing an extreme. If yields begin to pull back, stocks suddenly have room to breathe. If they keep pushing higher, today's equity recovery becomes much harder to trust.

That was the key setup into the close. The market did not suddenly become easy or decisively bullish. It reached a point where several technical conditions began lining up for a potential shift, and now traders need confirmation.

Why the 10-Year Treasury Yield Is Important for Stocks Right Now

The macro backdrop gave stocks some help. PCE inflation came in cooler while recent labor data remained strong, leaving the market balancing softer inflation against an economy that has yet to meaningfully crack.

Rate expectations reflect that tension. The Fed rate tool showed 76% odds of rates remaining unchanged at the upcoming meeting, even as expectations continue to lean toward another hike later in the year.

But Drew's focus was less on predicting the Fed and more on watching how the bond market responds.

After a nearly uninterrupted run of green candles dating back to September 3, the 10-year yield finally printed a red daily candle following its push to 5.342%. More importantly, Drew identified what he calls a "sleeper hold" pattern, a three-factor technical setup that can precede a reversal or meaningful consolidation.

"This is one of the most amazing signals," Drew said, noting that the same setup recently helped identify a top in semiconductors.

The weekly close is now important. A narrow-bodied weekly candle would add another layer of confirmation to the daily signal. If yields begin retracing, 5.021% becomes an important downside level to watch.

That is the transmission mechanism for equities. Tech does not necessarily need yields to collapse. It needs the pressure from continuously rising yields to ease.

Key Support and Resistance Levels for the S&P 500 and Nasdaq

The S&P 500 reflected that possibility today.

SPY pushed lower intraday before buyers stepped in aggressively, leaving behind a large lower wick and defending the \$760.40 support area. Whether traders want to call the candle a textbook hammer or simply a downside rejection matters less than what the price action showed: sellers had control, pushed into support, and could not hold the market there.

That changes the near-term setup.

The first level overhead is \$766.79. A move through that resistance would give the recovery more credibility, while a failure to build on today's rejection would keep SPY trapped in the same uncertain structure.

The Nasdaq is showing a similar battle, but with an important difference. It continues to hold above the declining trend line that previously capped price from the all-time highs. Bulls would prefer to see price accelerate away from that breakout level, but holding above former resistance is still constructive.

The all-time high area just above 27,200 is the first major test. Beyond that, the more interesting zone sits above 28,000, where two longer-term trend lines converge near a major psychological round number.

That is where the upside gets harder.

Are Semiconductors Confirming a Broader Stock Market Rebound?

If yields are the macro pressure point, semiconductors are one of the clearest places to watch whether equity buyers are actually willing to take risk again.

SMH rallied more than 1% and closed above its 61.8% Fibonacci retracement, measured from the all-time high to the July low. That level matters because it has been acting as an important decision point inside the larger recovery.

Now Drew wants confirmation.

Another daily close above the zone would strengthen the breakout and begin turning former resistance into support. If that happens, the next major upside level comes in around \$635.84.

Micron is part of the same story. MU held near the upper end of its consolidation following earnings and continues to pressure horizontal resistance around \$1,035.50. A confirmed breakout would shift attention first toward the open gap and then toward the midpoint of its broader parallel channel.

That channel becomes especially useful if MU moves into territory where obvious historical resistance becomes scarce. Instead of guessing where momentum might stall, the parallel structure gives traders a framework for projecting the next potential resistance zone.

Sandisk is showing another version of the same setup. Price remains near the neckline of a large inverse Head and Shoulders pattern, with the measured move pointing above \$2,600. Notably, that projection also lines up with an inclining parallel channel.

When independent technical tools begin identifying roughly the same destination, the level deserves more attention.

Breakout Retests Put ACN and TKO in Focus

Two of the cleaner individual-stock setups from today's show were Accenture and TKO, but for opposite reasons.

Accenture surged through \$197.98 following its earnings report, triggering an inverse Head and Shoulders breakout. The move itself is bullish, but chasing the breakout is not necessarily the best trade.

Drew's preferred setup is the retest.

If ACN pulls back toward \$197.98 and that former neckline becomes support, traders get something much more valuable than a dramatic green candle: a defined level where the trade can be tested and invalidated.

For traders looking for a shallower retracement, \$201.79 is the first Fibonacci support. If the larger pattern remains intact, its measured move points toward \$277.37.

TKO presents the mirror image. Its large Head and Shoulders pattern has already broken its neckline, with last week's close providing confirmation. The measured move projects toward \$137, but there is an important support shelf around \$166 that could interrupt the decline.

A bounce from there would not automatically invalidate the bearish pattern. In fact, a rally back toward the broken neckline could produce the cleaner setup by allowing traders to see whether former support becomes resistance.

That is the broader lesson from both charts. A breakout or breakdown tells you direction. The retest often tells you whether the market actually accepts that direction.

When Does Strong Momentum Become a Bad Entry?

Synopsys offered the clearest warning against chasing today's strongest movers.

SNPS jumped 12.78% following news of a deal with OpenAI, but the rally drove price directly into a declining trend line dating back to July 2025 while daily RSI reached 74.41.

The headline is bullish. The location is much less attractive.

An RSI above 70 does not guarantee a reversal, and a stock can remain overbought while continuing higher. But when an extended momentum reading appears at established resistance after a double-digit one-day move, the risk-reward changes quickly.

That is exactly where traders can get trapped by buying the story instead of the chart.

Wells Fargo sits near the opposite extreme. WFC pierced a long-term inclining trend line while RSI fell to 32.58, creating conditions for a possible oversold bounce toward \$83.54.

But Drew highlighted an important distinction: support is not necessarily getting stronger because it keeps holding.

"The more and more you hit these lines the weaker they become."

WFC has now tested this trend line five times. Each successful defense consumes some of the demand sitting around that level. A bounce may still develop, but another test should be treated with more caution than the first or second.

That is trader psychology expressed through price. Repeated tests are information.

Silver, Natural Gas, and Bitcoin Send Mixed Technical Signals

Outside equities, the setups remain mixed rather than uniformly risk-on.

Silver continues to resemble a true bear flag, with price moving sideways near the lows rather than producing a meaningful relief bounce. Its Head and Shoulders structure points toward the \$53 area if the bearish pattern continues.

Natural gas is approaching a different decision point. After extending its decline, price is moving toward an inclining trend line around \$2.98. That does not guarantee a bottom, but it gives traders a clearly defined area to watch for a technical reaction.

Bitcoin remains constructive while holding above former horizontal resistance. The more important test sits just above \$89,000 at the neckline of the previous Head and Shoulders structure. Clearing that area would materially improve the larger technical picture.

These markets do not all need to point in the same direction. In fact, the divergence is useful. It reinforces why this environment rewards selectivity rather than a blanket bullish or bearish call.

What Should Traders Watch After the Jobs Report?

The next session comes with another major catalyst in the Non-Farm Payrolls report, but the mistake would be focusing only on whether the jobs number beats or misses expectations.

Watch the reaction.

The 10-year yield is the first tell. If the sleeper hold confirms and yields begin backing away from 5.342%, the pressure that has weighed on long-duration equities begins to ease. That would give today's SPY rejection, Nasdaq breakout hold, and semiconductor strength a better chance to develop.

If yields instead resume their push higher, those bullish equity setups face a much tougher test.

Then watch whether today's technical levels actually hold. SPY has \$760.40 underneath and \$766.79 overhead. SMH needs to confirm above its 61.8% retracement. The Nasdaq needs to remain above its breakout trend line. ACN and TKO offer cleaner opportunities if their broken necklines are retested rather than chased.

The point is not to predict tomorrow's payroll number. It is to know what market reaction would confirm or invalidate the setups already on the board.

The Bottom Line for Stocks and Treasury Yields

Today's recovery was meaningful, but it was not a standalone signal.

The more important development was that equities rejected their lows just as the 10-year yield began showing its first meaningful signs of technical exhaustion after an extended run higher. Semiconductors strengthened, the Nasdaq held its breakout structure, and several individual stocks produced clearly defined setups.

Now the market has to prove it.

For Drew, that means waiting for confirmation instead of chasing the first move. A pullback in yields would give equity bulls breathing room. Continued strength in yields would keep pressure on the same areas trying to break out.

The levels are already mapped. The next job is simply to see which side confirms.

Bitcoin has rallied roughly 40% from its August 16 low to last week's high. Since then, price has pulled back, but Lawton Ho does not read that weakness as a reason to abandon the bullish structure.

Instead of immediately giving back the rally move, Bitcoin's price has shifted into sideways-to-downsloping consolidation. That is the structure of a potential bull flag: a strong move higher, followed by a controlled pause that can set up another leg in the direction of the original trend.

Bitcoin has several resistance levels stacked overhead, beginning near $87,400 and extending through $100,000, with an additional rising trend line creating a moving ceiling along the way.

Bitcoin Is Building Another Step

The bull flag fits a broader pattern Lawton has been watching in Bitcoin.

Price has repeatedly moved higher, consolidated sideways, then pushed higher again. Think of it as a stair-step advance rather than one uninterrupted rally. The current consolidation could be another version of that same sequence.

That does not mean the next leg higher is guaranteed. It means the pullback is occurring within a structure that still gives Lawton reason to look higher.

The first level that matters is approximately $87,400, the recent pivot high and highest point Bitcoin reached during this rally. Clearing that level would put Bitcoin back above the top of its recent advance and bring the next resistance zone into focus.

$90,000 Is Where the First Traffic Appears

Above $87,400, Lawton is watching the area around $90,000.

The importance of $90,000 is not simply that it is a round number. Bitcoin previously spent significant time chopping sideways around this area, leaving a concentration of prior trading activity overhead.

That makes it a logical place for resistance to reappear.

If Bitcoin reaches that zone, a stall would not necessarily contradict the broader bullish structure. It would put price back into an area where buyers and sellers have already spent considerable time fighting for control.

$98,000 and $100,000 Form the Next Resistance Zone

If Bitcoin can work through $90,000, the next major reference is approximately $97,924, which Lawton identifies as the highest level Bitcoin has reached this year.

Call it $98,000.

Immediately above that sits $100,000, one of the clearest psychological levels on the chart. Round numbers tend to attract attention because traders naturally use them when thinking about entries, exits and targets.

That puts two different forms of resistance close together: a prior price extreme near $98,000 and the psychological pull of $100,000.

One Resistance Level Is Moving

There is another obstacle that cannot be reduced to one fixed price.

Lawton connects Bitcoin's May high with last week's high to create an upsloping resistance trend line. That line has already capped price and continues rising as time passes.

This matters because Bitcoin is not simply facing a ladder of horizontal levels at $87,400, $90,000, $98,000 and $100,000. It also has a diagonal ceiling moving higher above the market.

Where Bitcoin meets that trend line will depend on when price gets there.

Bitcoin's Measured Move Still Points Toward $106,000

The larger structure also carries a prior measured-move projection.

Earlier in Bitcoin's advance, Lawton identified an inverse head-and-shoulders pattern with a relatively small right shoulder. Measuring from the bottom of the head to the neckline and projecting that distance from the breakout produces a technical objective near $106,000.

That is a projection, not a promise that Bitcoin reaches $106,000.

More importantly, the breakout from that earlier structure has already occurred. Bitcoin has since returned to consolidation, creating the possibility that the same stair-step behavior continues: advance, consolidate, then attempt another advance.

Ethereum Is Following Bitcoin's Stair-Step Pattern

Ethereum is showing a similar structure.

It moved higher, chopped sideways, moved higher again and is now consolidating. The major level Lawton is watching is $3,000.

That level matters primarily because of trader psychology. Buyers and sellers tend to gravitate toward large round numbers, making them natural areas for orders and profit-taking to cluster.

From the price shown during Lawton's analysis, a move toward $3,000 would represent roughly 12% of upside. If Ethereum can break above that level, it would clear the primary resistance Lawton is watching.

XRP Has Already Failed One Attempt

XRP is where the stair-step structure becomes less clean.

Like Bitcoin and Ethereum, XRP initially moved higher and consolidated. But its next push was rejected around $1.70.

That makes $1.70 the immediate test.

Lawton wants to see XRP get through that resistance before shifting attention toward approximately $1.90, where he expects another area of selling pressure.

SUI Has Decoupled From Bitcoin

SUI has followed its own version of the stair-step pattern, but Lawton sees its overall chart as notably different from Bitcoin.

The key resistance sits around $1.40.

That area contains multiple previous pivots and a stretch of sideways trading, including the May 10 pivot high. The number matters because price has repeatedly interacted with the same zone.

If SUI can clear $1.40, the previous highs of the year become the next area to watch.

Litecoin Has Its Own Version of the Pattern

Litecoin is another variation on the same theme.

Rather than Bitcoin's cleaner advance-and-consolidate structure, Litecoin has repeatedly moved up, pulled back and then traded sideways before attempting another move.

For Lawton, the important resistance level is approximately $80, based on previous consolidation and trading activity around that area.

The question is whether that sequence can continue.

Bitcoin Price Levels to Watch

The current consolidation has the characteristics of a potential bull flag, but the path higher is not open air. $87,400 is the first hurdle. $90,000 brings prior consolidation back into play. Roughly $98,000 marks the year's high, and $100,000 adds a major psychological barrier. The rising trend line adds another layer of resistance whose exact price will depend on when Bitcoin reaches it.

Behind all of those levels sits the earlier measured move near $106,000.

The bullish structure tells you the direction Lawton is watching. The resistance ladder tells you where Bitcoin still has to prove it.

Watch on YouTube

Published by Verified Investing | U.S. Economic Metrics

Released: October 1, 2026 | Data Period: September 2026 | Source: Institute for Supply Management (ISM)

Key Takeaways

• PMI missed consensus by 0.5 points, but the miss is a distraction. The composite came in at 54.5 versus consensus of 55.0 — essentially flat with August's 54.6. Manufacturing has been in solid expansion for months.
• Prices Paid exploded to 77.9 — the number that actually matters. Up 6.8 points from August's 71.1, against a consensus of 72.3. This isn't a rounding error. Prices Paid surged 6.8 points to 77.9, returning close to March's 78.3 reading.
• New Orders beat on both direction and magnitude. At 55.3, New Orders rose 1.6 points from 53.7, beating consensus of 53.9. Demand into the manufacturing sector is not slowing. That matters for the next two PMI prints.
• Employment accelerated to 52.7, up 1.5 points from 51.2. Consensus expected 51.5. Factory hiring is not just holding — it's picking up. Watch this number ahead of October NFP.
• The stagflation read is wrong. The cost-push read is right. Strong demand and rising employment rule out demand collapse. Prices at 77.9 with demand still growing means producers are absorbing and passing on input costs — not cutting output.
• The Iran War petroleum shock is still feeding the pipeline. Brent crude at $108–$113 means energy-sensitive manufacturing inputs are repricing upward. Prices Paid doesn't reverse quickly when crude stays elevated.
• October's print will confirm whether 77.9 is the new floor or a spike. If Prices Paid holds above 75, the manufacturing inflation pipeline is no longer a warning — it's an established regime.

What This Metric Measures, and Why This Print Matters

The ISM Manufacturing PMI is the national verdict on U.S. factory health. Regional surveys — Philly Fed, Chicago PMI — are previews. ISM Manufacturing is the number the market moves on.

The composite index aggregates New Orders, Production, Employment, Supplier Deliveries, and Inventories. Readings above 50 signal expansion. Below 50 signals contraction. The less-cited threshold worth knowing: a Manufacturing PMI above 47.5, sustained over time, has generally corresponded with expansion in the broader economy. September's 54.5 puts manufacturing well into expansion — not borderline, not fragile.

But context makes the September print genuinely consequential. The Fed hiked 25 basis points on September 16, raising the target range to 3.75%–4.00%. The question the market is still working through: was that enough? Kevin Warsh inherited an economy where services prices hit four-year highs. Now manufacturing Prices Paid has hit levels not seen since the inflation shock of 2022. This report doesn't answer whether one hike was enough. It strongly suggests the question isn't going away.

What Everyone Will Focus On vs. What Matters More

The consensus miss will dominate the first 20 minutes of commentary. PMI at 54.5 versus 55.0 expected. A miss. Expansion slowing. That's the take you'll hear.

It's the wrong take.

The PMI dropped 0.1 points from August. One-tenth of a point. That is statistical noise within a diffusion index, not a signal. The expansion is intact, the reading is solid, and the direction-of-travel argument from that number is close to zero.

Here's what actually moved: Prices Paid.

77.9. Against a consensus of 72.3. Against August's 71.1. A 6.8-point monthly surge, landing 5.6 points above the Street's estimate. In a survey where the historical average Prices Paid sits around 52–53, a reading of 77.9 reflects extremely broad upward pressure on input costs. ISM reported that 58.6% of respondents saw higher raw-material prices, versus just 2.8% reporting lower prices. That is not a normal inflationary background.

The chart above shows what the PMI headline obscures. The composite has been stable — constructively so. But New Orders at 55.3 is the more useful forward signal. New Orders lead the composite PMI by one to two months. August's 53.7 already told you September's output would hold up. September's 55.3 gives October's composite a meaningful demand-side cushion. The demand pipeline is open.

That combination — strong demand, rising employment, and Prices Paid at 77.9 — is the story. Not the 0.1-point PMI miss.

Prices Paid at 77.9: What's Driving It and Where It Goes

Six points in one month. Consensus missed by nearly six points. Either the Street wasn't paying attention to the energy price backdrop, or they assumed crude oil would stop mattering. It hasn't.

Brent crude has been trading $108–$113 since the Iran War pushed it to a May peak of $115.30. Energy-intensive manufacturing inputs — resins, chemicals, freight, industrial gases — move with crude. They don't move instantly, but they do move. The lag from crude price shock to manufacturing input costs is typically two to three months. Crude spiked hard in May. September's Prices Paid is catching that wave.

The second chart captures the tension in this print. Prices Paid has surged. Employment has also risen — 51.2 to 52.7 — which is the opposite of what happens when cost pressure is crushing factories. Manufacturers raising prices and hiring more workers simultaneously tells you demand is strong enough to absorb the cost shock. They're passing costs downstream, not eating them. That's the transmission mechanism to watch for in PPI and, eventually, CPI.

ISM Prices Paid at 77.9 is not a prices-are-about-to-roll-over reading. Historically, readings above 75 have persisted for multiple months once established, particularly when the underlying commodity driver (crude, in this case) remains elevated. The September print is either the beginning of a sustained high-price regime in manufacturing or a one-month spike that reverses sharply in October. The crude oil trajectory will determine which.

Employment at 52.7: The NFP Preview Nobody's Discussing

Consensus expected 51.5. Actual: 52.7. A 1.2-point beat, and a 1.5-point increase from August's 51.2.

ISM Manufacturing Employment releases before the monthly NFP report. The ISM Employment Index provides an early read on manufacturing labor conditions. ISM notes that readings above 50.3 over time have generally been consistent with rising BLS manufacturing employment. When this sub-index accelerates, goods-producing payrolls in NFP tend to reflect it.

August's Employment sub-index at 51.2 was a modest expansion signal. September's 52.7 is a cleaner expansion signal. It's not a blowout, but it's moving in the right direction — and it beat a consensus that was already above 50. The manufacturing labor market is not showing the strain you'd expect if 77.9 Prices Paid was genuinely crushing margins.

This matters for the Fed's framing. A manufacturing sector running at 54.5 composite, hiring more workers, and paying more for inputs is not a sector that needs emergency support. It's a sector running hot. The September 16 hike looks more justified today than it did in August.

New Orders at 55.3: Demand Is Not the Problem

New Orders rose 1.6 points from August's 53.7, beating consensus of 53.9. This is the leading sub-index — the forward signal the other components eventually follow.

Three months of New Orders above 53 means the October and November PMI composite readings have a demand-side anchor. Orders placed today become production and employment activity in 30–60 days. The pipeline isn't draining.

What New Orders at 55.3 rules out: the scenario where Prices Paid at 77.9 reflects demand destruction. When demand collapses, New Orders fall first, then production, then employment. September shows the opposite sequence — demand accelerating while costs surge. That's not a recessionary pattern. It's an inflationary one.

The risk isn't that manufacturing slows. The risk is that manufacturing stays hot, keeps passing costs downstream, and gives the Fed another reason to consider whether 4.00% is actually the ceiling.

What This Means For Traders

The following is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

1. Prices Paid at 77.9 is the number that feeds the next trade. Watch October PPI (released mid-October) for evidence that manufacturing input costs are flowing into finished goods prices. If goods PPI re-accelerates, the disinflationary goods story that anchored 2024 rate-cut expectations is dead.

2. The PMI headline miss doesn't change the rate picture. A composite of 54.5 with Prices Paid at 77.9 and Employment at 52.7 is not the profile of an economy that needs relief. If anything, it's the profile that pushed the Fed to hike on September 16. The October 27–28 FOMC meeting is the next decision point — this print does not argue for a pause.

3. Watch crude oil as the leading indicator for November Prices Paid. If Brent stays above $105, October Prices Paid likely holds above 73–74 at minimum. If crude breaks below $100, a correction in Prices Paid becomes plausible. The manufacturing inflation read lives and dies with energy prices right now.

4. The NFP goods-producing component deserves attention. ISM Manufacturing Employment at 52.7 signals factory hiring is picking up. If October NFP shows goods-producing payrolls tracking this acceleration, the "labor market is cooling" narrative takes another hit in the manufacturing segment specifically.

5. The thesis that breaks this framework: New Orders falling sharply in October (below 52) while Prices Paid holds above 75 would be a genuine stagflation signal — demand starting to crack under cost pressure while inflation stays sticky. That's the combination to watch for. September doesn't show it. October's print on November 3 will either confirm the current hot-expansion read or raise the first real demand-side warning flag.

The bottom line: The 0.1-point PMI miss is irrelevant. Prices Paid at 77.9 against a consensus of 72.3 is the signal. Manufacturing demand is strong, hiring is accelerating, and input costs are surging. That's not a miss. That's a warning for anyone still pricing in 2026 rate cuts.

Source: Institute for Supply Management — Manufacturing ISM® Report On Business®, September 2026, released October 1, 2026

Published by Verified Investing | U.S. Economic Metrics

Released: September 30, 2026 | Data Period: Q2 2026 (April–June) | Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis — Third Estimate

Key Takeaways

• Real GDP was revised up to 2.2% annualized from 1.5%, a 0.7-point upgrade, mainly from investment, consumer spending and government spending.
• Private demand was much stronger than the headline. Real final sales to private domestic purchasers grew 4.6%, up from 3.9% in the advance estimate and 4.2% in the second.
• The price side was revised down. The GDP price deflator now stands at 6.1% annualized. The second estimate's 8.0% nominal and 1.5% real implied roughly 6.4%. PCE inflation for the quarter was cut to 5.0% from 5.3%.
• Nominal GDP grew 8.5% annualized, the fastest of any quarter in the past three years.
• Q1 was also revised up to 2.5% from 2.1% in BEA's annual update, so the first half of 2026 was stronger than reported in real time.
• Watch October 29: the Q3 GDP advance estimate and September PCE come out together.

Why This Report Matters Right Now

When the second estimate came out in August, it confirmed 1.5% growth with a deflator around 6.4%. That looked like stagflation: weak output and high prices. The third estimate changes that picture.

Growth wasn't weak. It was underestimated. And this time the revision raised real output while lowering the price measures. More of the economy's nominal growth turned out to be volume and less of it inflation.

That changes the Fed's problem. The FOMC raised rates a quarter point to 3.75%–4.00% on September 16. A stagflating economy would have argued for stopping there. An economy growing above trend, with private demand running at 4.6% and the deflator at 6.1%, argues that the hike may not be the last one.

What Everyone Will Focus On vs. What Matters More

What everyone will focus on: 2.2% real GDP. It's a solid number, but third estimates rarely move markets, so most readers will skim past it.

What matters more: The 0.7-point revision and where it came from.

Third estimates usually move by a few tenths at most. This one moved real GDP by 0.7 points, and it pushed the two halves of the report in opposite directions:

Source: BEA, GDP (Third Estimate), 2nd Quarter 2026.

Real measures went up and price measures came down. In the second estimate the economy looked like it was barely growing under heavy inflation. In the third, it's growing well with inflation that is still high, but less extreme.

Real GDP held at 1.5% through two estimates, then jumped to 2.2%. Private final sales, the cleanest measure of underlying demand, rose with every estimate, from 3.9% to 4.6%.

Where the Upgrade Came From

BEA attributes the revision mainly to three areas:

Investment. Both inventories and fixed investment were revised up. Within fixed investment, the biggest change was nonresidential structures, led by commercial and health-care construction, mainly data centers. That's based on revised Census construction data for May and June. Residential improvements were also revised up.

Consumer spending. Services were revised up, led by recreation services (mainly admissions to spectator events), based on new Quarterly Services Survey data. Air transportation was revised down. Goods were revised up, led by information processing equipment.

Government. Most of the government revision was federal defense spending, reflecting updated seasonal adjustment factors.

The data-center line is the one to keep in mind. Data-center construction is being driven by a powerful investment cycle that may be less sensitive to current borrowing costs than housing or consumer credit. That helps explain why tighter policy has not cooled every part of investment equally That's part of why tight policy hasn't cooled investment as much as you'd expect.

Gross domestic income tells a similar story. Real GDI grew 2.6%, and the average of GDP and GDI was 2.4%, revised up 0.6 points. Both the spending side and the income side of the economy now point to above-trend growth.

The Deflator Is Still the Inflation Problem, Just a Smaller One

The revision doesn't make inflation go away. The GDP deflator ran at 6.1% annualized in Q2, nearly double Q1's 3.2%, and it's up 4.0% year-over-year. Nominal GDP grew 8.5%. An economy growing more than 8% in nominal terms isn't one where a 4% policy rate looks tight.

The deflator outpaced real growth in five of the last eight quarters. Q2 2026 shows the widest gap in this window: 6.1% prices against 2.2% real growth.

What changed is the composition. In August, the story was that real output was weak and the economy was mostly producing inflation. Now the story is that real output is strong and inflation is still high. The first gives the Fed more reason to hesitate. The second strengthens the case for keeping further tightening on the table.

Corporate profits fit this picture too. Profits from current production rose $384.0 billion in Q2 (revised down $16.9 billion). With 8.5% nominal growth, revenue rises quickly in dollar terms, and companies that can pass on prices keep the gain.

What Traders Should Watch

The following is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

1. October 29: Q3 GDP advance estimate. The question is whether above-trend growth continued into Q3. July and August real consumer spending rose 0.1% and 0.6%, so the consumer component is likely to be solid. If Q3 prints near or above 2%, the "first half was the peak" argument loses ground.

2. The Q3 deflator. A drop back toward 3%–4% annualized would mean Q2's 6.1% was a one-quarter energy and tariff spike. A second quarter above 5% would mean the economy is running hot on both growth and prices, which is the worst combination for duration.

3. Private final sales, not headline GDP. Real final sales to private domestic purchasers is the better read on demand. At 4.6%, it doesn't fit the idea of a cooling economy. A drop below 2.5% in Q3 would be the first real sign of demand slowing.

4. Data-center construction as its own driver. Nonresidential structures led the investment upgrade. Monthly construction spending data from Census will show whether that keeps going. Rate-insensitive investment is part of why tight policy isn't slowing the economy much.

5. The long end of the curve. Stronger real growth with the deflator still at 6.1% supports higher term premiums. A string of upward GDP revisions plus sticky core PCE (3.0% YoY in August) works against a quick drop in long-term yields.

What would change the read: a Q3 advance print below 1.5% with private final sales slowing sharply would bring back the slowdown story. A Q3 deflator below 3.5% would say the Q2 price spike has passed.

Bottom Line

The third estimate changed what Q2 2026 looked like. Real GDP was revised from 1.5% to 2.2%, private demand grew 4.6%, and the price measures were revised down. The third estimate substantially weakens the stagflation read. Growth was stronger than reported while inflation remained high. That weakens the case for stopping after September's hike. On October 29, the day after the next FOMC decision, check whether private final sales held up in Q3. If private final sales remain this strong in Q3, the case for additional tightening would remain very much alive.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis — GDP (Third Estimate), Industries, Corporate Profits, State GDP, and State Personal Income, 2nd Quarter 2026 (BEA 26-42, released September 30, 2026)

Published by Verified Investing | U.S. Economic Metrics

Released: September 30, 2026 | Data Period: August 2026 | Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

Key Takeaways

• Core PCE rose 0.2% in August and held at 3.0% year-over-year. Core has now been at or above 3.0% for six straight months (March through August). Rounded the way the BEA publishes it, it hasn't come down at all.
• Headline PCE rose 0.3% MoM and 3.4% YoY, up from 0.1% in July.
• Real spending rose 0.6% while real disposable income was flat (0.0%). Households spent more without earning more, after inflation.
• The personal saving rate fell to 4.1% from 4.6% in July, the lowest since November 2022. Spending growth far outpaced income growth, and households saved a smaller share of disposable income as a result.
• Goods led: goods spending rose $114.1 billion versus $76.7 billion for services, a 1.5-to-1 split. That's a rebound from July's $38.4 billion drop in goods, not a new trend yet.
• Watch October 29: September PCE and the Q3 GDP advance estimate come out together, the morning after the October 27–28 FOMC decision.

Why This Report Matters Right Now

The Fed's 2% target is defined in PCE terms, not CPI. That makes this the inflation report the FOMC actually grades itself on. Core inflation has remained stuck at or above 3.0% for six months.

That gives the Fed little reason to consider rate cuts on inflation grounds. But the inflation line isn't the most useful part of this release. The income and spending table is. It shows how August's strong consumer number was paid for, and the answer matters for Q4.

One more thing to know before reading the numbers. This release includes BEA's annual update, which revised personal income and outlays data back to January 2021. Comparisons with figures published before September 30 aren't like-for-like. Every number below comes from the revised data.

What Everyone Will Focus On vs. What Matters More

What everyone will focus on: Core PCE at 0.2% MoM and 3.0% YoY. It was in line and didn't add new heat, so the market will read it as "sticky but not accelerating" and move on.

What matters more: Real spending rose 0.6% while real disposable income rose 0.0%.

That gap has to be funded somehow, and the release shows how. The saving rate fell half a point in one month, from 4.6% to 4.1%. In dollars, spending rose $190.8 billion while disposable income rose just $68.6 billion. With spending growth far outpacing income growth, households saved a smaller share of disposable income, pushing the saving rate from 4.6% to 4.1%.

That's why the strong consumer number shouldn't be read as resilience. Spending supported by income growth can last. Spending supported by a falling saving rate lasts only as long as the cushion does, and at 4.1% the cushion is the thinnest it has been in almost four years.

Core PCE (amber) has stayed in a 3.0%–3.2% band since March. Headline (cyan) peaked at 3.8% in May and has settled at 3.4%. Neither line is near the Fed's 2% target.

The Data

Source: BEA, Personal Income and Outlays, August 2026 (revised series).

Three details support the thesis:

1. The income increase was ordinary. Personal income rose $66.6 billion, mostly from compensation (private wages and salaries) and government social benefits (Medicare and Social Security). BEA flagged no one-time transfer that would distort the picture. After inflation, disposable income didn't grow at all.

2. Goods drove the spending jump. Goods spending rose $114.1 billion and services $76.7 billion. Part of that is payback for July, when goods spending fell $38.4 billion. Averaged over the two months, goods spending is up modestly. August is less a surge than a catch-up, and that's another reason not to extrapolate it.

3. The monthly inflation pace picked up, but only back to the core trend. Headline went from 0.1% to 0.3% and core from 0.1% to 0.2%. July's softness was the outlier. August is back to the pace that has kept core at 3.0%.

Monthly headline PCE swung from -0.1% in June to 0.3% in August. Core has been steadier. It dipped in June and July and returned to 0.2%.

Historical Context

A 4.1% saving rate is the lowest since November 2022, when the rate was 4.0%. That was the tail end of the post-pandemic drawdown, when households were spending down excess savings built up in 2020–21. There's no comparable stockpile now. In 2022 the cushion was excess savings. In 2026 the cushion is the saving rate itself.

The saving-rate trajectory matters more than the level. It sat at 4.4% from April through June, rose to 4.6% in July, then dropped to 4.1% in August. Real disposable income has fallen or stalled in three of the past seven months (February, April and August). So far that's a yellow flag, not a red one. Two straight monthly declines in real DPI would be the next step up in concern.

On inflation, core PCE has stayed in the 3.0%–3.2% range for six months. Before March it hadn't been above 3.0% at any point in the 24-month window shown in the chart.

What This Means for the Fed

Core PCE at 3.0% is a full point above target and isn't moving. Real growth in consumer spending is strong. Neither gives the Fed a reason to ease.

The saving-rate drawdown is the one piece of this report that could change that argument later. If August's spending strength came partly at the expense of future consumption, Q4 spending could slow sharply, and the Fed would face slowing demand alongside 3% core inflation. That combination is harder than either problem alone. For now, strong consumer spending and sticky inflation strengthen the case for holding rates restrictive.

What Traders Should Watch

The following is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

1. October 29 is the key date. September PCE and the Q3 GDP advance estimate come out the same morning, the day after the October 27–28 FOMC decision. Q3 consumer spending will look strong because July and August real spending rose 0.1% and 0.6%. The question is whether September's saving rate falls again.

2. The saving rate is the thesis test. A further drop below 4.0% in September would confirm that spending is running on a shrinking cushion. A rebound toward 4.5% would mean August was a one-month catch-up, and the "borrowed spending" read weakens.

3. Real disposable income has to start growing again. A second straight flat or negative real DPI reading would be the clearest sign that consumer strength can't last. It would put retail, restaurant and travel-linked equities at risk of a weak Q4 after a strong Q3.

4. Watch core YoY, not the monthly print. As long as core PCE YoY stays at 3.0% or higher, the market has no data-based reason to price 2026 cuts. A move to 2.9% or lower would be the first real progress since February.

5. Energy drives the headline-core gap. Headline (3.4%) is running 0.4 points above core (3.0%). If crude prices stay elevated into Q4, headline PCE stays well above core even if core holds, which keeps the Fed's public messaging hawkish.

What would change the read: a September saving rate back above 4.5%, real disposable income growth resuming, and core PCE YoY breaking below 3.0%. Any one of these would soften the read. All three would change it.

Bottom Line

August's strong spending number was paid for out of savings, not income. Real spending rose 0.6%, real disposable income didn't grow, and the saving rate fell to its lowest level since late 2022. Meanwhile, core inflation hasn't broken below 3.0% in six months. The Fed has no reason to ease, and consumers have less room to keep spending at this pace. On October 29, look at the September saving rate before the Q3 GDP headline.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis — Personal Income and Outlays, August 2026 (BEA 26-43, released September 30, 2026)

Yields Are Driving the Market, but the S&P 500 Is Hiding the Bigger Setup

In this morning's My Trading Game Plan Revealed, Gareth Soloway started with the bond market: equities are moving almost tick for tick with Treasury yields, while mega-cap technology continues to mask weakness across a much broader group of stocks. 

That divergence is creating two very different markets. The cap-weighted S&P 500 remains technically resilient, and only about 2% below its all-time high, but the equal-weight index has already taken a much larger hit. For traders, that is where the more interesting setup is developing. The market may look like it is holding together, but beneath the surface, parts of it are already approaching levels where risk/reward begins to improve.

Treasury Yields Are Setting the Tone for the S&P 500

Gareth pointed out the relationship in real time during the morning broadcast. When yields moved higher, equity futures pulled back. When yields eased, buyers returned. Overnight, the 10-year yield pushed as high as 5.34% while S&P futures sold off. As the yield backed down toward 5.31%, futures recovered.

That is the transmission mechanism traders need to understand. At these levels, small changes in yields can have an outsized impact on equity valuations, particularly when yields are sitting at levels not seen in more than two decades. Add oil above $90 per barrel, and financial conditions remain restrictive even while the headline indices continue to show surprising resilience.

The S&P 500 has now posted losses in six of its last seven sessions, yet it remains only about 2% below its all-time high and above the neutral zone Gareth is tracking on the daily chart. That keeps the broader technical structure intact for now.

S&P 500 Strength Is Hiding Weakness in the Equal-Weight Market

The cap-weighted S&P 500 is increasingly dependent on its largest companies. Gareth used Nvidia to illustrate just how extreme that concentration has become, noting that its roughly $5 trillion market capitalization is comparable to the combined value of more than 200 smaller companies in the index.

That weighting matters. A strong move in a handful of mega-cap stocks can keep the S&P 500 near its highs even while a large portion of the market is moving in the opposite direction.

The Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP) gives traders a cleaner view of that weakness. While the S&P 500 is roughly 2% from its highs, RSP is about 7% below its all-time high, with many underlying stocks already below their 50-day moving averages.

That sounds bearish, but it is also where the opportunity begins to develop.

The level Gareth is watching on RSP is $205 to $204.70, where three technical factors converge. Former resistance from an inverse head and shoulders pattern comes back into play as potential support, an unfilled daily gap sits in the same area, and the 50% Fibonacci retracement from the prior major swing aligns with the zone.

That is the setup. The value is in the confluence.

When several independent technical factors point to the same price, Gareth's interest increases because the trade has a clearly defined area where buyers should appear. Instead of chasing an index that remains near record highs, the equal-weight chart is moving toward a level where the risk/reward becomes much easier to define.

Quarter-End Selling Is Creating New Trading Opportunities

The start of a new quarter adds another layer to the setup.

Gareth highlighted what he calls "window undressing," the tendency for institutional managers to unload some of their worst-performing positions near quarter-end before portfolio statements reach clients. Whatever the motivation behind individual trades, the important part for traders is the effect: already weak stocks can face another wave of selling that is tied more to positioning than a sudden change in the underlying company.

When the calendar flips, that pressure can disappear.

FICO offered a clean example. After a steep decline into parallel trend line support, the stock closed around $592 before jumping toward $640 in premarket trading as the new quarter began. The chart had already been stretched. Once the additional quarter-end pressure faded, price snapped back.

Nike is another name Gareth is watching through that lens. The stock has been trading near 52-week lows and is sitting around a major support area heading into earnings. That does not guarantee a reversal. It means the combination of depressed expectations, technical support and the removal of quarter-end pressure creates a setup worth watching for confirmation.

Weakness alone is not the signal. The opportunity develops when forced or temporary selling pushes price into a technical level where the downside can be clearly defined.

Micron Earnings Highlight New Risks for Semiconductor Stocks

The semiconductor trade deserves a different framework.

Micron delivered the type of earnings report that would normally support the stock, including better-than-expected revenue and earnings along with stronger forward guidance. Yet the shares failed to respond meaningfully and traded slightly lower after the report.

That reaction matters more than the headline beat.

When good news fails to push a stock higher, the market may already be looking beyond the current quarter. Gareth's longer-term concern centers on supply. New memory-chip capacity coming online could eventually pressure margins that are currently extremely strong. His view is that the risk becomes more meaningful over the next year to year-and-a-half as additional supply reaches the market.

There is a second issue developing as well: efficiency.

As AI software becomes better at extracting more performance from existing hardware, the assumption that computing demand must continue rising at the same rate becomes less certain. Gareth connected that risk to the market's reaction to DeepSeek in 2025, when evidence that advanced AI could operate with less computing power forced investors to reconsider some of their hardware-demand assumptions.

Strong earnings are no longer enough by themselves. The market is beginning to ask whether today's margins and hardware demand can persist as both supply and software efficiency improve.

For Micron specifically, Gareth identified a deep gap-fill level at $10.15 as the area where the short-term risk/reward would become more interesting. Until price reaches the level he is targeting, patience remains part of the trade.

Gold's Tests $4,100 Support as Precious Metals Pull Back

Precious metals are also approaching decision points.

For gold, Gareth's line in the sand is $4,100. The metal has pulled back from its recent highs and is testing an ascending trend line near that level. As long as support holds, the existing structure remains intact. A confirmed break below it changes the near-term read and opens the door to approximately $3,900, with $3,500 representing Gareth's more aggressive downside scenario.

That near-term risk is separate from his longer-term macro thesis. Verified Investing's proprietary model continues to point toward a much higher long-term gold target, but traders do not need to ignore shorter-term downside simply because they remain bullish over a longer horizon.

Silver is in a similar position. A failure of its current trend line could open a move toward $50 per ounce, particularly if economic weakness begins to weigh on industrial demand.

The lesson is simple: a long-term bullish thesis does not remove the need to respect near-term technical structure.

Bitcoin Dominance Is Warning Altcoin Traders

Bitcoin itself has gone almost nowhere over the past two weeks, leaving the short-term chart open to more than one interpretation. The more useful signal may be coming from Bitcoin dominance.

While Bitcoin has moved sideways, BTC dominance has pushed higher and broken out of its recent consolidation. That tells Gareth that capital is favoring Bitcoin relative to the broader crypto market.

For altcoins, that is a warning.

Highly extended names such as Zcash become more vulnerable when Bitcoin dominance is rising, especially after a move of roughly 250%. A 30% retracement after that type of advance would not be unusual from a technical perspective.

The key signal is where capital is moving while Bitcoin consolidates. Right now, the dominance chart says Bitcoin is gaining ground relative to the rest of the crypto market.

Key Market Levels Traders Need to Watch

The headline S&P 500 remains resilient, but Gareth's framework says the more important information is underneath it.

Treasury yields are still controlling the short-term rhythm of equities. Mega-cap stocks are masking significantly greater weakness in the equal-weight market. That weakness, however, is beginning to create better-defined opportunities rather than simply adding bearish evidence.

The clearest example is RSP. $205 to $204.70 brings together former resistance, a gap fill and a 50% Fibonacci retracement in one zone. That is the type of alignment Gareth wants to see before putting capital to work.

Elsewhere, the same discipline applies. Gold has $4,100. Nike needs confirmation at support. Semiconductor investors need to watch the market's reaction to good news rather than the earnings headline alone. Bitcoin dominance is giving a clearer signal than Bitcoin's sideways price action.

The market requires levels. As yields move, quarter-end distortions unwind and several major charts reach technical decision points, the advantage comes from knowing where the setup improves, where it fails, and where doing nothing is still the better trade.

Crude oil has pulled back as tensions in the Middle East have stabilized, but the decline has not broken the bullish structure on the daily chart.

Oil remains above the declining trend line that forms the neckline of an inverse head-and-shoulders pattern. That breakout carries a measured-move projection of $116.21. As long as price remains above the neckline, that target stays active.

The recent selling therefore looks more like a test of the breakout than a confirmed reversal. Oil does not need to move straight toward $116 for the pattern to remain valid. It can pull back, consolidate, and test support without breaking the larger setup.

Crude Oil Inverse Head and Shoulders Keeps $116 Target Active

On the daily chart, the declining trend line running through the center of recent price action forms the neckline of the inverse head-and-shoulders pattern.

Price has already broken above it.

The measured move from that pattern projects to $116.21, but the projection remains conditional. As long as oil holds above the neckline, the bullish pattern stays intact. A move back below that trend line would change the read and remove the $116.21 target from the current setup.

A pullback by itself does not invalidate a breakout. The technical question is whether price gives back the level that confirmed it.

So far, it hasn't.

Crude Oil Support Builds Around Rising Channel and August Pivots

The neckline is not the only support structure on the chart.

Oil is also trading within a rising parallel channel. If the current pullback extends, the lower boundary of that channel provides another technical support area. That level also sits just above a group of pivot lows from August.

Together, those levels create a second area to watch if selling continues.

A reaction from the rising channel and August pivots would keep the larger bullish structure intact and leave the $116.21 measured move in focus. A break back below the inverse head-and-shoulders neckline would weaken that setup substantially.

Natural Gas Breakout Fails to Show Follow-Through

Natural gas provides a useful contrast because its recent breakout did not behave the same way.

Nat gas broke above a declining trend line, but the following session failed to extend away from it with conviction. Instead, price tested the breakout line and quickly moved back below it.

That is the behavior traders want to distinguish from a healthy retest. A breakout becomes more convincing when price can separate from the level. When price repeatedly returns to the same line, the breakout becomes more vulnerable.

Fundamental pressure also contributed to the move. Natural gas inventories came in strong, supply issues in West Virginia were resolved, and hedge funds trimmed some of their near-term bullish positioning.

There is still support underneath nat gas. Price is holding above an earlier breakout area, but repeated pressure could weaken that level and put the next support at $2.99 back in focus.

The comparison helps frame oil more clearly. Pullbacks are not automatically bearish. What counts is whether the breakout structure survives the retest.

Gold and Silver Technical Support Levels Come Into Focus

Gold and silver are showing weaker near-term structures.

Higher yields have pressured gold, which recently broke beneath trend-line support. The next support identified on the chart sits at $3,943, near a prior pivot associated with the earlier break of gold's rising parallel channel.

Silver is also moving lower after breaking the neckline of a head-and-shoulders pattern. The downside projection from that setup comes in around $53.06, with a broader support area developing near $50.

The contrast across commodities is notable. Oil still has an active bullish pattern despite its pullback, while gold and silver are trading through weaker technical structures.

Crude Oil Levels to Watch Next

For oil, the inverse head-and-shoulders neckline remains the key decision level.

Holding above it keeps the bullish pattern and the $116.21 measured-move projection active. If selling continues, the lower boundary of the rising parallel channel and the August pivots become the next support areas to watch.

A break back below the neckline would change the setup. Until then, the pullback has weakened price, but it has not invalidated the bullish structure.

Watch on YouTube

S&P 500 Holds Firm Despite Rising Yields and Mixed Economic Data

The final print made Tuesday look weaker than it actually was.

The S&P 500 finished down 0.21% after selling accelerated during the final 10 minutes of trading. Taken by itself, that close suggests another session where rising Treasury yields and renewed rate concerns pressured equities. But that misses what Drew Dosek saw as the more important signal during Tuesday's Trading the Close: stocks spent most of the session absorbing those pressures remarkably well.

That resilience matters because the macro backdrop was anything but clean. A hotter-than-expected ADP jobs report added to concerns that the Federal Reserve may have more work to do, while cooler PCE inflation data pushed in the opposite direction. GDP also came in better than expected. Meanwhile, the 10-year Treasury yield pushed beyond its 2007 highs.

Normally, that combination would give equity traders plenty of reasons to sell. Instead, the market held together until the final minutes.

"If you flipped up just to look at the markets at the very end of the day, you would have said, oh, it was a red day. But guys, that was just one 10 minute candle."

That is the distinction traders need to carry into the next session. The close was weak. The structure underneath it was considerably more resilient.

The 10-Year Yield Tests a Critical Technical Zone

The biggest test for that resilience remains the 10-year Treasury yield.

Higher yields create a tougher backdrop for equities, particularly growth and technology stocks whose valuations are more sensitive to interest rates. With the 10-year pushing through levels not seen since 2007, equities are being forced to prove they can continue higher despite increasingly restrictive conditions.

Drew's chart, however, is beginning to show the first technical reason to watch for a pause.

The 10-year has developed what Drew calls a "Sleeper Hold," a technical pattern that previously appeared near the top in semiconductors earlier this year. Combined with an overbought daily RSI, the setup does not guarantee that yields have topped. It does tell traders that chasing the move higher becomes increasingly risky.

Drew is watching roughly 5.021% to 5.289% as the important range. Consolidation inside that zone would matter beyond the bond market because it could remove one of the biggest immediate headwinds facing equities.

That makes yields the transmission mechanism for the broader setup. If the 10-year finally cools while equities continue holding their technical breakouts, the market gets breathing room. If yields continue accelerating instead, Tuesday's resilience gets a much harder test.

Semiconductors Hold Key Breakout Levels Despite Rising Yields

The semiconductor sector offered one of the clearest examples of that resilience.

SMH has broken above both a declining trend line from its all-time high and the upper portion of an inclining parallel channel. Price then ran directly into the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement, creating a logical resistance area rather than an arbitrary stopping point.

Drew compared the structure to bumpers in a bowling lane. The levels give traders boundaries for where price should react and where the next decision gets made.

That is especially useful here because SMH does not need to blast through resistance immediately for the setup to remain constructive. What matters is whether buyers can defend the breakout structure underneath it.

The NASDAQ is telling a similar story. Drew highlighted 26,672 as an important support area while the index continues holding above a declining trend line and near the top of a parallel channel that has been developing since April and May.

For now, technology is not behaving like a market overwhelmed by higher rates. It is behaving like a market testing whether it can digest them.

That is a much more useful signal than Tuesday's slightly red closing print.

Silver Approaches a High-Confluence Support Zone

Silver provided one of the cleaner examples of Drew's approach to trade location.

After breaking the neckline of a large head and shoulders pattern, the measured move points toward approximately \$53.15. But Drew is not treating that number as a magic level. Below it sits another important support area around \$50.14, where multiple prior pivots create additional confluence.

That turns the area into a zone rather than a single price.

Drew's framework is straightforward: below \$52.50, silver becomes increasingly interesting on the long side.

The lesson is not simply that silver could bounce. It is that a trader does not need to chase an asset to participate in the next move. Once the chart identifies where the risk-reward becomes more attractive, the job becomes waiting for price to come into that area and then evaluating the reaction.

Oil presents another constructive commodity setup. US Oil continues building an inverse head and shoulders pattern, with the larger measured move pointing toward \$116 as long as the structure remains intact. Drew identified \$88.14 near the bottom of the parallel channel as an important support area.

Natural gas is showing the opposite lesson.

A strong breakout candle produced no meaningful follow-through, and price subsequently rolled over as higher inventories and expectations for a mild winter weighed on the market. Support now sits around \$3.08, with resistance near \$3.23.

A breakout is information. Follow-through is confirmation. Natural gas delivered the first without the second.

Jabil Shows Why Good Earnings Are Not Enough

The same principle showed up in individual stocks.

Jabil reported a strong quarter, beating EPS estimates by 8.16% and revenue estimates by 9.3%. Yet the stock sold off and lost an important long-term inclining trend line.

That is why traders cannot stop at the earnings headline.

Drew mapped the March 30 pivot low to the recent high using Fibonacci retracements and identified \$281 to \$284.51 as the first major support zone. Jabil traded as low as \$284.39 Tuesday, putting price directly into that area.

Now the reaction matters.

If buyers defend the zone, the stock has a technical path back toward \$300. If the area fails, Drew is watching the open gap between approximately \$273 and \$266 as the next downside magnet.

Conagra offered another version of the same lesson. After breaking support, the stock rallied back into the underside of its broken trend line and was rejected, a classic breakdown-retrace setup.

The notable part was where that resistance came from. Drew traced the level back decades, including pivots around 1987 and the 2008 financial crisis. With price rejecting there again, \$11.78 becomes the next major support area on his chart.

The age of the trend line is less important than the behavior around it. Price reached a known area, sellers appeared, and the rejection confirmed that the level still mattered.

Quarter-End Positioning Pushes Market Leaders Higher

There was one additional wrinkle Tuesday: it was the final trading day of the quarter.

That matters because institutional portfolio positioning can distort price action around quarter-end. Fund managers may add recent winners or reduce laggards as they adjust reported holdings, creating flows that are not necessarily driven by a new fundamental view.

Drew pointed to HPE and P&W as examples of stocks pressing into or through all-time highs during the session.

For HPE, the challenge is that price discovery leaves fewer obvious horizontal resistance levels. Drew instead focused on a major trend line stretching back to March 2018, with \$58.19 as an important near-term support level if the quarter-end momentum fades.

P&W also broke above its previous highs, with Drew watching approximately \$426.62 around the midpoint of its longer-term parallel channel and heavier resistance extending toward \$435.

The takeaway is not that every late-quarter breakout should be faded. It is that traders should understand the source of demand before assuming today's momentum automatically carries into tomorrow.

What Traders Should Watch

Tuesday's late selloff changed the appearance of the daily candle, but it did not erase the more important message from the session.

Equities absorbed conflicting economic data and a 10-year Treasury yield pressing beyond its 2007 highs without giving up their broader technical structure for most of the day. Semiconductors remain above key breakout levels. The NASDAQ continues holding support. Several commodity and individual-stock setups are approaching clearly defined decision zones.

Now those levels have to hold.

The next macro test is ISM manufacturing PMI, followed by non-farm payrolls. Drew's framework going into those releases is less about predicting the number and more about watching how price responds to it.

If yields begin consolidating while the NASDAQ and semiconductors defend their breakouts, Tuesday's late selling may prove to be more noise than signal. If yields keep accelerating and those equity supports begin to fail, the market will be sending a different message.

That is why the closing print alone was not enough.

10-Year Treasury Yield Approaches Key Resistance

Tuesday was a good reminder that where the market closes matters, but how it got there can matter more.

The S&P 500 ended slightly lower, yet equities spent most of the session absorbing a difficult combination of rising yields and conflicting economic data. That resilience remains intact until the technical levels underneath it begin to break.

For Drew, the job now is not to guess what happens next. It is to watch the 10-year, respect the breakout levels in technology, and let price come into predefined trade zones rather than chasing movement.

One 10-minute candle can change the color of the day. It does not automatically change the structure of the market.

President Trump hosted leading AI executives at the White House on Tuesday. The companies signed a voluntary accord on AI development, and the administration also rolled out an AI-powered government website, America.gov. On Wednesday, the large-cap leaderboard looked familiar. Filter a stock screener for companies above $200 billion in market cap and sort by top gainers, and several names from the guest list appear: Alphabet, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, NVIDIA and Palantir.

Nick Valdez thinks that companies at the center of Washington's AI discussions could be well positioned as policy and government partnerships develop. At this time, several of these companies are sitting at defined technical levels.

Apple's $346 Retest Comes First

Apple has been trading around a rising trend line. Price was rejected there, pushed above it, pulled back and came back into the line only a few days ago.

The next level Nick is watching sits around $346, which he calls a "very, very important" retest. How Apple reacts there should give a cleaner read on whether the recent move can hold its technical structure.

Amazon Is Already Showing Resistance

Amazon is trading inside an ascending parallel channel, and it is currently rejecting at the channel's midpoint. That is a common point of friction inside a rising structure, and the stock has started to pull back from it.

Jeff Bezos was at the White House, and Amazon is firmly part of the AI story. For now, Amazon is running into resistance, not breaking out.

TSM and Tesla Have Cleaner Pullback Levels

Taiwan Semiconductor has respected a rising trend line with several clean interactions. A pullback toward that line is the level to watch. It may not happen today, but the trend line could converge with the June 30 pivot high. That is where the trend would face an important support test.

Tesla has a pivot low and a large opening gap that sold off sharply and now offers some support. The more useful signal is confluence. Fibonacci retracements drawn from different swings, including the 0.786 and the 0.5, line up around $341. When independent measurements point to the same price, that level deserves attention.

SpaceX: Pivot First, Gap Fill Second

SpaceX (Nasdaq: SPCX), which began trading publicly in June, is moving higher with the group. With xAI and Grok under its umbrella, it has an AI angle beyond rockets.

The first obstacle is a recent pivot high. It is not a heavily layered level, but it is a reasonable place for a rejection. If price clears that pivot, the next level is the gap fill from July 7.

Meta's Downside Level Still Matters

Meta has made some decent moves, and the White House meeting may have eased pressure on the stock for now. If it resumes lower, the level to watch is the one set by the April 17 pivot and retested on July 15. That area also lines up with a 0.382 Fibonacci retracement, which makes it the downside line that matters.

Nike Is the Outlier

Nike has nothing to do with the AI trade, and that is why it is worth watching. The stock is down roughly 80% from its all-time high, trading around $35 and testing levels last seen in February 2014.

That long-term zone is acting as support. If it gives way, the next level is a gap fill near $33. Nick points to heavier competition and questions around Nike's brand focus as possible contributors to the decline. Whatever the cause, the chart is sitting on a level that has not been tested in more than a decade.

While attention flows toward the AI leaders, Nike shows the other side of the market: a former leader on support that has to hold.

Key Support and Resistance Levels for Apple, Amazon, Tesla, Meta and SpaceX

Apple has the ~$346 retest. Amazon is testing whether it can reclaim the midpoint of its ascending channel. TSM has its rising trend line and the June 30 pivot on any pullback. Tesla has Fibonacci confluence near $341. SpaceX has a pivot high first and the July 7 gap above it. Meta has lower support defined by the April and July pivots plus the 0.382 retracement. Nike has 2014-era support, with ~$33 below.

Apple, Amazon, TSM, Tesla, SpaceX and Meta are now sitting around defined technical levels, while Nike is testing long-term support from a very different part of the market. Some are approaching support. Others are already running into resistance. The policy narrative may explain why traders are paying attention, but price action will show whether the move has staying power.

Watch on YouTube

Cooler Inflation Meets a Critical Yield Rejection: The Setup That Could Push Stocks Higher

The headline this morning was cooler-than-expected PCE inflation. The 10-year Treasury yield just tested its 2007 high near 5.28%, briefly pushed through it, and then backed away. At the same time, the S&P 500 remains less than 2% from its all-time high despite significant weakness underneath the surface.

That combination creates the framework for today's market. If yields continue to respect resistance, pressure on equities could ease at exactly the moment when much of the broader market is already beaten down. The S&P 500 does not necessarily need its mega-cap leaders to accelerate from here. If they simply hold while weaker areas of the market begin to recover, the index could have another leg higher.

Cooler PCE Changes the Read on Hotter Employment

The morning began with what initially looked like bad news for risk assets. ADP private employment came in at 90,000 jobs for September versus expectations of 73,000, accelerating sharply from the previous month's 38,000. Futures initially moved lower as traders considered whether stronger employment could keep inflation elevated and maintain pressure on the Federal Reserve.

Fifteen minutes later, PCE changed the equation. Headline year-over-year PCE came in at 3.4% versus 3.7% expected, while core PCE registered 3.0% against expectations of 3.3%. The important point is not that inflation has suddenly disappeared. At 3.4%, headline inflation remains well above the Fed's 2% target.

What matters for equities is the direction relative to expectations. Employment came in stronger, but inflation came in cooler. That reduces some of the immediate pressure on rates, and the bond market is reaching a major technical level at the same time. 

The 10-Year Yield Is Testing the Level That Matters

The 10-year Treasury yield reached 5.29% yesterday, briefly moving above the 5.28% high from 2007 before pulling back. That rejection deserves attention because the market has now identified a clear technical decision point.

As Gareth explained, resistance is holding for now. Cooler PCE gives the bond market another reason to respect that level, but confirmation still has to come from price. A sustained move lower in yields would reduce one of the biggest sources of pressure on equity valuations and could also provide support for gold and silver.

A breakout above the 2007 high would change that read. Until then, the rejection keeps open the possibility that rates have reached at least a near-term ceiling.

That makes the 10-year yield one of the most important charts on the screen. The market's reaction through yields tells traders whether inflation is changing the broader setup.

The S&P 500 Is Stronger Than Its Breadth

The S&P 500 remains less than 2% below its all-time high and is potentially forming an inverse head and shoulders pattern. If that structure confirms and follows through, Gareth's measured technical target sits near 8,000.

The unusual part is what is happening underneath the index. More S&P 500 stocks are currently trading below their 50-day moving averages than above them. The Equal Weight S&P 500 is also more than 6% below its all-time high, showing how heavily the standard index has depended on its largest companies.

"The mega caps have been keeping the market up. Market cap matters, right? Size matters here," Gareth said.

Narrow breadth is often treated automatically as bearish, but there is another way to read it. Much of the weakness has already occurred beneath the index. If beaten-down stocks begin to bounce while the mega caps merely hold their ground, participation could broaden without requiring another major surge from the largest technology names.

That is the opportunity inside the divergence. The risk is that the opposite happens and mega-cap strength finally gives way. For now, however, the index itself has not confirmed that bearish outcome.

Oil, Gold and Silver Give Traders Confirmation Points

The same framework is visible across commodities.

Crude oil is testing an ascending trend line for the fourth time. Gareth's rule here is simple: repeated tests do not necessarily make support stronger. They can weaken it as buyers at the level are gradually absorbed.

"The more a trend line hits, the weaker it becomes," Gareth explained. His analogy is a door being hit repeatedly. It may survive the first or second attempt, but eventually the hinges can give way.

That makes this fourth test important. As long as the trend line holds, support remains intact. A confirmed break would open the door to a lower parallel trend line below \$80 per barrel. Oil weakness would also matter beyond the commodity itself because lower energy prices could further reduce inflation pressure.

Gold is facing its own decision point at a longer-term trend line. Gareth is giving that support the benefit of the doubt in the near term. If it fails, \$3,900 becomes the first important downside level, followed by the possibility of \$3,500. His longer-term bullish thesis remains intact, but that does not eliminate the possibility of a deeper technical correction first.

Silver has a similar structure. Holding its trend line keeps \$55 in play, while a confirmed breakdown shifts attention toward \$50. If Treasury yields continue backing away from resistance, both metals would receive a more favorable macro backdrop.

Bitcoin Continues to Show Relative Technical Strength

Bitcoin remains one of the cleaner charts in Gareth's current framework. Following its longer-term breakout, price has repeatedly surged, consolidated sideways and then attempted another leg higher.

That stair-step structure matters because consolidation after a strong advance allows price to digest gains without immediately surrendering the breakout. Rather than trying to predict each short-term move, the more useful question is whether Bitcoin continues to respect that broader structure.

For now, it has.

Natural gas is less constructive. Price is sitting just above short-term support near \$2.85. Losing that level would put approximately \$2.70 in play as the next technical target.

Individual Stocks: Wait for the Levels

The same discipline applies to individual names.

Conagra (CAG) continues to trade lower as higher input costs pressure the business, but Gareth is not interested in chasing the stock in the middle of the decline. The technical level that matters is approximately \$12.60, where a major double-bottom area could create a potential day or swing-trade setup.

That is an important distinction. A stock becoming cheaper does not automatically create a trade. The setup comes when price reaches a predefined level where risk can be measured.

Micron is another example. With earnings due after the close, Gareth identified the levels before the event rather than trying to predict the report itself. A bullish reaction puts the gap-fill area near \$1,150 in focus. A negative reaction brings the ascending trend line below \$1,000 into play.

The larger concern is the semiconductor cycle. Massive capital expenditures across the industry could eventually increase supply and pressure margins as new capacity comes online. That longer-term risk does not determine tonight's earnings reaction, but it is part of the framework traders should separate from the immediate chart setup.

The Bigger Lesson: Let Price Confirm the Narrative

Today's market offers plenty of narratives. Employment was stronger. Inflation was cooler. Yields reached levels last seen around the 2007 cycle high. Market breadth is weak. Mega caps remain resilient.

Trying to trade all of those headlines independently creates noise.

The cleaner approach is to identify where the market is forcing a decision. For the 10-year yield, that is the 2007 high near 5.28%. For the S&P 500, it is whether the potential inverse head and shoulders can confirm while breadth begins to improve. For oil, it is whether a fourth test finally breaks trend-line support. Gold and silver have their own trend lines defining whether the current bounce can develop further.

That is also why Gareth emphasizes removing emotion from technical analysis. The goal is not to decide what the market should do based on a headline. The goal is to establish the levels beforehand and let price determine whether the setup is confirming or failing.

Bottom Line

Cooler PCE matters, but the bigger signal is how it interacts with the 10-year Treasury yield at one of the most important resistance levels on the chart. If the 2007 high continues to reject yields, equities get some breathing room, precious metals get a potential tailwind, and the S&P 500 has an opportunity to push higher if participation beneath the mega caps begins to improve.

The bullish case does not require every chart to suddenly turn strong. It requires yields to respect resistance, mega-cap leadership to remain intact, and some of the weakness underneath the index to stabilize.

If those pieces begin lining up, the S&P 500's weak breadth may become fuel for a broader rebound rather than the warning sign many assume it is. If yields break decisively above the 2007 high, that framework changes.

The U.S. dollar has broken higher, and the effects are showing up across the major currency pairs. EUR/USD and GBP/USD have been pushed into oversold territory, while USD/CAD has climbed to an overbought reading after a persistent run higher.

The more useful signal now is not simply that the dollar is strong. It is where that strength is running into resistance. The DXY is approaching a prior pivot high at 101.97, with a key Fibonacci level at 102.86 above it, and its daily RSI is already overbought.

That leaves the broader breakout intact but increasingly stretched in the near term. The same setup appears across the currency charts from different directions: the dollar may need to consolidate before its next larger move develops.

DXY Is the Anchor for the Currency Setup

On the daily chart, the DXY has traded around a rising parallel channel dating back to August 2025. After a failed move through that channel in June and a period of weakness that followed, the dollar recovered. It has pushed steadily higher since then, pausing for only a few daily candles near the channel before continuing.

Now it is running into the next technical test. The first resistance is 101.97, a pivot high from May 2025. Above that is 102.86, a key Fibonacci level. The overbought daily RSI adds another reason to watch for the advance to slow.

Another push into resistance remains possible, and this is where the difference between trend and timing matters. The dollar is still in a bullish technical structure. But an extended RSI combined with overhead resistance makes some consolidation increasingly plausible before another sustained move higher. That potential pause is the framework for reading the other pairs.

EUR/USD: Oversold, but the Bearish Structure Is Intact

EUR/USD shows the inverse side of the move. As the dollar has strengthened, the pair has fallen into a prior pivot, and its daily RSI is near 24.63. That oversold reading leaves room for a pause, bounce or consolidation before the next directional move.

The larger structure still leans bearish. If a bounce stays weak or develops into a bear flag rather than reclaiming meaningful resistance, the next major support sits near 1.11. That Fibonacci level carries added weight because it also lines up with pivot highs from 2024.

The shape of any bounce matters. A short-term recovery would relieve the oversold condition, but it would not by itself change the broader bearish structure.

GBP/USD Is Holding Up Better Than EUR/USD

The pound is showing more relative strength. EUR/USD is testing its recent pivot lows, while GBP/USD remains comfortably above its own. The pound is still oversold in the near term, though, which leaves room for consolidation before another move develops.

If the bearish structure resumes, 1.30 is the more important support area. Price would have to get through a nearer pivot low first. The 1.30 level carries more technical significance because it lines up with a prior low pivot and the upper end of the 2024 consolidation range.

Both pairs have been pressured by dollar strength, but so far the pound has held its structure better.

USD/CAD Needs to Digest the Move

USD/CAD is the bullish side of the same story. The pair's sharp advance has pushed its daily RSI to roughly 75.2. The weekly RSI, however, has not yet reached 70, so the higher timeframe is not as extended as the daily chart.

The preferred bullish scenario is not another vertical move. It is continued strength toward the 1.42 area, followed by sideways consolidation similar to the pause in June. That would let the daily RSI cool while keeping the larger bullish structure in place. If that structure holds and price eventually resolves higher, 1.45 is the next technical objective.

The consolidation is the important part. It would show that USD/CAD can absorb the recent advance without materially damaging the broader bullish structure.

Key Levels to Monitor

What Would Strengthen the Setup

The next clue should come from how the DXY handles resistance. If it stalls between 101.97 and 102.86 and moves sideways, that would help relieve the overbought condition. It would also give EUR/USD and GBP/USD room to work off their oversold readings.

What happens during those consolidations matters more than the fact that they occur:

• A weak EUR/USD bounce that develops into a bear flag would keep 1.11 in focus.
• GBP/USD holding above its recent pivot would preserve its relative strength. A break through that structure would bring 1.30 more clearly into play.
• USD/CAD holding the breakout while momentum cools would preserve the case for another push higher.

A sustained DXY reversal, as opposed to consolidation near resistance, would call for reassessing the framework.

The Dollar Can Pause Without Breaking the Trend

Several currency charts are stretched at the same time. The DXY is overbought into resistance, EUR/USD and GBP/USD are oversold, and USD/CAD is overbought after a persistent advance.

Those conditions do not mean the dollar's breakout is finished. They suggest the next phase may look different from the move that got it here. The dollar remains the directional anchor. The test now is whether it can digest its recent gains without giving up the breakout structure. If it can, any consolidation that develops across the currency complex may help define the next set of technical setups.

Watch on YouTube

10-Year Yield Breaks 2007 Highs, but Stocks Refuse to Break

The biggest move into Tuesday's close was not in stocks. It was in the bond market.

The 10-year Treasury yield pushed as high as 5.293%, breaking above its June 2007 high. Normally, that kind of move would be expected to put significantly more pressure on equities, particularly growth stocks and other rate-sensitive areas of the market. Instead, the S&P 500 and Nasdaq bent without breaking.

That resilience was the most important signal Drew Dosek highlighted on today's Trading the Close. The headline is that yields are making historic highs. What matters more for traders is that stocks are absorbing the pressure better than expected while the 10-year itself is becoming technically stretched.

That creates a straightforward setup heading into the next round of economic data: if yields continue higher, equities may finally have to respond. If yields consolidate or pull back from overbought conditions, the pressure that has been sitting on stocks could begin to ease.

The 10-Year Is Testing the Market, but Stocks Are Holding

The 10-year yield reached 5.293%, pushing through the June 2007 high and into territory the market has not dealt with in nearly two decades.

Higher yields matter because they tighten financial conditions, raise borrowing costs and give investors a more competitive alternative to equities. The important question, though, is not whether higher yields should pressure stocks. It is whether they actually are.

So far, the reaction has been relatively controlled.

"You would anticipate the markets actually pushing and pulling down lower, but they didn't."

SPY finished down just 0.18% at \$764.20 and never reached the declining trend line it had interacted with in five of the previous six sessions. If selling picks up, Drew is watching the previous pivot high around \$760.40 as the next important support area.

The Nasdaq showed a similar response. It pulled back but avoided testing its declining trend line. Drew wants to see the index create more separation from that support, with a move back toward 27,000 strengthening the bullish structure and potentially opening the door toward 28,000.

That does not mean rising yields suddenly do not matter. It means the equity market has not confirmed the bearish message coming from bonds.

That distinction becomes more interesting when looking at the yield chart itself.

The daily RSI on the 10-year has moved above 70, putting it into overbought territory, while the latest daily candle showed a relatively narrow body after the recent push. Drew's working range is roughly 5.021% to 5.289%. A period of consolidation inside that area, or a pullback toward the lower end, could take some pressure off equities.

The next move in yields matters more now than simply the fact that they reached a new high.

Small Caps Show Where Higher Yields Are Actually Hurting

The Russell 2000 ETF, IWM, gives traders a cleaner look at how the rate environment is being transmitted into equities.

Small-cap companies tend to be more sensitive to financing conditions, and IWM has been moving lower as yields have pushed higher. Unlike the relative resilience in SPY and the Nasdaq, this is an area where the pressure is much easier to see.

But price is also approaching an interesting technical zone.

IWM has remained inside a parallel channel dating back to the April 2025 lows, with the lower boundary approaching \$274.52. Just beneath it, the 50% Fibonacci retracement from the March 2026 low comes in around \$271.94, near a prior January pivot high. Daily RSI has also fallen to 31.05.

That gives Drew a cluster of factors rather than a single support line.

"We have a yield heavy-stressed index right here with the IWM, and it's coming down with the yields going up, getting to a place of potential support."

The \$271.94 to \$274.52 area is therefore worth watching if IWM continues lower. More importantly, the setup connects directly back to the day's main macro signal. If yields begin to cool while IWM reaches that support cluster, the technical and macro pieces would start lining up at the same time.

That is a much stronger setup than buying simply because RSI is approaching oversold.

Semiconductors Are Waiting for Their Catalyst

Semiconductors are dealing with a different problem: price is consolidating near resistance while traders wait for a catalyst.

SMH remains around its 61.8% Fibonacci retracement at \$607.58. It traded above that level intraday but failed to secure the daily close Drew wants to see for confirmation.

The larger structure remains constructive following breakouts from a declining trend line and parallel channel, but the sector still needs to prove it can clear resistance.

That makes the upcoming Micron earnings report particularly important.

STX and WDC are consolidating near declining trend lines, while SNDK has already broken its trend line and spent the past two sessions holding above the breakout area. Rather than treating those as three separate trades, Drew's framework is to watch whether Micron provides the catalyst that confirms or rejects the broader semiconductor setup.

Strong guidance could help pull the group through resistance. A negative reaction would put the recent breakouts at risk and force traders to reassess the structure.

The charts are already in position. Now they need confirmation.

Natural Gas Reinforces Drew's Rule: Do Not Chase

Natural gas provided one of the clearest trading lessons of the session.

After attempting to push higher without confirming a breakout above its declining trend line, natural gas reversed sharply. Price ultimately came back toward previous consolidation support.

For Drew, the lesson was less about predicting the selloff and more about entry discipline.

"Be patient, sit back, sit on your hands. You don't need to buy a breakout. Wait for price to come back into support."

That is especially important in a volatile market like natural gas. Buying an initial push through resistance can leave a trader with poorly defined risk if the breakout fails. Waiting for price to return to support allows the chart to prove whether buyers are actually there.

If the current support area fails, Drew's next level is around \$2.99.

The same principle applies well beyond natural gas: a setup does not become better simply because price is moving quickly. Often, the better trade comes after the excitement fades and price returns to a level where risk can actually be defined.

Gold, Silver and Oil Still Need Confirmation

Elsewhere in commodities, the charts remain mixed.

Gold bounced following the prior session's breakdown as yields eased from their intraday high, but the bounce left unfinished business on the chart. Drew is watching the overhead trend line and the \$4,104 area to determine whether the move can develop into something more meaningful.

Silver reclaimed the \$61.30 area after breaking through support the previous session. The next test sits near \$63. A rejection there would keep Drew cautious and leave open the possibility of a larger retracement, while a clean break would force a reassessment of the near-term bearish setup.

Oil also continues to move lower and is approaching the bottom of its parallel channel near \$87.73. As long as the larger declining trend-line breakout remains intact, Drew's broader measured-move target around \$116 stays on the chart. For now, however, support matters before the target does.

That is the common thread across all three: do not trade the destination before price confirms the next step.

DraftKings Shows What "Stacking Factors" Actually Means

One of Drew's more interesting individual setups came from DraftKings, which fell 7.42% and is approaching a technically important support area.

The level Drew is watching is approximately \$19.15.

What makes it interesting is not the price alone. A longer-term trend line is approaching the same area, the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement from the 2022 low sits at \$19.15, and daily RSI has fallen to 29.15.

"I don't like to just take one-factor trades. I want to have those factors stacked in my favor."

That sentence gets to the heart of Drew's process.

A Fibonacci level by itself is not enough. An oversold RSI by itself is not enough. A trend line by itself may not be enough. When several independent technical factors begin converging around the same price, however, the area becomes much more useful for defining a potential trade.

Even then, support is not guaranteed to hold. The weekly RSI remains around 34, leaving room for price to briefly push through the level before finding buyers. The point is not to predict the exact bottom. It is to identify an area where the risk and potential reward become clearer.

Other Setups on Drew's Radar

Several other stocks are reaching decision points, but they remain secondary to the broader yield story.

CarMax gave back most of its post-earnings advance and closed at \$59.23 despite strong reported results. The stock had already broken a multi-year declining trend line, so the question now is whether it can consolidate above the old downtrend rather than falling back inside it. The reaction around the \$64 area showed that overhead supply remains meaningful.

LITE is also testing a major declining trend line after repeated attempts to break through it. Drew counted nine tests, making the current close above the line worth watching for confirmation. A confirmed breakout followed by a controlled retest would be more compelling than chasing the initial move.

BE, meanwhile, gave back a move above \$300 and closed at \$291.25, but its larger consolidation remains intact. Repeated tests of resistance near \$314.94 are the key. If price eventually clears that area and holds, Drew's parallel-channel work points toward \$400.

Different charts, same process: identify the level, wait for confirmation, and define the trade before committing capital.

What Traders Should Watch Next

The next session comes down to whether the relationship between yields and equities begins to change.

The 10-year has already delivered the headline by breaking its 2007 high. Now traders need to see whether it can extend that move or whether overbought conditions finally produce consolidation. If yields cool while SPY and the Nasdaq continue holding support, the resilience equities showed today becomes more meaningful.

IWM is particularly important because it provides a clearer read on rate sensitivity. A move into the \$271.94 to \$274.52 support zone alongside easing yields would create the type of multi-factor setup Drew looks for.

The upcoming inflation and employment data add another variable, but the charts provide the framework before those numbers arrive.

The market does not need to predict the data. It needs to react to it.

Bottom Line

The 10-year yield breaking above its 2007 high was the biggest headline of the session. The more useful signal was what didn't happen afterward: equities did not break with it.

That resilience should not be confused with an all-clear. If yields continue pushing higher, pressure on stocks can still build quickly. But with the 10-year technically stretched and major indexes still holding structure, the next move in yields could determine whether today's equity resilience was temporary or the beginning of another push higher.

Drew's approach remains the same across the market. Do not chase the first move. Wait for price to reach the level. Stack multiple factors when possible. Then let confirmation determine whether there is actually a trade.

That is especially important now, because the biggest opportunity may not come from predicting what happens next. It may come from being patient enough to let the market show it first.

Gold just gave traders the first warning. It has not given them the breakdown.

Monday's selloff knocked more than 4% off gold, and price is now back below a level that had recently flipped into support. Silver sold sharply as well. At the same time, long-term Treasury yields have continued pressing higher, creating another headwind for non-yielding precious metals.

The short-term message is straightforward: sellers have control.

The more important question is what happens when they reach the next level.

Both gold and silver still have larger technical structures beneath current price that have not yet broken. That makes the next trendline tests more important than Monday's percentage decline. If those structures hold, the selloff can remain a pullback. If they begin to fail, the technical picture changes.

Gold's $4,161 Failure Puts the Bigger Trendline in Play

Gold's first technical change has already happened.

The $4,161 level had flipped from resistance into support after price pushed above it. Gold has since fallen back underneath that level, and Tuesday's attempted recovery has struggled to reclaim it.

The upper wick developing on Tuesday's candle matters. Buyers pushed price higher intraday, but sellers responded and drove it back down. Until $4,161 is reclaimed, that keeps the immediate pressure pointed toward the next support rather than back toward the highs.

That next test sits around $4,050 to $4,060.

Jake draws the rising trendline from the April 23 pivot low through several subsequent lows and candle tails. A move into that trendline would still leave gold above $4,000 and, more importantly, would test the larger structure that has supported the advance.

A reaction there would keep the broader uptrend structure intact. A confirmed break below it would be more meaningful than the loss of $4,161 because it would begin damaging the trend that sits underneath the recent advance.

What Gold Has to Reclaim

If gold stabilizes, the recovery has its own hierarchy.

$4,161 comes first. Until buyers can reclaim the former support level, there is little reason to treat Tuesday's bounce as a meaningful change in the short-term structure.

Above it sits a downsloping trendline that capped gold repeatedly last week. Jake counts roughly six to seven interactions with that line, which is why he views it as increasingly vulnerable to a breakout if gold gets back there.

The larger resistance, however, sits near $4,307.

That trendline begins at the April 8, 2025 pivot low and previously acted as support. After price broke underneath it, the same line began rejecting subsequent rallies from below.

That polarity shift gives $4,307 more technical weight than a simple horizontal price level. If gold eventually gets back there, buyers would be testing former structural support that has turned into resistance.

For now, though, $4,307 is secondary. The immediate fight is between $4,161 overhead and the $4,050–$4,060 trendline underneath.

Silver Has Its Own Line in the Sand

Silver is working through a similar test, but its structure is slightly different.

Jake's primary support comes from a rising trendline extending from the October pivot low. Price previously slipped below that line before reclaiming it rather than confirming the breakdown.

Within Jake's framework, that reclaim adds credibility to the trendline because sellers failed to sustain the move beneath it.

Now it is being tested again.

If that support fails, the next major reference sits near the prior pivot top at $54.46. Buyers stepped in just before reaching that level during the previous decline, and Jake identifies roughly $54 as the area he would favor for a potential swing-long setup if silver sells down that far.

That does not make $54 an automatic entry. It makes the reaction there important.

On the upside, silver first needs to reclaim $64, the prior low pivot that is currently acting as resistance. Above that, a downsloping trendline comes into play near $67.

The sequence is therefore clean: hold the rising support structure, reclaim $64, then challenge the trendline near $67.

Oil Shows Why the Commodity Read Isn't One-Dimensional

The rest of the commodity complex makes this more interesting because the weakness is not identical everywhere.

Crude oil has spent roughly a week trading inside a range after falling below $93. The key horizontal support is $88.61, a level that has produced several clean bounces.

Jake is also watching the possibility of an upsloping head-and-shoulders structure developing inside a widening channel. That pattern is still developing, not confirmed.

A break of $88.61 would bring the lower channel boundary into focus around $86.94 to $87.40, depending on timing.

If oil reverses higher instead, Jake sees initial resistance around the 0.618 Fibonacci retracement near $99.45 to $100, followed by a longer-term downsloping trendline around $104 to $105.

Oil therefore has its own decision point. It is weakening inside the range, but the larger downside signal still requires support to break.

Natural Gas Is Giving Back the Spike

Natural gas adds another variation.

UNG made a large move last week and was up roughly 13% intraday on Tuesday before selling back and giving up much of that gain. Even so, Jake still sees a series of relative higher lows holding above a rising support trendline.

That trendline comes into play around $10.37. If it fails, Jake's next support is the prior downsloping resistance line that UNG broke above, now sitting around $9.94 to $10.00.

Resistance begins around $10.90, followed by the prior consolidation shelf near $11.72 and another downsloping trendline around $12.

The spike has faded. The higher-low structure has not yet.

Copper Is Still Holding the Larger Trend

Copper may be the cleanest example of why a pullback does not automatically equal a broken trend.

After reaching a new 52-week high last week, copper failed to hold the breakout and sold back underneath its ascending resistance line. Jake is now watching $39.55 as the immediate support level.

Underneath that sits the more important structure: a long-term rising trendline extending from the July 31, 2025 pivot low.

Copper has been traveling along that trendline despite temporary breaks and reclaims. Even if $39.55 gives way, Jake sees room for another higher low to develop along that larger structure.

For the bullish case to regain momentum, copper first needs to reclaim $40.21 and then challenge the ascending resistance line again.

The Levels That Matter Now

Bottom Line

The percentage moves are dramatic. The technical message is more measured.

Gold has lost short-term support. Silver is under pressure. Oil is making lower highs inside its range. Natural gas has surrendered much of its intraday spike, and copper failed to hold its move above ascending resistance.

But the larger structures underneath those markets have not all failed.

That makes the next tests more useful than the selloff itself.

For gold, $4,050 to $4,060 is the level that can tell us whether this remains a pullback inside the larger trend. For silver, the rising trendline comes first, with $54.46 underneath it if sellers keep pressing. Oil has $88.61, UNG has its rising support near $10.37, and copper remains tied to its longer-term trendline.

The pressure is already visible. Now the charts have to show whether it is strong enough to break the structures underneath price.

Stay patient. Don't chase the move. Let the levels do the work.

Watch on YouTube

The 10-Year Yield Is at 5.25%. This Is the Level Driving the Market Now

The S&P 500 may be sitting within roughly 2% of its all-time high, but that is not the chart carrying the most information right now. The more important setup is happening in the 10-year Treasury yield, which has rallied into major resistance around 5.25%, a level that traces back to the 2006-2007 period. How yields behave here could determine whether equities get another opportunity to push toward record highs or whether higher borrowing costs force another round of pressure across risk assets.

That makes 5.25% the line in the sand. The level has not broken yet, which means it still deserves respect as resistance. A rejection would give equities some breathing room, particularly if incoming economic data cools without collapsing. A decisive breakout would change that framework. Above 5.25%, the next technical area on the 10-year sits around 5.45% to 5.50%, creating another meaningful tightening impulse for financial conditions.

The Market Wants Weaker Data, But Not Weak Data

That yield setup makes this week's economic data more important than the headline numbers themselves. The market is still operating in a narrow zone where slightly weaker data can be bullish because it reduces pressure on rates, while significantly weaker data risks reviving recession concerns. The reaction function matters more than whether a report simply beats or misses expectations.

JOLTS is a good example. Job openings previously came in at 7.27 million, with consensus around 7.23 million for the next release. A print slightly below consensus, around 7.19 million, could fit the market's preferred scenario. It would show some cooling in labor demand without necessarily pointing to a sharp deterioration in the economy. A hotter number creates the opposite problem because it could put renewed upward pressure on the 10-year yield.

Consumer Confidence carries a similar setup. With the prior reading at 89.4 and expectations around 89.2, a modest miss could help the rate picture. A stronger reading, particularly around 90 or above, could reinforce the idea that the economy remains hot enough to keep yields elevated. The market is not simply trading whether the data is good or bad. It is trading whether the data gives the 10-year a reason to break 5.25%.

The S&P 500 Is Bullish, But Breadth Is Sending a Warning

The S&P 500 itself remains constructive despite yesterday's roughly 0.75% decline. The index is still close to its all-time high, and as long as it remains above the neutral zone identified on the chart, the broader bullish structure stays intact. There is also the potential for an inverse head and shoulders pattern that, if confirmed, would carry a measured move toward 8,000.

The weakness is underneath the index. More S&P 500 components are trading below their 50-day moving averages than above them, even with the index near record territory. That tells us leadership is narrow. Mega-cap names such as Microsoft, Meta, NVIDIA and CrowdStrike are doing more of the work while a larger portion of the market struggles underneath.

That does not invalidate the bullish S&P setup, but it changes the quality of the move. An index can continue higher on narrow leadership, especially when the largest stocks carry significant weight. The vulnerability appears if those leaders begin to weaken before participation underneath them improves. That is why breadth matters here as a warning rather than an automatic bearish signal.

Oil Is Helping, But Rates Are Not Fully Responding

WTI crude fell roughly 3.25% this morning, which should remove some inflation pressure at the margin. What stands out is that the 10-year yield has not fallen proportionally with oil. If energy were the market's primary concern, a move of this size in crude would normally be expected to provide more relief in rates.

That disconnect suggests the bond market is looking beyond oil. Debt issuance, economic resilience and the possibility that growth remains too firm are still part of the rate equation. In other words, lower oil helps the bullish case, but it has not yet solved the problem at 5.25%.

The oil chart itself remains weak. WTI is forming a bear flag, with the recent price action contained inside a downward-sloping channel. The next important support sits around \$90 per barrel. Continued weakness toward that area could further reduce inflation pressure, while a break below \$90 would open the door to additional downside unless a geopolitical or supply catalyst changes the structure.

Gold and Silver Are at Decision Levels

Precious metals are showing what happens when momentum breaks after an extended run. Gold has pulled back into support around 4,100 and is attempting to stabilize. That level matters because a failure of the current trendline would expose a deeper retracement zone around 3,700 to 3,800. Below there, the larger breakout area near 3,500 becomes relevant.

Silver has already suffered more technical damage and is testing support around \$60. If that level fails, the next area is roughly \$54 to \$55. The more interesting longer-term zone sits near \$50, where prior price structure converges with the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement measured from the 2025 low to the recent high.

The important point is not that silver must reach \$50. It is that multiple technical references begin stacking up there. When historical price support and a major Fibonacci retracement converge, that is where the chart becomes more interesting from a risk/reward standpoint.

Bitcoin Is Stronger, but Dominance Changes the Crypto Read

Bitcoin is showing better relative strength than several other major risk assets, but the Bitcoin Dominance chart is sending a separate message. Dominance has broken above a large wedge and has repeatedly held the breakout area on subsequent tests.

That does not automatically mean Bitcoin itself has to surge. Rising dominance can also occur because capital is leaving altcoins faster than it is leaving Bitcoin. In that environment, Bitcoin could remain relatively resilient while smaller cryptocurrencies experience substantially larger percentage declines.

For crypto traders, that distinction matters. The signal is less about an outright Bitcoin price target and more about where capital is concentrating inside the crypto market. As long as the dominance breakout holds, the relative-risk picture remains more difficult for altcoins.

Individual Setups: Let Price Come to the Level

Away from the macro picture, several individual stocks are approaching levels where the risk/reward becomes more defined. Carnival Cruise rallied following earnings, but chasing the initial move offers less structure than waiting for resistance. The first level is around \$24, followed by a stronger confluence near \$25.50, where prior pivot lows overlap with the 50% Fibonacci retracement. That is the area where a potential short setup becomes more interesting.

Boeing is approaching support around \$177.50 following its recent decline, creating a potential bounce area if buyers respond there. Aeon is also deeply oversold, with RSI near 20 and significant support below price. That does not guarantee a reversal, but the combination of stretched momentum and nearby support creates the conditions for the type of snap-back trade worth watching.

The common thread across these setups is patience. A stock moving sharply is not enough. The edge comes from waiting until price reaches a level where the chart defines the trade.

The Bottom Line

The market's game plan currently runs through one chart: the 10-year Treasury yield at 5.25%.

A rejection from that resistance, helped by slightly softer economic data and continued weakness in oil, would give the S&P 500 room to maintain its bullish structure and potentially challenge new highs. A confirmed break above 5.25% changes the equation and brings 5.45% to 5.50% into play, increasing pressure on equities and other risk assets.

The S&P remains constructive, but weak breadth means the index does not have much room for its largest leaders to stumble. Gold and silver are testing important support, Bitcoin dominance is warning of continued relative weakness in altcoins, and several individual stocks are approaching actionable technical levels.

There is no need to predict every move from here. Respect 5.25% until it breaks. Then let the reaction in rates tell you which market setup deserves your attention next.

Quant had a catalyst. Most of the altcoins following it have a narrative.

Quant (QNT) rose roughly 200% in less than 24 hours after The Clearing House selected it to provide the interoperability and transaction-management layer for its On-Chain Money Initiative, a network being built to clear and settle tokenized deposits between financial institutions, with launch expected in the first half of 2027. That gives QNT's move a concrete institutional basis.

Momentum then spread into tokens commonly grouped under the "ISO 20022" label, including Hedera (HBAR), Algorand (ALGO), Stellar (XLM), XRP and Cardano (ADA). ISO 20022 is a financial messaging standard, not an endorsement or certification of any individual token. The Clearing House announcement did not extend to these assets. The broader move reads as traders reaching for a bullish story after Quant gave them a reason to look.

That rotation is happening while Bitcoin and Ethereum both show bearish RSI divergence near support. If the majors weaken, the momentum carrying the altcoins becomes their main vulnerability.

Bitcoin Is Holding Support, but Momentum Is Not Confirming

Bitcoin has pulled back into a support zone running from the November wick low to the May high. The range acted as resistance on the way up and has since flipped to support. On the four-hour chart, price briefly tagged the zone and began to bounce.

Price is doing what bulls want to see. Momentum is not. Bitcoin is printing higher highs while RSI prints lower highs, a bearish divergence. That does not invalidate support or guarantee a breakdown, but it tilts the read slightly bearish while the divergence persists.

Ethereum shows a similar warning. On the one-hour chart, a rising trendline drawn from two earlier wicks has held as support again when extended forward. The level is intact, but continued tests alongside weakening RSI are starting to favor a move lower.

That makes Bitcoin and Ethereum the directional filter for everything further out on the crypto risk curve. Altcoin rotations can run while the majors are stable. A break of support in either would make chasing an extended narrative considerably less attractive.

Charts Over Labels

The distinction matters for positioning. Quant's technology was selected by The Clearing House. The rest of the basket did not receive that catalyst. Traders appear to be connecting one announcement to a familiar narrative and market-buying assets that fit it.

That does not make the moves untradeable. It means the charts, not the label, should decide the trade.

HBAR, ALGO and XLM Have Already Moved

Hedera (HBAR) has pushed beyond its prior bull flag target. A previous pivot high is the first potential cool-off area. If HBAR makes a second leg higher, the next resistance level becomes an area to watch for a potential short setup. The first expansion has already happened.

Algorand (ALGO) pushed sharply higher on the daily before running into a prior pivot top and rejecting, a reaction visible almost immediately on the lower timeframes. If ALGO clears that pivot, the next prior high is the next resistance.

Stellar (XLM) is breaking higher from an inverse head-and-shoulders pattern. The measured move, taken from the neckline to the bottom of the head, projects to a level that lines up almost exactly with a prior pivot high. Two independent signals pointing to the same area is what gives that target weight.

XRP, Cardano and Chainlink: The Laggards

If the rotation continues, attention shifts to the names that have not yet made the same kind of move.

XRP: The August pivot high around $1.70 is the upside objective if momentum develops. A descending trendline approaches the same area, adding a second layer of resistance.

Cardano (ADA): Price sits inside a reasonably clean parallel channel after several failed attempts at the upper boundary. A confirmed breakout puts roughly $0.28 to $0.29 in view. Until then, it is a developing setup.

Chainlink (LINK): A descending trendline dating back to 2021 capped the latest advance. LINK wicked above it but could not close a daily candle beyond it. That trendline converges with a horizontal level near $19.99 that has acted as resistance, then support, then resistance again, forming a two-factor resistance zone around $20. A daily close above it would change the structure. Another rejection keeps the long-term downtrend intact.

What to Watch Next

• Bitcoin's support zone. Holding the November-low-to-May-high range keeps the rotation viable. A break with RSI divergence in place raises the odds of a broader pullback.
• Ethereum's one-hour trendline. Continued tests on fading momentum lean toward a downside resolution.
• Second legs in HBAR and ALGO. Extensions into the next resistance levels are where risk shifts from chasing to fading.
• Laggard triggers. A confirmed ADA channel breakout or a LINK daily close above $20 would signal the rotation is broadening.

Bottom Line

Quant's move started with a real institutional catalyst. The rotation that followed is a different trade, built on a label rather than a shared development. Some of those charts have already run; others sit below defined breakout levels.

Above all of them sit Bitcoin and Ethereum. Their support is holding, but momentum is not confirming price. Until that divergence resolves, the altcoin rotation has momentum without a clean foundation. The disciplined approach is to define the target and the invalidation on each chart, size accordingly, and let price confirmation decide.

Watch on YouTube

Yields Hit 2007 Levels, But Stocks Aren’t Breaking Yet

The 10-year Treasury yield pushed above 5.25% into the close, reaching levels last seen in 2007. That should be a major problem for stocks. Higher yields raise borrowing costs, pressure valuations, and give investors an increasingly attractive alternative to equities.

But the more important signal from Monday’s session was what didn’t happen.

Stocks did not break the way traders might expect with yields at these levels. The S&P 500 slipped, but the Nasdaq held its breakout structure and semiconductors continued to consolidate constructively. For Pro Trader Drew Dosek, that disconnect matters more than the headline yield itself.

“The selling is not what we could anticipate,” Drew said. “It tells us the markets aren't really too scared about the high yields per se right now.”

That does not make the yield spike irrelevant. It means traders need confirmation before assuming higher rates automatically translate into a larger equity selloff. Right now, the bond market is flashing stress while important areas of the stock market are refusing to confirm it.

The 10-Year Is Reaching a Decision Zone

The 10-year yield climbed as high as 5.274%, putting it just beneath Drew’s next major resistance level at 5.289%. That area carries historical significance because yields have not traded there since June 2007.

The comparison matters as a technical reference, not as a prediction that 2007 is about to repeat. The more useful question is what yields do when they reach a level the market has not tested in nearly two decades.

Momentum is already stretched. RSI sits at 69.07 on the monthly chart, 78.61 on the weekly, and 73.6 on the daily. That does not guarantee an immediate reversal, but it tells traders that the move has become extended across several timeframes.

That creates the first major watchpoint for equities.

If the 10-year stalls around 5.289% and begins consolidating or pulling back, one of the market’s biggest current headwinds starts to ease. If yields continue breaking higher instead, stocks will have to prove how much rate pressure they can actually absorb.

Until one of those scenarios develops, the lack of aggressive equity selling remains part of the signal.

Stocks Are Bent, Not Broken

The S&P 500 closed down 0.74% and slipped below its declining trend line, so the index has not escaped the pressure completely. Near-term support sits around 760.36, an important pivot tied to the previous all-time-high area. On the upside, Drew is watching 767.99 as the level bulls need to reclaim to strengthen the setup.

The Nasdaq is holding up better.

It remains above key support at 26,691 and has preserved its broader breakout structure despite the jump in yields. That resilience is constructive, but Drew does not want to see price repeatedly lean on the same level.

“The more and more you hit any support trend line, the more and more likely price will go through it,” he explained.

That makes 26,691 more than just another support number. Bulls want separation from it. A move higher while yields begin cooling would keep 28,000, where psychological resistance meets an inclining trend line, in play.

The distinction for traders is simple: the macro backdrop looks increasingly uncomfortable, but price has not yet confirmed the bearish interpretation.

Semiconductors Reinforce the Divergence

Semiconductors provide another reason not to treat the yield spike as an automatic risk-off signal.

SMH fell roughly 1%, but its broader technical structure remains constructive. The ETF has broken above a declining trend line, moved through the top of an inclining parallel channel, and reclaimed its 50-day moving average. Its 20-day moving average is also curling above the 50-day.

Instead of immediately failing after those moves, SMH is consolidating beneath 61.8% Fibonacci resistance at \$607.58.

That is the level that matters now. A confirmed push through \$607.58 would keep the bullish structure intact and bring \$635.54 into view. Failure would put more emphasis back on the breakout levels underneath.

NVIDIA is telling a similar story.

The stock gained 1.68% following the announcement of a \$150 billion share buyback authorization, but Drew’s focus remains on the chart rather than the size of the headline. NVIDIA continues making higher lows while approaching stacked resistance at \$234.70 and \$239.68.

“The near-term trend on NVIDIA is not bad at all,” Drew said. “It's making higher lows on the chart, but we got stacked resistance approaching.”

That is exactly the type of setup where confirmation matters. Higher lows show buyers continuing to step up, but resistance still has to break. If NVIDIA can clear that zone, \$240 becomes the immediate area to watch rather than something traders need to anticipate before price gets there.

Where Higher Yields Are Actually Doing Damage

The resilience in equities becomes more meaningful when compared with assets that are reacting aggressively to higher yields.

Gold dropped 3.87% and broke beneath the inclining parallel channel that had supported its advance since April 2025. Near-term support now sits around \$4,104, with the recent lows around \$3,946 becoming increasingly important if sellers remain in control.

The first bounce may also be revealing. Once support breaks, that same trend line can become resistance on a back-test. Rather than assuming gold immediately recovers, Drew’s framework is to watch how price reacts if it returns to the underside of the broken structure.

Silver suffered even more damage, falling 5.56% and breaking out of its previous consolidation area. It is now testing support around \$58.82, while Drew sees \$52 as a more significant downside level if the breakdown continues.

This is where Monday’s market gets interesting. Higher yields clearly matter. Precious metals are showing that. The question is why the same pressure has not produced comparable technical damage across the major equity indexes.

Until it does, traders should respect the divergence instead of forcing every asset into the same macro narrative.

SpaceX Shows Why Supply Can Matter More Than the Story

SpaceX offered a different lesson, one centered on market structure rather than macro conditions.

Drew focused on the scheduled release of previously restricted shares and the potential supply those shares can introduce into the market. The company recently saw 328 million additional shares become available, with further releases expected in October, late October into early November, and December.

That potential supply matters because price has already lost near-term support at \$149.91.

Rather than chasing weakness, Drew is looking lower. His preferred area sits between \$125.19 and \$131.48, where the chart could offer a more attractive risk-reward setup after additional supply has had time to work through the market.

There is also a larger pattern developing. If price stabilizes in that zone, it could form the right shoulder of an inverse head and shoulders setup with a measured-move target around \$212.

The trade is not the pattern today. The trade is waiting to see whether price reaches the area where that pattern can actually develop.

Tesla carries a similar lesson. The stock broke its near-term uptrend and now needs to reclaim \$369.42 to repair the immediate technical damage. If it cannot, \$342.11 becomes the next support area Drew is watching. A hold there could also contribute to a larger inverse head and shoulders structure, but resistance around \$385 and \$410 would still need to be cleared before the bullish case strengthens.

Both setups reinforce the same discipline: location first, confirmation second, target third.

Energy Rewards the Same Patience

Crude oil remains above the neckline of its larger inverse head and shoulders pattern. As long as that structure holds, Drew continues to watch the measured-move target around \$116.19.

Natural gas is giving traders an even cleaner example of why chasing breakouts can create poor entries.

After a sharp move higher, natural gas failed to hold above \$3.23 and began retracing. Drew is watching approximately \$3.08 as the preferred area for buyers to prove themselves again. A successful hold there would keep the path toward \$3.60 open.

The important part is not simply that natural gas remains bullish or bearish. It is that the setup improves if price comes back to a predefined level rather than forcing traders to chase an extended move.

Individual Stocks Show the Value of Confirmation

MongoDB and Procter & Gamble rounded out the session with two very different examples of how catalysts interact with technical structure.

MongoDB fell 18.46% following a leadership change ahead of its Investor Day. Whatever the market ultimately decides about that change, the chart has already registered the uncertainty through price. Drew is watching \$339.57 as the first meaningful level the stock would need to reclaim before the technical damage begins to improve, followed by the \$355 pivot.

P&G moved in the opposite direction, gaining 1.91% as it pushed through a declining trend line after several attempts.

That puts the stock on breakout watch, but the move still needs confirmation. A daily close above the recent highs would strengthen the breakout and bring \$153.06 into focus, followed by a broader channel target around \$157.

Again, the framework is the same. A technical level creates the setup. Price behavior at that level determines whether traders actually have confirmation.

Bottom Line: Watch What the Market Does, Not What It Should Do

The 10-year yield above 5.25% is the obvious headline. The better trading signal is that stocks have not responded the way many traders would expect.

That can change quickly.

The S&P 500 still has work to do. Nasdaq support at 26,691 cannot withstand unlimited tests. SMH still needs to clear \$607.58, and NVIDIA is approaching stacked resistance. If those structures begin failing while yields continue higher, the bond market’s warning will finally have confirmation from equities.

But that confirmation is not there yet.

For now, Drew’s framework is built around watching the reaction rather than trading the assumption. A rejection in the 10-year near 5.289% could relieve pressure on equities. Continued strength in the Nasdaq and semiconductors would reinforce the market’s resilience. A breakdown through their key supports would tell traders that higher yields are finally transmitting into equity price action.

That is the real setup heading into the next session: yields are flashing the warning, but price still gets the final vote.

Monday's weakness was not evenly distributed across the market. The S&P 500 opened down about 0.4%, came close to Thursday's low and recovered much of the decline. The Nasdaq 100 opened down about 0.6% and then sold another 1% intraday.

Semiconductors were a major source of that divergence.

The warning started overnight, when South Korea's KOSPI sold off with weakness in semiconductor names. That pressure carried into the U.S. session, where the VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) fell as much as 2.5% intraday.

But the individual charts were not moving in lockstep. Nvidia was green while several semiconductor names that had made sharp upside moves over the previous week gave back a meaningful portion of those gains.

ARM, Intel, Credo Technology and Lumentum are all approaching technical areas that could determine whether their recent rallies find support or continue unwinding.

ARM's Pullback Has Not Reached the Level That Matters

ARM gained more than 22% over three trading days last week before reversing Monday. The stock was down roughly 8% late in the session and had fallen more than 10% at its intraday low.

Despite the size of that decline, the more important technical level remains below current price.

ARM still has an unfilled gap near $275. A move back to that area would represent roughly an 18% decline from last Wednesday's high, but it would also bring price into the zone Lawton is watching for a potential trade setup.

The key point is that an 8% or 10% decline does not automatically create the setup after a 22% three-day rally. The gap near $275 provides the more meaningful technical reference. Until ARM reaches that area, the setup Lawton is watching has not arrived.

Intel Is Following a Similar Path

Intel is showing a similar pattern, although its pullback is at an earlier stage.

The stock began pushing higher last Monday and peaked Thursday roughly 18% above its earlier low. It has since started giving back part of that move.

If the reversal continues, Lawton is watching support near $128.60 as the more interesting area for a potential setup.

ARM and Intel therefore share the same basic structure: both made large short-term advances, both are now retracing, and both still have lower technical levels that matter more than simply buying because the stocks have fallen from last week's highs.

CRDO's Neckline Is the Level to Watch on a Retest

Credo Technology (CRDO) presents a different setup.

On Friday, CRDO gained as much as 10% intraday and closed up 7.7%. Monday's decline erased that move, with the stock falling through Friday's gap and trading down as much as 10% at its low.

Zooming out reveals what appears to be a head-and-shoulders pattern, with the neckline now becoming the critical level.

If CRDO retraces toward that neckline over the next several sessions, Lawton expects it to act as resistance. A rejection there would keep the bearish structure in play and raise the possibility of another leg lower.

Another possibility is that CRDO continues selling without providing the retest. In that case, the setup Lawton is watching never develops.

Lumentum's $840 Level Could Decide the Next Move

Lumentum (LITE) has already broken below last week's lows and is moving toward another important decision point near $840.

The stock has also completed a gap fill below its prior range, but the larger technical feature is the rising trend line underneath price.

LITE has gained more than 72% from its July lows and roughly 500% in less than a year. That makes the current test more significant because the stock is approaching trend support after an unusually large advance.

Lawton's bearish condition is specific: a break of the rising trend line followed by confirmation below $840 would favor additional downside toward the $750 region.

That makes the $750 area the next technical zone Lawton would watch for the possibility of a short-term bounce if the $840 support structure fails.

Longer term, he continues to view Lumentum as overextended after the scale of its advance.

The Levels That Matter Now

The common thread across these charts is that several names coming off large short-term rallies are now moving toward levels where the technical picture becomes much clearer.

ARM still has its gap below. Intel has support near $128.60. CRDO has a neckline that could become resistance on a retrace. Lumentum has a rising trend line and $840 support that need to break before the $750 region comes into focus.

Those levels are where the next decisions get made. 

Watch on YouTube

Yields And Oil Are Pressuring Stocks, But The Bullish S&P Setup Has Not Broken

The pressure on stocks this morning is coming from a familiar combination: oil is back near $100, the 10-year Treasury yield is pushing above 5.2%, and the S&P 500 is pulling back. But the important part of today's setup is how closely they are moving together, and what has not happened yet. Despite another push higher in yields and renewed strength in oil, the S&P 500 is still holding its recent bull-flag breakout and remains above the level that would change Gareth Soloway's near-term read.

That makes this a market where the headline and the chart are giving traders slightly different messages. Rising yields and oil are obvious headwinds for equities. Technically, however, the S&P has not confirmed the bearish case. Until it does, Gareth's framework remains straightforward: watch oil, watch the 10-year, but let the S&P's own price structure determine when the bullish setup has actually failed.

The Three Charts Driving The Market

The 10-year Treasury yield, crude oil, and the S&P 500 are effectively trading as one interconnected macro setup right now. The relationship was visible intraday. As crude pushed toward $100, the 10-year yield moved toward its highs and the S&P sold off. When oil backed away from $100, yields eased and stocks began to recover.

The 10-year is now around 5.215%, putting it within striking distance of the 5.25% to 5.27% area Gareth has been watching. On the long-term chart, yields are pressing into major pivots stretching back to 2006 and 2007. A rejection there would relieve some of the pressure currently hitting equities. A clean breakout would change the equation, with the chart potentially opening a path toward 5.5%.

There is also a macro difference between today's 5% yield environment and the one traders saw nearly two decades ago. The federal debt load is substantially larger, which means the economic cost of sustaining these rates is also larger. That does not tell us exactly when yields will turn, but it raises the stakes around this long-term resistance test.

Oil is adding another layer to the same trade. WTI briefly pushed toward $100 before pulling back into the upper $97 area. Higher crude feeds inflation concerns, which can keep upward pressure on yields and make the Federal Reserve's job more difficult. That is why the market's reaction to oil is showing up almost immediately in bonds and equities.

The S&P Is Bent, Not Broken

Against that backdrop, the S&P 500 is showing more resilience than the macro headlines would suggest. The index recently broke out of a bull flag, and despite this morning's weakness, price remains above Gareth's neutral line around 7,575.

That level keeps the hierarchy clear. Oil near $100 matters. A 10-year yield above 5.2% matters. But neither automatically invalidates the bullish S&P structure. Price has to do that.

As long as the S&P holds above the neutral line and preserves the bull-flag breakout, Gareth continues to give the near-term bullish structure the benefit of the doubt. A failure back below that area would be more important than another scary move in yields because it would finally show that the macro pressure is translating into technical damage in equities.

That is also why Wednesday's PCE inflation report and Friday's nonfarm payrolls report carry more weight than usual. The market does not simply need strong economic data. It needs data that is strong enough to avoid recession fears without being so strong that the Federal Reserve has to become more aggressive.

The Goldilocks analogy fits. Too weak and the market begins worrying about growth and earnings. Too strong and traders have to price a more hawkish Fed. The market wants something in the middle.

Gold And Silver Just Changed Their Technical Read

While the S&P is absorbing the pressure, gold and silver are not.

Gold has broken below the ascending parallel channel that had contained its advance, falling more than 3% and producing one of its largest down candles of the past month. The first areas Gareth is watching are roughly $4,250 and then the $4,125 to $4,100 zone. If those levels cannot stabilize the chart, the larger technical structure leaves room for a move back toward $3,900.

Silver has now broken its ascending parallel as well. With price near \$61, the breakdown puts approximately $55 into view as a larger support area.

This is where one of Gareth's recurring technical concepts becomes especially useful: the “retrace to the scene of the crime.”

A breakout does not require price to keep moving vertically. Markets frequently return to the area where the original breakout occurred, retest it from the other side, and then make the next decision. That is why the current decline in precious metals needs to be viewed through levels rather than emotion. The question is not whether gold and silver are down sharply today. The question is where buyers reappear and whether former breakout zones hold when tested.

The break of the ascending channels means the charts have changed. It does not mean traders should assume a straight-line collapse from here.

Bitcoin Is Holding Up Better Than The Metals

The contrast with Bitcoin is notable. Bitcoin is pulling back, but its chart has suffered far less technical damage than gold or silver. Relative to the precious metals complex, Bitcoin remains the stronger structure.

The key now is whether Bitcoin can hold the previous major resistance area that it recently broke above. That level had rejected price multiple times before the breakout. A successful retest would be another example of the “scene of the crime” setup and would strengthen the argument that Bitcoin's larger structure has changed.

Natural gas is creating a similar lesson from a different direction. After a sharp run higher, price has pulled back toward an area defined by previous high pivots. Gareth is not interested in chasing the original move. The better setup comes if price returns to a predetermined technical level and then gives confirmation.

That is an important distinction in today's market. A large move can attract attention without offering a good trade. The level after the move is often more useful than the move itself.

AI Stocks Are Still Priced For Perfection

Individual technology names are creating another set of opportunities, but the psychology is different. Nvidia, Micron, and MongoDB show how aggressively the market is still pricing AI-related expectations.

Nvidia moved higher following news of an additional $170 billion in stock buybacks. Technically, Gareth is watching the gap around $236 as the next resistance area. If Nvidia pushes through that level, the larger trend line near $260 becomes the more interesting zone.

Micron reports earnings Wednesday after the close, making preplanned levels more important than predicting the report. On an upside move, Gareth sees a major gap fill lining up with the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement, creating technical confluence. On a downside reaction, the first major support area comes from the combination of a rising trend line and gap support.

The point is not to guess whether Micron beats or misses. It is to know where the chart becomes interesting after the information is public.

MongoDB provided the clearest example of how unforgiving the AI trade has become. The stock fell more than 20% following the CEO transition and the company's decision to reaffirm rather than raise forward guidance. In a part of the market where expectations are elevated, simply maintaining guidance can be treated as disappointment.

But a large decline does not automatically create a trade. Gareth's focus shifts to approximately $294, where multiple previous pivot lows create a much clearer technical support zone. If price reaches that area, the chart offers a defined level to evaluate rather than an emotional attempt to catch a falling stock.

The Market Keeps Dealing New Cards

The common thread across all of these setups is probability.

Gareth compared trading to watching a poker hand. Every time another card is turned over, the odds change. Charts work the same way. A broken trend line, a successful retest, an economic report, or a failure at resistance adds new information and changes the setup.

Gold breaking its ascending channel changes the odds for a deeper retracement. The S&P holding its bull-flag breakout keeps the bullish structure alive despite rising yields. Bitcoin holding former resistance would strengthen its larger technical reversal. None of those outcomes has to be predicted in advance.

That is why missing a move is not the problem traders often think it is. There will always be another setup. Chasing because something already moved usually means accepting worse risk/reward simply because the market created FOMO.

The better approach is to define the important levels first and make the market come to you.

Bottom Line

The biggest signal this morning is the tension between the macro pressure and the equity chart. Oil is elevated, the 10-year yield is testing a major long-term resistance area, and precious metals have already suffered meaningful technical breakdowns. Yet the S&P 500 has not broken the structure that has kept Gareth near-term bullish.

If yields reject the 5.25% to 5.27% area and oil continues backing away from $100, some of the pressure on equities can unwind quickly. If yields break higher and the S&P loses its neutral line around 7,575, the technical picture changes with it.

Until then, the game plan is to know which levels will tell us when the odds have changed.

Falling Yields Give Stocks Relief, but These Technical Levels Still Need to Break

The market opened Friday with another reminder that headlines can move price quickly, but they do not automatically change the technical picture. Drew Dosek, filling in for Gareth Soloway on My Trading Game Plan, pointed to falling Treasury yields and renewed discussion around a potential phased reopening of the Strait of Hormuz as the immediate catalysts. The more important question for traders is what happens after that initial reaction. Across the S&P 500, semiconductors, oil and several individual names, price is sitting near levels that can either confirm the move or expose it as another short-term reaction.

That makes yields one of the most important pieces of the setup. The 10-year yield recently broke out of consolidation and cleared the 5.021% area dating back to 2023 before reaching roughly 5.177%. Drew’s focus is not simply on whether yields rise or fall on a given headline. He is watching how the entire curve behaves and whether relief at the long end is actually being confirmed elsewhere.

The Yield Curve Is the Macro Signal Behind the Headlines

The Strait of Hormuz remains an important variable because of its potential impact on oil and inflation expectations. Drew noted that reports of a possible phased reopening helped yields pull back Friday morning, but he also questioned how durable that relief could be if negotiations fail to produce a lasting agreement. In his framework, the geopolitical story matters primarily through what it does to oil, inflation expectations and ultimately Treasury yields.

There is also an important divergence developing inside the yield curve. Drew highlighted the 2-year yield around 4.89% against the 10-year near 5.177%. Since August 25, he noted that the 10-year had risen roughly 13% while the 2-year had climbed about 18.2%. That faster move at the short end is what makes the spread worth watching.

If the 2-year eventually moves above the 10-year, the curve would invert. Drew pointed to inversion as a historically important recession warning rather than an immediate recession signal, with the economic implications potentially arriving months after the initial inversion. For traders, that distinction matters. The signal is not a reason to react to one trading session. It is a change in the macro framework that would need to be incorporated into positioning over time.

Stocks Are Bouncing, but SMH Has the Cleaner Confirmation Level

Against that macro backdrop, the S&P 500 is trying to recover from Thursday’s failed attempt to hold above its declining trend line. The index was pushing higher in Friday’s premarket session, putting the bulls back in position to test the breakout. Drew identified 768.54 as the level that matters for confirmation. A daily close above it would strengthen the near-term bullish setup, particularly if oil and Treasury yields remain contained.

The Nasdaq 100 is facing a similar test. QQQ is pressing against resistance near \$748.65, and a daily close above that area would improve the technical structure. But Drew’s preferred read on broader risk appetite comes from semiconductors.

“I see the SMH as being the leading indicator for risk-on sentiment in the markets.”

SMH has already cleared a declining trend line from its all-time high and broken above the upper boundary of the parallel channel that had contained price since the April 2025 lows. Now it is testing the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement at \$607.58. That gives traders a clean decision point. A daily close above \$607.58 would strengthen the breakout and put \$635.84 into play as the next major resistance area. Failure there would leave the recent move without the confirmation Drew wants to see.

That is the more useful read on Friday’s equity bounce. The headline may create the initial move, but SMH can help show whether risk appetite underneath the market is actually improving.

Oil Shows Why the Chart Still Comes First

Oil provided one of the clearest examples from Drew’s session of price reaching an important technical level before the narrative caught up. Crude had been moving higher inside an inclining parallel channel before reaching the channel’s 50% midline. Price began rejecting that resistance around the same time reports emerged about a possible phased reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The sequence reinforces Drew’s broader framework. The headline helped explain the catalyst, but the resistance level was already visible on the chart. Traders did not need to predict the geopolitical development to know where price could run into trouble.

The larger oil structure remains important. Drew is tracking an inverse head and shoulders pattern with a declining neckline overhead. A confirmed breakout would produce a measured-move target above \$116. Until that neckline breaks, however, the target remains conditional. A breakdown in Strait negotiations could become a catalyst for another move higher, but price still has to confirm the technical setup.

Natural gas is further along in its breakout. Price continues to hold above a major pivot from March, although daily RSI reached the 70 area Thursday, signaling that the move has become extended in the near term. Drew continues to view pullbacks within the existing structure as potential opportunities, with the lower boundary of a longer-term parallel channel around \$3.56 serving as the next major upside level.

Gold and Silver Are Trying to Repair Their Structures

Gold and silver are also sitting at technical decision points, but the two metals are not giving the same signal. Gold recently slipped beneath the lower boundary of its parallel channel from the April 2025 lows. For the bullish structure to repair itself, Drew wants to see gold reclaim that channel, with \$4,347 marking an important area in that process.

Silver has shown better relative strength, but it still needs confirmation. Drew identified \$64.62 as the key level, where price is testing an inclining trend line left over from a failed head and shoulders formation. A daily close above that area would strengthen the near-term bullish case. Until then, strength alone is not the same thing as a confirmed breakout.

Tesla and Meta Show the Risk of Chasing Extension

Some of Friday’s most useful lessons came from stocks that are moving higher rather than breaking down. Tesla is drifting up with the broader market, but Drew sees a less attractive structure as price approaches \$400. The stock has not built the cleaner stair-step pattern of advance, consolidation and another advance that he prefers to see in sustainable trends.

The \$400 area also carries more than psychological significance. Trend lines drawn from the April 2025 lows converge around that region, creating what Drew described as an “X marks the spot” resistance area. The issue is therefore not whether Tesla can continue higher in the short term. It is whether the risk/reward remains attractive as price approaches converging resistance without first consolidating.

Meta presents an even clearer example. Price is approaching a triple-top region near \$795, while the midpoint of a parallel channel dating to December 2023 sits close by around \$798. At the same time, daily RSI has reached 80.51, putting momentum deep into overbought territory.

That does not automatically mean Meta has to reverse. It does mean the setup has changed. After a strong run into multiple resistance factors, chasing the move offers a very different risk/reward profile than buying after a pullback or consolidation that allows momentum to reset.

Fastly and Bitcoin Still Need the Breakout

Fastly offers the opposite setup: a chart where the larger move has not happened yet. FSLY has formed a sizable inverse head and shoulders pattern with neckline resistance at \$29.83. A daily close above that level would confirm the breakout and activate a measured-move target around \$46.33.

The weekly chart adds to the setup because there is relatively little nearby technical resistance immediately above the neckline. But the sequence still matters. The pattern itself is not the trade confirmation. The break above \$29.83 is.

Bitcoin is operating under the same principle. Price continues to consolidate beneath \$88,948, the neckline from its previous head and shoulders structure. Drew sees that level as the point that could materially change the technical read. A confirmed break above it would weaken the prior bearish structure and open the door toward the midpoint of Bitcoin’s broader parallel channel, with resistance around \$104,000.

Until that happens, Bitcoin remains below the level that would force a reassessment.

Bottom Line

Friday’s headlines are providing relief to yields, oil and equities, but Drew’s game plan does not depend on predicting whether the Strait of Hormuz negotiations succeed or what the next headline will say. The charts already provide the levels where the market has to prove that the underlying structure has changed.

For equities, SMH at \$607.58 is one of the cleanest risk-on confirmation levels on the board. The S&P 500 and QQQ also have resistance directly overhead, while Tesla and Meta show why strength can become less attractive when price reaches major resistance in an extended condition. Oil, Fastly and Bitcoin tell the same story from different directions: the setup may be there, but confirmation still has to come from price.

That is the game plan heading into the next move. Let the headline create volatility. Let the chart determine whether that volatility actually changes the trade.

The Headline Moved the Market. The Charts Told the Bigger Story.

Thursday's session gave traders plenty of reasons to focus on the headlines. A report that the Strait of Hormuz could be moving toward reopening sparked a sharp midday rally, only for Iran to deny the report shortly afterward. The result was what Drew Dosek described on Trading the Close: whiplash.

Despite the sudden burst higher from the rally the S&P 500 ran into the declining trendline extending from its recent highs and stalled. At the same time, the 10-year Treasury yield continued pushing higher. That combination leaves traders with a cleaner framework heading into the next session: equities have not cleared the technical resistance standing in their way, and yields remain the larger macro pressure point.

The S&P Rally Found Its Line in the Sand

Before the midday reversal, the S&P 500 had opened lower and spent the morning consolidating bearishly. Then came the Hormuz headline and a sharp rally around 12:10 PM.

Price rallied into the declining trendline Drew has been tracking from the index's recent highs and stalled there. That is why predefined technical levels become more useful when headlines start moving markets quickly. Traders do not have to predict the next geopolitical update. They can watch how price behaves when the news pushes the market into an important area.

As Drew explained during the show:

"When you draw these trend lines correctly, you can have price influenced by these trend lines in multiple days afterwards."

The rejection does not automatically make the broader market bearish. It does tell traders that the S&P has not yet proven it can break the short-term resistance structure.

The Nasdaq offered a slightly different signal. After reaching new all-time highs earlier in the week, the index retraced to roughly 26,700, near its prior breakout area, and held. That keeps the technology-heavy index technically stronger for now, but the combination of Nasdaq resilience and rapidly rising yields creates one of the more important divergences in the market.

The 10-Year Yield Is the Bigger Test

If there is one chart outside the major indexes that deserves traders' attention, it is the 10-year Treasury yield.

Yields have moved sharply higher over the past two sessions, with daily RSI reaching 75.69 and weekly RSI at 78.17 in Drew's analysis. Those readings show how extended the move has become, but an overbought reading alone does not mean yields have to reverse.

That distinction matters because equities, particularly technology stocks, have so far absorbed the rise in yields better than traders might normally expect.

Higher long-term yields can increase financing costs and raise the discount rate applied to future earnings. Yet the Nasdaq is still holding its breakout area, and the broader market has not suffered the type of breakdown that the bond move might suggest.

For traders, that makes the market's reaction to yields more important than the yield move by itself.

Drew identified 5.289% as the next major technical resistance area on the 10-year. Rather than assuming equities must break because yields are rising, the cleaner approach is to watch whether the S&P and Nasdaq continue absorbing that pressure or finally begin confirming it through weaker price structure.

That is the divergence to carry into the next session.

Semiconductors Give Traders Another Confirmation Point

The SMH semiconductor ETF reinforces the same idea.

Like the broader market, SMH opened lower and consolidated bearishly before the midday headline pushed price back toward its gap. But overhead resistance remains important, particularly around the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement at $607.58.

Drew also noted that the earlier decline did not reach the top of the parallel channel he is tracking. In other words, the cleaner retrace setup he was looking for never fully developed.

If SMH can work through $607.58 and hold above that area, the technical picture would improve. If it stalls there, the semiconductor ETF remains another example of a market capable of rallying without yet clearing the resistance that matters.

Oil Shows Why Headlines Need Confirmation

Oil provided the clearest example of why traders cannot rely on a chart pattern after the information driving price has changed.

Earlier in the session, U.S. oil had triggered a 30-minute inverse head and shoulders pattern with a potential move toward the $97.50 area. The Hormuz reopening report changed that setup almost immediately, sending oil sharply lower and disrupting the bullish intraday structure.

That does not make the original analysis wrong. It makes the invalidation part of the trade.

Oil subsequently developed a near-term bear flag, although long lower wicks showed buyers stepping in after the decline. On the daily chart, Drew highlighted approximately $97.43 as resistance, near the midpoint of the larger parallel structure.

The lesson is straightforward: patterns provide a framework, not a promise. When price invalidates the setup, the trader adjusts.

A Few Secondary Charts Worth Keeping on the Screen

Natural gas produced one of the cleaner breakouts of the session, moving above a declining trendline that had rejected several prior attempts. Drew referred to natural gas by its familiar "Widowmaker" nickname, a reminder of how quickly volatility can move against either side of the trade.

The next question is confirmation. Holding above the breakout area would strengthen the move, while a reversal back below it would weaken the signal. Drew's next larger technical area sits near the lower portion of the parallel channel below $3.60.

META is approaching a different type of test after its recent surge. The stock is moving toward its prior all-time-high area around $796.25, while Drew's weekly chart also places the 50% area of a longer-term parallel channel nearby. That creates a meaningful resistance zone approaching the psychological $800 level.

Rather than assuming META has to reverse there, traders can watch how price behaves when those technical factors converge. A rejection, consolidation, or clean breakout would each provide different information about the strength of the move.

Bitcoin remains another chart where confirmation matters. Drew is watching resistance in roughly the $88,000 to $89,000 region, with the larger neckline near \$89,021 and support around $80,594. Until either boundary gives way decisively, Bitcoin remains inside the broader structure rather than in a confirmed breakout.

What Traders Should Watch Next

Thursday's session was noisy, but the framework coming out of it is relatively simple.

The S&P 500 absorbed a sharp geopolitical headline and rallied, but the move stopped at declining technical resistance. The Nasdaq continues to hold its recent breakout area. Semiconductors bounced but still face an important Fibonacci barrier. Meanwhile, the 10-year yield remains elevated enough to test how much macro pressure equities can continue to absorb.

That creates several useful confirmation points for the next session.

The first is whether the S&P can finally clear its declining trendline or continues rejecting it. The second is whether the Nasdaq can defend the 26,700 breakout area. The third is whether the 10-year yield continues toward Drew's 5.289% resistance level or begins cooling after its recent surge.

Those signals matter more than trying to predict the next headline.

Bottom Line

The big lesson from Thursday was not that geopolitical news can create volatility. Traders already know that.

The more useful takeaway was that even during a fast headline-driven reversal, the market still gave traders defined areas where the risk/reward changed. The S&P rallied into resistance and stopped. Nasdaq held its breakout area. SMH bounced into another technical barrier. Oil demonstrated what an invalidated setup looks like in real time.

That is where Drew's framework becomes useful.

The goal is to know the levels that matter before the headline arrives, then let price confirm or invalidate the setup.

Published by Verified Investing | U.S. Economic Metrics

Released: September 24, 2026 | Data Period: Week Ending September 19, 2026 | Source: U.S. Department of Labor

Key Takeaways

• Initial claims came in at 197,000, down 1,000 from the prior week's 198,000. That is a low number by any modern standard — but a 1,000-unit decline at this level is statistical rounding, not a signal.
• The 4-week moving average dropped to 202,250, down from 204,000 the prior week. This is the number that actually tracks labor market conditions. At 202,250, it sits near multi-year lows — and has been stubbornly rangebound rather than breaking out in either direction.
• Continued claims edged up to 1,719,000, a 2,000-week increase. People aren't being fired at any elevated rate — but they also aren't clearing the unemployment rolls faster than they're entering them. Rehire absorption is grinding, not accelerating.
• The insured unemployment rate holds at 1.1%, unchanged. That figure has not moved meaningfully in months. The floor is real, but it is a floor — not a springboard.
• The 4-week MA trend is the thesis. The drift from 204,000 to 202,250 is directionally constructive but operationally flat. This is a labor market in stasis, not one generating fresh momentum in either direction.
• Watch whether claims can sustain a break below 200,000 on the 4-week average — that would be a genuine signal. A drift back toward 210,000–215,000 would confirm the plateau. Neither has happened yet.

What This Number Measures, and Why This Print Matters

The Department of Labor's weekly initial jobless claims report is the highest-frequency labor-market data the U.S. government produces. It counts workers filing for unemployment insurance for the first time — a near-real-time read on layoff activity. No other release gives traders weekly visibility into whether employers are holding or shedding workers.

Q3 GDP is the next major macro anchor, and the labor market's condition at the quarter's close feeds directly into the consumption and wage dynamics that drive that number. A labor market that is quietly eroding at the margin going into Q4 is a different setup than one that is genuinely firm.

This print says: firm. Still firm. But the firmness has a texture worth examining before accepting the headline at face value.

The weekly trend chart makes the current moment legible. Claims have been grinding lower in short steps, holding in a tight band from the high 190,000s to the low 200,000s. There is no collapse in layoffs here — they were already low. And there is no deterioration. What there is, is a labor market that has found a low-volatility equilibrium and is sitting in it.

What Everyone Will Focus On vs. What Matters More

The wire services will headline the 197,000 print. Sub-200,000 initial claims is a threshold that reads as strong, and it will be framed as confirmation that the labor market remains robust. The 1,000-week decline gives the headline an additional directional polish.

What matters more is where continued claims are going.

Initial claims tell you about the flow in — how many workers are newly filing. Continued claims tell you about the stock — how many are still collecting. When initial claims are low but continued claims are creeping upward, the labor market is telling you something the headline number conceals: workers who do lose jobs are taking longer to land new ones.

Continued claims ticked up 2,000 to 1.719 million, but the broader recent trend has moved lower. That weakens the case for calling re-employment conditions a fresh source of deterioration. The next signal is whether continued claims stabilize near current levels or begin rebuilding from here.

The secondary chart frames this clearly. Initial claims remain near the low end of the cycle. Continued claims are not. The divergence is not dramatic — but in a labor market where the headline number has been doing all the heavy lifting on the bullish narrative, the continued claims drift is the buried story.

Think of it this way: a low initial claims number says employers aren't cutting. A rising continued claims number says the workers who do lose jobs aren't getting absorbed quickly. Both can be true at the same time. Right now, both are.

The 4-Week Average Is the Clean Signal — and It's Plateauing

At 202,250, the 4-week moving average is a real number. It exists to smooth out the week-to-week noise that makes any single print unreliable. And what it shows right now is a plateau rather than a breakout.

The prior week's average was 204,000. The week before that, it was in the same zone. The 4-week MA has been cycling between roughly 200,000 and 210,000 for months. This week's 202,250 print is toward the lower end of that band — directionally good, but not a structural shift.

A 4-week average that stays pinned in a 10,000-unit range is a labor market in equilibrium. That is a useful condition to understand correctly. It means the Fed is not seeing fresh deterioration that would force their hand toward easing. It also means they are not seeing fresh tightening that would push the hawkish read. The claims data does not provide a clear new labor-market argument for reversing the Fed's latest policy stance.

The threshold worth watching: if the 4-week MA breaks decisively below 200,000 and holds there for two or more consecutive prints, that is a genuine signal of further tightening in layoff activity. It hasn't happened yet. Conversely, a drift back toward 210,000–215,000 on the 4-week average — even without any alarming single-week spike — would be the first real evidence that the plateau is breaking to the downside.

Neither condition is in play. The 4-week average is telling traders: nothing has changed.

The Continued Claims Drift Deserves More Attention Than It's Getting

The insured unemployment rate sits at 1.1%, and has sat there for long enough that it no longer generates commentary. That stability is itself worth examining.

A 1.1% insured rate against a backdrop of 197,000 initial claims suggests an extremely low-firing regime. In the abstract, that is textbook labor market health. But the continued claims figure at 1,719,000 — up 2,000 this week — is not compressing the way you'd expect if the labor market were genuinely accelerating.

Here is the math that cuts against the press-line read. Continued claims at 1,719,000 represent workers who have already filed initial claims and are still collecting benefits. If layoffs are historically low and the insured rate is steady at 1.1%, the continued claims pool should be shrinking — workers cycling through faster, finding new jobs before their benefit duration runs out. Instead, the pool is edging up. That is not an alarm. But it is a tell.

When initial claims are very low and continued claims are rising, it usually means one of two things: either the job-finding rate for unemployed workers is softening at the margin, or the composition of layoffs is shifting toward workers in sectors with longer unemployment spells. At this stage in the data, it is too early to distinguish which. But the signal is there, and it runs against the narrative that everything in the labor market is uniformly firm.

What This Means For Traders

The following is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

1. The 197,000 headline is not the trade. A 1,000-unit weekly decline in initial claims, from one already-low level to another already-low level, carries no meaningful new information about the labor market's direction. Do not anchor to it.

2. Watch the 4-week moving average for a confirmed break below 200,000. The average is at 202,250. Two or three consecutive weeks below 200,000 would be genuine evidence of further tightening in layoff activity and would warrant a reassessment of the labor market strength narrative. One week at 197,000 does not.

3. The continued claims drift is the asymmetric risk. If continued claims continue edging higher over the next three to four weeks — even while initial claims stay low — that divergence becomes a meaningful signal of softening labor market absorption. Watch the week-ending October 3 and October 10 prints specifically. A continued claims number above 1,740,000 on sustained basis would be worth noting.

4. For rate expectations: this print holds the status quo. A labor market that is neither accelerating nor deteriorating gives the Fed no fresh reason to move in either direction. The FOMC's next decision is not being driven by this week's claims. Traders pricing rate cuts on the assumption of labor market softness need to see continued claims confirm that thesis — and it hasn't yet.

5. The Q3 quarter-end framing matters for the next NFP read. This is one of the final weekly claims readings covering the third quarter. The September NFP — released in early October — will be the definitive test of whether the plateau in initial claims reflects true underlying strength or a low-firing regime that is quietly seeing rehire rates soften. If the NFP headline comes in below 150,000 while claims stay near current levels, the continued claims drift gets confirmed. Watch that combination.

6. What would change the thesis: A single-week initial claims print above 220,000 would break the recent range and demand attention. Continued claims sustaining above 1,740,000 would confirm the rehire-rate thesis. Either condition — and especially both together — shifts the labor market read from "plateau" to "early softening." Neither has materialized. Until one does, the correct framing is stasis, not strength.

Source: U.S. Department of Labor — Unemployment Insurance Weekly Claims Report, Week Ending September 19, 2026, released September 24, 2026

Litecoin rose 20 to 25 percent today and is trading near $74. Jake attributes the move primarily to a technical breakout: price cleared a descending trendline on its eighth test, with volume running at roughly seven times its normal level.

What matters for traders is that the move came from a pattern that can be seen and tracked. When a trendline gets tested again and again, and the tests come closer together, it can lose its strength as resistance. Litecoin just showed that clearly. Ethereum and Solana are now building versions of the same setup, while Bitcoin has not yet confirmed what is developing elsewhere in crypto.

Why the Eighth Test Mattered

Early tests can reinforce a trendline as resistance. But as price returns to that line more frequently, each additional test can signal that sellers are having a harder time pushing price away.

Litecoin's trendline held on its seventh test. On the eighth, price pushed through intraday but closed back inside the line, so the break wasn't confirmed. Today, the breakout followed through.

The volume adds weight to the move. Participation had already been picking up since September 21, and Jake noted more than 700,000 units traded during the session. That expansion in participation makes the breakout more meaningful than a move occurring on relatively light volume.

Don't Chase the Extension

After a move this sharp, it helps to consider where price may pull back to and whether those levels hold.

Support levels to watch:

• $71–$73: The swing-low pivot from the large price action on October 9, 2025. Holding above this zone would strengthen the breakout. This is the first test.
• $64.00–$64.80: A full retest of the broken trendline, going back to where the breakout started. If price pulls back this far and bounces off the trendline for another move higher, that could offer a better buying opportunity than chasing the extended move.

Being patient and waiting for one of these levels keeps risk defined by the chart structure rather than by today's momentum.

Where Resistance Sits Above

Litecoin traded above $80 but ran into overhead resistance in the $84.84 to $86.40 area. That band is made up of a prior pivot top at $84.84 and a low pivot at $86.40, which Litecoin was unable to get past. Whether price has the strength and volume to work through this zone is the next question for the breakout.

Beyond that sits a long-term trendline starting at the August 2024 lows. It acted as support for a long time, broke, and has since flipped to resistance. It hasn't been tested from below since January 2026. If Litecoin clears the horizontal levels above, this trendline becomes the line in the sand. Clearing it would strengthen the case for Litecoin to continue toward, and potentially through, the $90 to $100 area.

Whether Litecoin can win back that trendline will say more about its long-term "silver to Bitcoin's gold" story than any single day's move.

The Same Setup on Ethereum and Solana

The main lesson from Litecoin applies elsewhere: when tests of a trendline come faster and closer together, the odds of a breakout tend to improve.

Ethereum is pressing against a descending trendline that starts at the December 10, 2025 top. That line has been tested on Monday and again yesterday, so the tests are speeding up. If it breaks, the first target is the $2,880 pivot top. Above that, a second resistance trendline starting from the April 9, 2025 low comes in near $2,940 by Friday. Getting through both could open the way toward $3,000.

Solana is up about 2 percent intraday after an early selloff and has tested its trendline four times today. A push to $120 would be the fifth test. A break points to the consolidation area and low pivot at $126.03, where heavy resistance is likely. On the downside, three trendlines converge near $105, making that a strong support zone within what looks like a developing wedge.

Bitcoin Isn't Confirming the Altcoin Breakouts Yet

Litecoin may have delivered the cleanest breakout of the session, but Bitcoin is not giving the broader crypto complex the same confirmation yet. Bitcoin is roughly flat after selling into the $82,814 pivot and bouncing, leaving the largest cryptocurrency in more of a decision zone than a breakout.

It is now sitting on a trendline it recently pushed above and then slipped back below. Reclaiming that line is the first test. Above it, the consolidation shelf and low pivot at $88,483 is the key resistance. If price moves lower instead, a retest of the broken descending trendline near $79,500 is the area to watch for a bounce.

That creates a clear hierarchy for the session: Litecoin is the active breakout, Ethereum and Solana are developing repeated-test setups, and Bitcoin is the broader-market confirmation that is still missing.

What to Watch Next

• Litecoin closing and holding above $71–$73. Losing that zone puts the $64–$64.80 trendline retest in play.
• A volume-backed push through $84.84–$86.40, which would set up a test of the long-term trendline and the $90–$100 area beyond it.
• Ethereum's December trendline. Another test soon, with volume expanding, would resemble the Litecoin setup.
• Solana at $120 as a possible fifth test, with $105 as the level that needs to hold.
• Bitcoin reclaiming its trendline and pressing toward $88,483, which would give the altcoin moves broader confirmation.

The Bottom Line

Litecoin is the example, but the eighth test is the lesson. Resistance that repeatedly gets hit, especially as those tests arrive closer together, can become increasingly vulnerable. The surge in volume gave Litecoin's eventual break additional weight.

Ethereum and Solana are now putting versions of that same idea to the test, while Bitcoin has yet to provide the same confirmation. That makes the next step less about chasing Litecoin's 20%-plus move and more about watching whether the breakout can hold, whether ETH and SOL follow through, and whether Bitcoin begins to confirm the strength showing up elsewhere in crypto.

Watch on YouTube

The 10-Year Yield Is Breaking Out. The Stock Market Still Isn't Breaking Down

By Gareth Soloway, Verified Investing, September 24, 2026

The 10-year Treasury yield pushed through 5.02% and reached 5.1% overnight, extending a move that has become the most important macro pressure point for equities. But the bigger signal from this morning's market is not simply that yields are surging. It is that stocks are still refusing to break down with them. Despite borrowing costs reaching levels not seen since 2007, the S&P 500 remains roughly 2% below its all-time highs. That resilience keeps Gareth Soloway's near-term technical read on equities bullish as long as the index holds its key support structure.

Gareth notices a disconnect. On August 13, the 10-year yield was around 4.67%. It is now near 5.1%, yet the S&P 500 is down only about 1.5% from where it traded that day. Higher yields are a legitimate headwind because they raise the cost of capital and put pressure on valuations, but price is showing that equities have absorbed that pressure remarkably well so far. Gareth's framework is straightforward: respect the risk coming from rates, but do not turn bearish on stocks simply because the macro backdrop says they should be falling.

The 10-Year Is Driving the Tape

The intraday action reinforced just how tightly stocks are trading against yields. Around 5:40 a.m. ET, the 10-year yield formed a bottoming tail and began pulling back. S&P futures started recovering from their lows at essentially the same time. That inverse relationship is the market's immediate tell.

The push to roughly 5.1% on the 10-year confirms that the bond market is still applying pressure. Overnight, yields jumped roughly 16 basis points. For perspective, the Federal Reserve's latest rate increase was 25 basis points, so the speed of the move is noteworthy.

For equities, however, confirmation still has to come from price. As long as the S&P remains above Gareth's technical neutral line, the chart continues to argue for a bullish bias. If stocks eventually lose that structure while yields remain elevated, the read changes. Until then, the divergence itself is information: rates are delivering a substantial headwind, and equities have not yet buckled under it.

Oil Feeds Back Into Rates

The geopolitical headlines surrounding the Middle East matter to markets primarily through one transmission mechanism: energy. Higher oil prices can keep inflation pressure elevated, which makes it harder for interest rates to come down. That ultimately feeds back into the 10-year yield that is already pressuring equities.

Oil is now sitting near an important rising support line on Gareth's chart. A confirmed break would open the door to roughly \$87 per barrel, followed by a potential move toward \$80. That would be meaningful relief from current levels, although oil would still be well above the prices seen earlier this year.

Diesel adds another layer. Higher diesel costs work through transportation and distribution expenses, giving businesses another cost that can eventually reach consumers. That is why the oil chart cannot be separated from the rates discussion. Falling energy prices would remove some inflation pressure. A renewed oil surge would make the 10-year's breakout more difficult for equities to absorb.

The Dollar Is Testing Gold and Silver

The U.S. Dollar Index is adding another source of pressure, with DXY approaching Gareth's major resistance trend line near 101.63. A rapidly strengthening dollar generally creates a tougher backdrop for dollar-denominated commodities, which makes the current positioning in gold and silver particularly important.

Gold is still holding a rising support line formed by connecting its recent pivot lows. That keeps Gareth's near-term read neutral to bullish despite the dollar's strength. The risk is the failure of that support. If the trend line gives way, the chart opens the possibility of a larger retracement toward \$4,000 or potentially lower.

Silver is showing somewhat weaker price action but remains near its own parallel support line. A breakdown there puts roughly \$59 to \$60 into focus, followed by another support area near \$55. For both metals, the setup is less about predicting what the dollar does next and more about watching whether support survives the pressure already being applied.

Bitcoin's Structure Has Changed

Bitcoin is giving a different signal. The pullback alongside gold and silver does not erase the structural change Gareth sees on the larger chart.

A downtrend requires lower highs and lower lows. Bitcoin has broken that sequence and is now producing higher highs and higher lows, while areas that previously acted as resistance are beginning to function as support. That changes the technical read.

It does not mean Bitcoin cannot experience another sharp pullback. It means the burden of proof has shifted. The recent advance increasingly looks like a change in trend rather than simply another bounce within the prior bearish structure. As long as Bitcoin continues defending those higher lows and former resistance holds as support, the bullish structure remains intact.

McDonald's Shows Why Price Can Matter More Than Sentiment

Gareth's McDonald's trade offered the clearest example of how this framework translates from macro analysis into an individual setup.

McDonald's recently dropped roughly 5% in a single session following negative headlines surrounding market share and restructuring costs. The easy response is to look at the news, see the selling and stay away. Gareth looked at where the selling took the stock instead.

MCD fell directly into a major long-term channel on the weekly chart, a structure connecting important pivots going back more than a decade. That creates the type of reversion setup Gareth looks for: a heavily beaten-down stock reaching a historically significant technical level while sentiment is overwhelmingly negative.

That does not make support automatic. It creates a defined trade location. The attraction is the asymmetry between buying after a large decline at established support and chasing price after the crowd has already moved in the opposite direction. If the long-term channel holds, the reversion thesis remains intact. If it fails, the chart has provided the trader with a clear signal that the setup has changed.

AI Volatility Is Creating More of These Setups

The same principle is beginning to appear elsewhere as AI developments create sharp moves across individual stocks.

Meta showed the other side of the setup. Expectations had built ahead of its AI event, but once the news arrived, the stock printed topping tails and began retracing. That is classic sell-the-news behavior: the event itself can be positive while the stock falls because price had already discounted much of the optimism beforehand. If the pullback continues, Gareth is watching a former breakout area below as the next meaningful support.

Booking Holdings and Bank of America are approaching levels that could create similar risk-defined opportunities. BKNG is selling off toward major double-bottom support near \$150, while BAC is approaching an ascending trend line just below \$55. The important part is not simply that these stocks are falling. It is where the decline takes them.

Bottom Line

The 10-year yield is sending a warning, but the S&P 500 has not confirmed it.

That is the tension defining Gareth's market framework right now. Yields have broken above 5.02% and reached roughly 5.1%, yet equities remain close to their highs and above the technical structure that keeps the near-term bias bullish. The macro pressure is real, but price still gets the final vote.

That same discipline applies across the rest of the market. Gold and silver have support levels that define whether their structures survive a stronger dollar. Bitcoin's move into higher highs and higher lows has changed its technical character. McDonald's, Booking Holdings and Bank of America show how aggressive selling can create opportunity when it reaches established support rather than simply producing more downside.

Watch the levels that force the market to prove its case. If equities hold their structure despite 5% yields, that resilience matters. If support begins breaking while yields remain elevated, the market will be telling traders something different. Until price gives that confirmation, the chart matters more than the fear surrounding it.

Gold, silver, and copper pulled back today as the U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) appears to be attempting a breakout. Platinum is also showing a developing bearish structure, while oil is moving the other way. Dollar strength is putting pressure on several metals, but the individual charts determine where the next meaningful decisions sit.

Most of these charts are trading around clearly defined technical structures, but they are not all in the same phase. Gold and silver remain inside developing patterns, platinum is testing a potentially bearish structure, and copper has already broken above its weekly channel and may be setting up for a retest.

The Dollar Is the Swing Factor for Metals

Gold, silver, and copper softened on the same move today, which points to a macro driver rather than asset-specific selling. If the DXY breakout fails and the dollar reverses, that pressure lifts, and gold and silver could have room to rebound.

Gold: A Potential Megaphone Pattern

Gold has been choppy, and the structure developing appears to be a broadening formation, often called a megaphone pattern, with swings growing slightly wider at each end.

The key level comes from the trend line. Drawing from the recent pivot low through the next pivot and extending it higher, the line lands at the level where gold pulled back on August 25. That confluence makes it the level to watch if gold makes a higher high.

There is useful precedent. Earlier in this advance, gold pressed against resistance repeatedly before finally breaking, and when it did, the move higher was sharp. A break of the megaphone could produce a similar response.

Silver and Platinum: Developing Structures

Silver is pulling back alongside gold and trading within a wedge pattern that still has room before it runs out, with a trend line above marking the upside area of interest. Nick's approach is to look for potential longs near the lower boundary and potential shorts near the upper boundary rather than chase price through the middle of the wedge.

Platinum carries a more cautious read. On a zoomed-out view, it is trading in an ascending parallel channel, and Nick views that channel as vulnerable to a downside break, particularly with a loose head-and-shoulders structure also developing. The potential right shoulder is forming into the 1,550 area, close to a psychological level. A confirmed break below the neckline, ideally followed by a retest, would point toward lower levels.

Copper, Oil, and Natural Gas

Copper has broken out of its ascending parallel channel on the weekly chart, extending a long-term advance off the July 2022 low. Today's dollar-driven pullback may be setting up a retest of that channel.

Crude oil is diverging, moving higher despite the stronger dollar. A descending trend line from the March 2026 peak, confirmed by the April touch, rejected price again on September 15, with an ascending trend line below. Nick is not interested in a trade unless price reaches one of those boundaries.

Natural gas, tracked here through the United States Natural Gas Fund (UNG), is trading within a wedge drawn from the March 9 pivot top and the April 30 pivot low. Nick previously opened longer-dated UNG options near the lower boundary of the wedge, has already scaled out of most of the position, and is holding a small remainder as price approaches the descending trend line. A return to the lower boundary is where he would consider adding.

What to Watch Next

• DXY: A confirmed breakout would likely keep pressure on the metals complex, while a reversal could give gold and silver room to rebound.
• Gold: A higher high toward the August 25 level, and ultimately a resolution of the megaphone pattern.
• Platinum: The 1,550 area for a potential right shoulder, and a confirmed break and retest of the neckline for a bearish signal.

Key Levels to Monitor

Conclusion: Structure Over Headlines

Today's pullback in the metals is largely a dollar story, but it is not the whole story. Oil is moving the other way, copper has already broken out, and gold, silver, and platinum each sit at a different point in their own patterns. The dollar sets the pressure; the charts define where that pressure is likely to matter.

The discipline is in the waiting. Megaphones, wedges, and channels tend to offer clearer information at their edges than in their middles. Until the dollar resolves and these structures confirm or fail, the process matters more than any single day's candle.

Watch on YouTube

The most important signal into today's close was not simply that stocks sold off. It was that two major indexes treated nearly identical breakout setups very differently.

Earlier this week, both the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite pushed through declining trend lines. The Nasdaq followed its breakout with another move higher. The S&P did not. That difference is now showing up clearly in the charts.

It is a useful reminder of why the first move through resistance is rarely enough. A breakout tells you price crossed a level. Extension tells you buyers were willing to keep paying higher prices after the level was cleared. Without that second step, traders remain vulnerable to exactly what happened in the S&P today: price rolled over, lost the breakout line and turned what looked bullish earlier in the week back into a questionable setup.

With Treasury yields pressing higher at the same time, confirmation matters even more. The market is not trading in an environment where every breakout deserves the benefit of the doubt.

The S&P Failed the Test. Nasdaq Hasn't Yet.

The S&P's breakout looked constructive when price initially pushed above its declining trend line. What it never produced was meaningful extension above Monday's high.

That became the warning.

On the 10-minute chart, price eventually slipped back through the trend line, attempted a weak reclaim and then continued lower. Rather than expanding away from resistance after the breakout, the S&P effectively fell back into the prior structure.

That puts attention back on support. SPY has an important area around $760.40, a level price has already interacted with several times. Another test becomes increasingly important because repeated interaction with support can reduce the amount of buying interest waiting there.

The Nasdaq is giving traders a different read.

After clearing its own declining trend line, the Nasdaq extended higher on Tuesday. That extra push created separation between price and the breakout level before today's weakness arrived. As a result, the index is still holding above its declining trend line, with near-term support around 26,692.

That does not guarantee the Nasdaq holds. It does show why extension matters.

Two charts can technically "break out," but they are not necessarily telling traders the same thing. The S&P crossed resistance and stalled. The Nasdaq crossed resistance and proved there were buyers above it. Today's pullback exposed that difference.

The 10-Year Yield Raises the Bar for Equity Breakouts

The bond market is making that distinction more important.

The Federal Reserve raised its target range by 25 basis points last week to 3.75%-4.00%, and longer-term yields remain elevated. The Federal Reserve's latest published H.15 data showed the 10-year Treasury yield at 4.96% on September 21 after trading at 5.01% on September 18.

On Drew's chart, the broader technical structure remains the bigger issue. The 10-year has been climbing through a long-term channel that stretches back decades, while momentum has pushed into overbought territory.

The next levels on that structure sit around 5.76%, followed by 6.249%.

Those are not predictions that yields must travel there. They are the next technical areas that become relevant if the current move continues.

For equities, the transmission mechanism is straightforward. Higher long-term yields raise the hurdle for valuations, particularly in areas where investors are paying heavily for future growth or comparing equity income against increasingly competitive fixed-income returns.

That is why today's failed S&P breakout deserves more attention than it would in isolation. The index lost momentum while one of the market's larger macro pressures is still moving in the wrong direction for equity multiples.

Semiconductors Show Where Strength Still Exists

SMH remains one of the more useful counterpoints to the broader weakness.

The semiconductor ETF pulled back roughly 1% today, but its larger structure remains much stronger than the S&P's. Since the April 2025 low, semiconductors have produced an unusually large advance within a broad parallel channel.

The short-term chart, however, shows why traders still need to respect resistance even inside a strong trend.

After breaking a declining trend line, SMH moved rapidly higher over seven sessions. The 61.8% Fibonacci retracement of the most recent downswing came in at approximately $607.58, and that is where price ran into resistance today.

That gives traders a clean framework.

If SMH stabilizes and eventually clears $607.58, the strength of the larger semiconductor trend remains difficult to ignore. If selling continues, the top of the prior parallel channel around $585.15 becomes the more important support test.

The lesson is not that semiconductors are immune to today's pressure. It is that the sector has more technical cushion than the S&P currently does.

That internal divergence is worth watching. If SMH continues holding structure while the major indexes weaken, leadership has not fully broken. If semiconductor support begins failing as well, the weakness becomes broader.

Gold Breaks Structure While Silver Holds Its Line

Precious metals are also separating technically.

Gold closed beneath the rising parallel channel that had supported price since April 2025. That changes the near-term chart. As long as price remains below that channel, the next important support area comes in near $4,219.

Silver took the larger percentage decline today, but its technical structure is arguably cleaner.

Price is sitting near an important trend line around $64.53. That level also corresponds with the neckline area from the prior head-and-shoulders setup that failed to confirm.

As long as silver continues producing daily closes above that level, the bullish structure has not been invalidated. A confirmed close beneath it would change the setup.

This is another example of why the size of the daily move can be misleading. Silver fell harder today, but gold is the asset that actually broke an important piece of chart structure.

Bitcoin Returns to the Other Side of Its Old Breakdown

Bitcoin is dealing with a similar support-versus-resistance problem.

The bottom of its parallel channel recently held and prevented further downside following the prior head-and-shoulders breakdown. That defense helped Bitcoin rebound, but the bounce now creates a different test.

The old neckline near $88,858 becomes resistance on the way back up.

That is a common piece of market structure. Support that breaks can become resistance when approached from underneath. Traders who bought around the old level and sat through the breakdown may use a return to that price as an opportunity to exit, creating supply where buyers previously expected support.

Ethereum has its own version of that problem. Its parallel channel held, but price faces a rising resistance trend line dating back to 2022, with another resistance area around $3,041.

The broader lesson applies beyond crypto: watch how price behaves when it returns to a level shortly after testing it.

A strong rejection from support followed by sustained extension is constructive. A small bounce followed by an immediate return to the same level deserves more caution. Each test can consume some of the orders that created the initial reaction.

Individual Stocks: Let Price Come to the Setup

Today's weakness also produced several individual charts worth monitoring, but the same rule applies to all of them: the level comes before the trade.

McDonald's is a good example. The stock broke beneath a rising parallel channel that had contained price since 2022. Rather than trying to catch the first drop, Drew's chart points farther down to a larger confluence area near $232.79, where the 50% Fibonacci retracement from the COVID-era low aligns with prior consolidation.

The daily RSI is also deeply oversold, but that alone is not the setup. The attraction is the combination of price support, Fibonacci structure and stretched momentum. If $232.79 is tested and holds, a rebound toward the broken channel near $273.55 comes into view.

Google is much closer to its level. Shares sold off into the $332.60-$333 area, where a gap fill intersects with a rising support trend line.

What matters next is the reaction.

A decisive bounce would confirm that buyers are still defending the trend. If price only drifts away from support and quickly returns, that defense becomes less convincing. The first nearby upside area sits around $340.64.

Fastly offers the opposite type of setup because traders are waiting for confirmation rather than support. FSLY is forming a multi-month inverse head-and-shoulders pattern, but the pattern has not triggered. A daily close above the neckline near $29.83 would provide that confirmation.

Until then, it remains a setup, not a breakout.

If confirmed, $34.82 becomes the first meaningful resistance area before the larger measured move comes into play.

The Bottom Line

Today's close offered a useful reminder that crossing resistance and confirming a breakout are not the same thing.

The S&P moved through its declining trend line but never generated the extension needed to strengthen the breakout. The Nasdaq did, and that extra confirmation is why its structure remains intact despite today's weakness.

At the same time, elevated Treasury yields are raising the standard for bullish equity setups. Semiconductors still have technical strength, but even SMH is encountering defined Fibonacci resistance. Gold has already broken an important channel, while silver remains above its key line. Bitcoin and Ethereum are running into former support and longer-term resistance.

The common thread is confirmation.

Do not treat the first touch, first break or first bounce as the entire setup. Watch what price does afterward. A real move should create separation from the level. When it cannot, the chart is telling you something.

That is the framework to carry into the next session: know the level, wait for price to prove itself, and let extension separate the breakout from the fakeout.

Early this week, SPY looked ready to break to new all-time highs. The S&P 500 ETF had rallied steadily since Friday on renewed AI enthusiasm, reached about $775 on Tuesday, and brought the $780 area into view. Since then it has given back roughly 1%.

But what matters is the shape it's leaving on the chart. SPY is building a potential head and shoulders pattern, a bearish reversal structure. It isn't complete, and it hasn't triggered.

It also isn't the only signal on the board. QQQ has gone from lagging the market to testing its own highs. So the two major index charts aren't showing the same setup, and that makes waiting for confirmation more important than guessing direction.

SPY: A Bearish Pattern That Still Needs Confirmation

The structure on SPY tilts slightly upward instead of sitting flat. That's less textbook than a horizontal neckline, but the pattern is still valid. The left shoulder and head are in place, and the right shoulder is forming now.

A break below the neckline would confirm it. From there, the standard measured move takes the distance from the top of the head down to the neckline and projects it below the breakdown point. On this chart, that points back toward the May lows, a decline of roughly 6% depending on where the break happens.

There are two common ways to approach a confirmed head and shoulders: the initial neckline break, or a later retest of the neckline that gets rejected from below. The retest case matters because broken support often acts as resistance.

Until the neckline breaks, this is a setup and not a signal.

QQQ: From Laggard to Leader

QQQ tells a different story.

For much of this year, SPY led. It made a higher high on August 13, while QQQ stayed about 2% below its prior peak. Tech was the weaker part of the market.

That gap has mostly closed. QQQ tested its all-time highs this week, which shows tech has not only caught up but is now showing more relative strength than it did during SPY's earlier advance. The two charts have usually moved together, so this shift in leadership stands out.

QQQ doesn't have a head and shoulders pattern. Its key reference is a rising trendline. If the trendline holds, the current structure stays intact. A confirmed break would bring the $670 area into focus, about 7.5% to 8% lower depending on where the trendline breaks. The same break-or-retest logic applies.

AMD vs. SMH: Strength Isn't Uniform

The semiconductor picture adds context without settling the question.

AMD made a new all-time high today before pulling back. That's real strength, but it doesn't describe the whole group. SMH, the semiconductor ETF, is still well below its peak, and so are Micron, Nvidia, and Broadcom.

One stock can lead without its sector confirming the move. Anyone using chip strength to judge tech leadership should look at the basket, not just the best performer in it.

The Reaction Matters More Than the Headline

Two stocks on today's list show the same idea from different sides.

IONQ announced what it calls the industry's first end-to-end, real-time quantum error-correction decoder running on a standard CPU. The stock gapped up about 12% to 13% on the news, then gave back most of the move and was up as little as 2% at one point. Other quantum names that rallied in sympathy turned negative. That's a clear case of selling the news: the announcement may be good for the company, but buyers weren't willing to hold the opening gain.

McDonald's sold off after announcing a reinvestment plan that includes about $8.5 billion in franchisee support and targets operating margins around 50% by 2030, along with upgrades to its food and restaurants. The long-term goals are constructive. The concern is that the spending is front-loaded. The stock is now down about 31% from its March high and trading at levels last seen in 2022. After a decline that size, this zone is worth watching for a technical bounce. If selling continues, the 2021 lows become the next reference.

In both cases, the headline explains why traders are paying attention, and the price reaction shows how the market is actually taking the news.

What to Watch Next

• SPY neckline: This is the decision point. A confirmed break activates the measured move toward the May lows. Until then, the pattern is unconfirmed.
• QQQ rising trendline: If it holds, tech's relative strength stays intact. A break shifts focus toward $670.
• Semiconductor participation: Broader confirmation of tech strength would mean more of SMH joining AMD near highs.

The Bottom Line

SPY is building a bearish pattern, but it hasn't triggered, while QQQ has caught up and is now showing stronger relative strength. When the two main index charts aren't showing the same setup, the edge comes from defining the levels in advance and letting price decide.

The SPY neckline and the QQQ trendline are the two levels that settle it. Until one of them breaks, the useful insight is whether the signal confirms.

Watch on YouTube

5.02% Is the Level That Can Change the Market Read

The stock market is pulling back after three straight positive sessions, but the more important signal this morning is coming from bonds. The 10-year Treasury yield is pressing back toward 5%, and Gareth Soloway’s framework is straightforward: the equity market does not need to fear every tick higher in yields, but a confirmed breakout above the October 2023 high would change the conversation.

That level is 5.02%. The 10-year has spent an extended period moving sideways beneath resistance instead of sharply rejecting it, creating the type of consolidation that can eventually resolve higher. Gareth is not calling the breakout early. His confirmation remains a daily close above 5.02%. Until that happens, resistance is still resistance. If it does happen, the bond market would be breaking a level that has capped yields for nearly three years.

That is the line in the sand because higher yields transmit into almost every part of the market. They tighten financial conditions, increase borrowing costs and put pressure on the valuations investors are willing to pay. The Federal Reserve also returned to tightening last week, raising its target range to 3.75%-4.00% as inflation remained elevated. For Gareth, the chart still comes first. The market can absorb yields testing resistance. A confirmed move through it would require a different risk assessment.

Oil Is Bouncing. That Does Not Mean the Selloff Is Over

Crude oil is finally bouncing after five consecutive down sessions and a roughly $15 slide from $107 toward $92. Gareth’s point was not that oil suddenly turned bullish. It was that after a decline of that size, directly into a meaningful support zone, a bounce should not be surprising.

The area around $93 to $94 is doing the work. It lines up with a prior pivot high and gives crude a logical place to stabilize after the recent selling. What matters next is whether buyers can build from that support or whether the bounce simply relieves an oversold move before sellers return.

That distinction also matters for the refiners. Wide refining margins have been a major source of profitability, but the group has come under heavy pressure as the energy narrative shifts. Gareth pointed specifically to names such as Valero, Phillips 66 and Marathon Petroleum as examples where the charts have become increasingly extended to the downside. Rather than treating today's oil bounce as an automatic all-clear for the sector, the better read is to see whether crude can first prove it has established a durable floor.

Gold and Silver Still Have Their Trend

Rising yields and a stronger dollar are creating a difficult backdrop for precious metals, with silver taking the larger hit this morning. Yet Gareth has not changed his broader technical read because neither gold nor silver has broken the structure that matters.

Both remain inside rising channels, and their lower trend lines continue to define support. That leaves a simple framework: weakness inside the channel is different from a breakdown of the channel.

As Gareth put it, “You have to assume support will hold until proven.”

That is especially useful on a session when the headlines and percentage losses can look more dramatic than the chart itself. Gold and silver are under pressure, but the technical damage does not arrive until support actually fails. Until then, the pullback is occurring inside an existing uptrend rather than replacing it.

Natural Gas Has a Breakout, but Gareth Wants Confirmation

Natural gas is producing the cleaner energy setup. Price pushed above $3.00 yesterday after an extended consolidation, putting a potential breakout into play. Gareth, however, wants another daily close above approximately $3.02 before treating the move as confirmed.

That second close matters because it separates a breakout that can hold from another brief move above resistance that gets sold back down. If natural gas confirms above the level, Gareth sees the next meaningful area around the cluster of prior highs near $3.30.

The setup is a good example of the broader discipline running through today's Game Plan. The move itself is not enough. Confirmation determines whether the chart has actually changed.

AI Is Creating a New Kind of Selloff

The more unusual theme this morning is coming from stocks that historically would not have been viewed as obvious AI casualties. Software has already spent years dealing with the question of AI disruption. Gareth is now watching that pressure spread into areas such as banking, travel and consumer services.

The market's concern is simple. AI assistants are becoming increasingly capable of comparison shopping, monitoring personal finances and eliminating some of the friction that businesses have traditionally monetized. For banks, that could mean consumers becoming better at avoiding certain fees. For travel companies, it could mean customers finding better prices with less effort.

Whether those fears ultimately justify the magnitude of the current repricing is a separate question. Gareth's job as a trader is not to settle the long-term AI debate. It is to identify where fear may push a quality company into a technical level that changes the risk/reward.

That is why Booking Holdings and Bank of America are more interesting to him lower, not after trying to catch the first leg of the selloff.

Two Levels Gareth Is Stalking

For Booking Holdings, Gareth is watching the area around $150. A deeper flush toward that price would bring the stock into a major historical support area built around multiple prior lows. The attraction is not simply that the stock would be cheaper. It is that a defined technical level would give the trade a clearer structure after a disorderly decline.

Bank of America has a similar setup developing around $55, where a rising trend line is approaching price. Again, Gareth is not treating the current weakness as a reason to buy immediately. The level is the reason to become interested.

That is an important difference. When a stock is selling off because the market is aggressively repricing a new risk, the goal is not to guess where fear ends. It is to know where the chart gives you a reason to act.

Housing Feels the Yield Pressure

The move in interest rates is also showing up in housing. Mortgage borrowing costs remain elevated, with Freddie Mac's latest weekly survey putting the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate at 6.95%. That continues to squeeze affordability and creates a difficult backdrop for homebuilders.

KB Home is feeling that pressure even after reporting respectable earnings. Gareth is not interested in stepping in simply because the stock is down. His preferred area is closer to $42.50, roughly $4 below where he was discussing it during the show, where the stock would move into a more meaningful support zone.

The logic is the same as Booking and Bank of America. Price weakness alone does not create the trade. Price weakness into a predefined level can.

Bitcoin Pulls Back Into a Better Structure

Bitcoin is also giving back some ground after running into the resistance Gareth had been watching. A deeper pullback brings the low-$81,000 area into focus as the next support zone.

What has changed is the broader structure. Bitcoin recently produced a higher high, an important improvement after the weakness that defined the previous decline. That does not mean every pullback should automatically be bought, but it does shift Gareth's framework away from assuming rallies will fail and toward watching support for higher-low opportunities.

For now, Bitcoin is doing what many of today's markets are doing: moving between clearly defined technical levels without yet breaking the larger structure.

Bottom Line

The market has several moving pieces this morning, but they do not deserve equal weight.

The 10-year Treasury yield at 5.02% is the level with the greatest ability to change the broader market framework. A test is not a breakout. Gareth wants the daily close before adjusting the read.

Below that macro signal, the opportunities are becoming more selective. Crude is bouncing from $93-$94 after five down days. Gold and silver remain above trend support. Natural gas has pushed through $3.00 but still needs confirmation above roughly $3.02. Booking near $150, Bank of America near $55 and KB Home near $42.50 are levels to stalk rather than reasons to chase falling stocks.

That is the Game Plan today: let the market come to the level, then make it prove the setup.

The Fed explains why the dollar has strengthened. The more useful signal now is what is happening on the other side of the trade.

The DXY is pressing into resistance that dates back to January 2025. At the same time, the yen, euro and yuan are testing important technical areas of their own, and the pound is compressing toward the end of a long coil. Chart the dollar alone and you only see half the setup.

The DXY measures the dollar against a basket of currencies, so the condition of those currencies is part of the dollar's chart. When several of them line up against the dollar at once, the case for a rejection at resistance gets stronger. If that rejection develops, gold and Bitcoin are the two assets to watch most closely.

The Hawkish Fed Is Already in the Price

The dollar has been rising since February, and the reason is the Federal Reserve. Under Kevin Warsh, the Fed has raised rates, and the policy outlook leaves room for more increases. That is not the path many expected when Warsh was nominated. The White House wanted a chair who would cut. Warsh has instead positioned himself as independent and focused on inflation.

The dollar has spent the year pricing in that more aggressive Fed, and it has now reached a technical ceiling. With resistance overhead and counter-currencies at key levels, the hawkish story has less room to push the dollar higher on its own.

Cross-Currency Structure: Three Supporting Charts and a Coil

Japanese Yen: A Bull Flag in Spirit

The yen broke a descending trendline and then formed a bull flag. It does not fully meet Nick's criteria. He looks for a defined retracement angled between roughly 45 and 90 degrees that holds above half of the flagpole. This one sits near 45 degrees and has slipped slightly past the 50% mark. It is a bull flag in spirit, and somewhat less reliable than a clean one.

Nick also points to Japan's willingness to support the yen as another factor behind the setup, which makes a move higher before any retest of the flag's lower boundary a reasonable possibility.

Euro: A Double Layer of Support

The euro is approaching two overlapping support levels: an extended trendline and former resistance that has turned into support, which is clearer on the weekly chart. Price may drift sideways into this area, but the overlap gives the euro a stronger support zone than either level would provide alone.

Chinese Yuan: 530 Days Into Long-Term Resistance

The yuan has risen almost without pause for about 530 days on the daily chart. It is now at the pivot top from January 2023.

If it breaks that level, Nick does not favor a straight continuation. His preferred path is a breakout, a pullback to retest the broken level, and then a continuation higher. Above that sits a larger test: a descending trendline on the weekly chart that starts in January 2014 and was last retested in February 2022. A third touch of a 12-year trendline is major resistance, and how the yuan handles it will say a lot about how much weakness the dollar has left.

British Pound: Direction Undecided

The pound works differently from the other three. It does not confirm the dollar thesis. It is coiling between a rising trendline and a slightly falling one that meet around April 2027, which is not far off for a currency. The longer a pattern like this coils, the larger the eventual break tends to be, and the break could go either way. The pound adds to the sense that currency volatility is building, but it does not add a direction.

Why Gold and Bitcoin Are in Focus

A weaker dollar would give dollar-priced hard assets a more supportive backdrop. Gold is the most direct case, with silver and, to a lesser extent, oil also exposed. Bitcoin is the other asset Nick is watching most closely, and the timing matters more for it because it appears to be coming out of a bear market. In his view, these two are where flows leaving the dollar are most likely to go.

Key Levels and Signals

What to Watch Next

The key signal is how the DXY reacts at resistance. A rejection while the yen, euro and yuan hold their levels would confirm the thesis and put gold and Bitcoin in focus. A clean dollar breakout, most likely on more hawkish Fed signaling, would invalidate it, and the counter-currency levels would likely come under pressure.

On the yuan, watch whether a break of the 2023 pivot top is followed by a retest that holds. On the yen, watch whether the flag's lower boundary holds.

Conclusion: Read the Whole Basket, Not Just the Dollar

The Fed explains the dollar's strength. The charts show where that strength is being tested, and the test is lining up across markets. No single pattern here guarantees a result, but together they shift the odds toward a dollar pullback.

The chart does not require traders to anticipate the rejection. The signal comes if the DXY fails at resistance while the currencies on the other side hold or start to turn higher. A clean dollar breakout would change that read.

Watch on YouTube

Following a massive, tech-led surge to kick off the week, the broader markets entered a period of digestion and consolidation today. As the dust settles from last week's triple options expiration, traders are navigating a complex landscape defined by diverging sector performance, critical geopolitical developments, and major technical inflection points. In this afternoon's Trading The Close Market Recap, Pro Trader Drew Dosek at Verified Investing broke down the charts, revealing why the technology sector continues to command the market's attention, while financials and commodities flash warning signs and opportunities of their own.

This article expands on the key technical setups and psychological trading concepts discussed in today's show, providing traders with a comprehensive roadmap for the days ahead.

The Post-Expiration Unpinning and Market Breadth

To understand today's muted price action, we first have to contextualize the explosive momentum witnessed during Monday's session. The markets recently emerged from a triple options expiration—a quarterly event where stock options, stock index futures, and stock index options all expire on the same day.

Historically, the weeks leading up to these massive expirations can artificially pin stock prices as market makers hedge their massive derivative books. Once those contracts expire worthless or are rolled over, that institutional pressure is alleviated. This unpinning effect was the primary catalyst for the sudden, aggressive rally in the AI and data center space that caught many off guard.

However, today's price action on the S&P 500 painted a different picture. The index remained largely flat, characterized by a morning dip at 9:30 AM followed by a gradual, muted recovery. This is textbook market behavior; after a low-volume, straight-up directional move, the market typically requires a period of consolidation to digest those gains. For bullish traders, the primary objective is simple: the S&P 500 needs to maintain its position above the recently broken declining trend line. Any pullbacks to this trend line should be viewed as potential buying opportunities, provided the broader market structure remains intact.

Tech Takes the Wheel: The NASDAQ's March to 28,000

While the S&P 500 took a breather, the technology sector refused to hit the brakes. The NASDAQ Composite (IXIC) breached brand new all-time highs today, definitively proving that tech remains the undisputed market leader.

This relentless strength is being fueled by the ongoing AI data center buildout. The demand for computational power is so immense that even older generations of computer chips are seeing price increases. But from a technical perspective, this parabolic move is rapidly approaching a historic collision course with resistance.

Pro Trader Drew identified a massive technical confluence approaching on the IXIC chart:

"X marks the spot double layer of resistance. If we continue in this fashion, this would be a very hard level to get through on the first attempt."

This target sits squarely at the 28,000 level. In technical analysis, whole round numbers often act as formidable psychological barriers, as institutional algorithms and retail traders alike tend to place profit-taking limit orders at these clean intervals. But 28,000 is not just a psychological level; it aligns perfectly with a trend line connecting two major historical pivots—one from November 2021 and another from December 2024. When a psychological round number perfectly intersects with a multi-year structural trend line, the probability of a sharp rejection or prolonged consolidation increases exponentially.

Semiconductor Strength: Analyzing the SMH Breakouts

Nowhere is the tech sector's dominance more apparent than in the Semiconductor ETF (SMH). In a rare display of technical strength, the SMH has triggered three distinct breakouts in just the last four trading days:

1. A breakout above a long-term declining trend line from all-time highs (confirmed last Friday).
2. A breakout above the daily 50-period moving average (confirmed yesterday).
3. A breakout from an inclining parallel channel (confirmed today).

However, trees do not grow to the sky. The SMH ran directly into a brick wall of resistance today at $607.58. This precise level represents the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement drawn from the recent highs down to the July 29th lows.

The 61.8% Fibonacci level, often referred to as the "golden ratio," is arguably the most important retracement level in technical analysis. It frequently serves as the ultimate battleground between bulls and bears. Compounding this resistance is the Relative Strength Index (RSI), which is rapidly approaching the 70 threshold, indicating near-term overbought conditions.

For disciplined traders, chasing the SMH at $607.58 is a low-probability endeavor. Instead, the professional approach is to wait for a "breakout retrace"—a pullback to the top of the recently broken parallel channel. This retest of former resistance turning into new support offers a much safer, high-probability entry for those looking to capitalize on continued semiconductor strength.

Financials Flash Warning Signs

While technology stocks soar, the financial sector is painting a starkly different technical picture. Major banking institutions found themselves under significant selling pressure today, approaching critical support zones that could dictate the sector's medium-term trajectory.

JPMorgan Chase (JPM) suffered a 3.42% decline, pushing price action dangerously close to a critical cluster of weekly wicks at $343.15. If JPM closes the week below this threshold, the technical damage could accelerate a move down to the primary inclining trend line from the April 2025 lows, sitting at $325.14. Just below that lies the 50% median line of its multi-year parallel channel at $320.75.

Wells Fargo (WFC) and Bank of America (BAC) are exhibiting similar vulnerabilities, and both are approaching their own 61.8% Fibonacci retracement levels. WFC is targeting a critical support zone at $80.12, while BAC is eyeing $55.38.

This divergence between tech and financials is a crucial macro indicator. It suggests that while capital is aggressively hunting growth in the AI sector, there is underlying institutional caution regarding the broader economy, interest rates, or consumer health, which typically manifests in banking sector weakness.

Commodities and Geopolitics: Oil, Gold, and Natural Gas

The commodity markets are currently a battleground of technical patterns and geopolitical headlines. With the UN General Assembly convening this week and high-stakes meetings scheduled between global leaders, headline risk is at a premium.

U.S. Oil's Structural Battle

Despite ongoing tensions, U.S. Oil prices have been declining on the back of potential Middle East peace talks. Oil is currently trapped in a consolidation range, with near-term downside support pegged at the bottom of its parallel channel at $86.38.

However, the broader structural chart tells a more complex story. Oil is currently tracing out a massive inverse head and shoulders pattern. The neckline for this bullish reversal pattern is a diagonal declining trend line. If geopolitical winds shift and oil can break above this neckline, the pattern carries a staggering measured move target of $116.27. Until that neckline breaks, however, the path of least resistance remains lower toward channel support.

The Precious Metals Divergence

Gold and silver are showcasing fascinating price action, heavily influenced by the stabilization of the 10-year Treasury yield. Gold put in a fantastic close today, maintaining its position within an inclining parallel channel at $4,332. The metal has formed a textbook V-shaped recovery followed by bullish consolidation—a highly constructive pattern that suggests a coming push toward the next major resistance at $4,575.

Silver, meanwhile, showed even more relative strength, pushing toward the high end of its recent range. The metal recently invalidated a bearish head and shoulders pattern, saving itself from a severe breakdown. Now, it is forming a new inverse head and shoulders pattern. Silver is currently in a race against its neckline; a breakout could send it surging toward $72.07, while failure to hold could see it retest support levels at $64.63 and $71.01. The immediate speed bump for silver bulls remains resistance at $67.99.

Natural Gas: The Anatomy of a Blowout

Perhaps the most impressive chart of the day belongs to Natural Gas, which executed a flawless technical breakout. After bottoming in August, NatGas formed a V-shaped recovery, consolidated bullishly, broke out, retraced to test support, and has now bounced violently higher.

This sequence—breakout, retrace, bounce—is the holy grail of swing trading. NatGas is now targeting a major declining trend line at $3.24. Given the structural damage done to the bear thesis, it is highly probable that NatGas will eventually break back into its massive macro parallel channel dating back to February 2024.

Bitcoin's Critical Juncture

In the cryptocurrency space, Bitcoin took a breather today following yesterday's massive surge. But zooming out to the weekly timeframe reveals that the world's largest digital asset is at a make-or-break technical juncture.

Bitcoin is currently testing the neckline of a massive, active head and shoulders pattern at $89,154. This is the exact level from which price previously broke down. In technical analysis, broken support frequently acts as new resistance.

However, Bitcoin has recently formed a powerful bull flag pattern on the lower timeframes. If Bitcoin can secure a daily close above the $89,154 neckline, the bearish head and shoulders target is completely wiped off the chart, paving the way for a return to all-time highs. Until that daily close is secured, traders must respect the overhead supply, utilizing previous resistance at $80,524 as a gauge for near-term momentum.

The Psychology of Chart Patterns

Perhaps the most profound takeaway from today's market analysis is the underlying philosophy of why these technical levels work. It is easy for retail traders to get lost in the lines, Fibonacci sequences, and parallel channels, forgetting what these tools actually represent.

As Pro Trader Drew eloquently explained:

"We're emotional roller coasters as humans, aren't we? I mean, we can't deny that. We're hot on something, then we're cold on that… guys, we are emotional beings, and thus, that's what happens in the charts."

Technical analysis is not magic; it is the visual representation of mass human psychology. A support level holds because enough human beings (and the algorithms programmed by them) feel the pain of missing out and step in to buy. A resistance level holds because the trauma of past losses at that specific price point triggers a wave of selling.

We saw this psychological battle play out perfectly in individual stocks today. Sandis executed a flawless breakout from an inverse head and shoulders pattern, confirming its move and opening the door for a measured move target of $26.25, with near-term resistance at $19.50.

Conversely, On Holding (ONON) attempted a breakout, surging 7.58% intraday, only to succumb to selling pressure and close back underneath its critical declining trend line at $29.85. The failure to hold the breakout level is a visual representation of sellers overwhelming buyers at a known historical pivot. ONON must now prove itself all over again before it can target the $35 median line of its parallel channel.

This is why professional traders place so much emphasis on the closing price. Intraday price action is often driven by emotion, news algorithms, and stop-loss hunting. The closing price, however, represents the final consensus of value for the day.

"That's our show, where price action closes because that's what really carries the weight over into tomorrow…"

Conclusion: Discipline in a Divergent Market

As we navigate the remainder of this trading week, the market is presenting a masterclass in divergence. We have a technology sector operating in a state of euphoria, pushing against historic, multi-layered resistance zones. Simultaneously, we have a financial sector flashing warning signs, and commodity markets reacting violently to geopolitical chess moves.

For traders and investors, this environment demands strict adherence to technical levels and probability-based execution. Whether it's waiting for the SMH to pull back to channel support, watching to see if Bitcoin can close above $89,154, or monitoring the banking sector's reaction to the 61.8% Fibonacci retracements, the roadmap is clearly drawn.

Success in these conditions does not come from predicting the news or guessing the outcome of geopolitical meetings. It comes from mapping the charts, identifying where the highest probabilities lie, and having the emotional discipline to execute when the market comes to your levels. By removing the emotional roller coaster and relying on the data, traders can navigate these complex crosscurrents with confidence and precision.

Crude oil has pulled back since tagging the top of its trading channel earlier in September. The selling picked up as price closed back beneath that area, and the move is now showing up beyond energy. Gold and silver have drifted sideways to lower as crude has fallen. That makes the link between the three one of the more useful signals in the commodity complex right now.

Here is the key point. Oil's decline is easing some of the inflation pressure that had been supporting precious metals, but the oil chart has not broken its larger bullish structure. The pullback matters, and so does where it stops.

Oil Is Pulling Back Into Support

Since the July low pivot, U.S. oil has traded inside a well-defined parallel channel. The recent decline carried price from the upper end of that channel back to a cluster of prior consolidation pivots. That cluster includes the shelf formed around July 23 and 24, and yesterday's close landed right on top of it.

That gives the current area technical weight. The expectation is for price to defend this zone and attempt a bounce over the next couple of sessions.

If price keeps falling instead, the next support sits near $86.32 at the bottom of the parallel channel. That level also lines up with earlier pivots, which gives it more weight than the channel boundary alone.

Geopolitics are part of the picture. Progress toward a resolution in the Middle East could strip out more of crude's risk premium, bring that lower channel support into play, and possibly push price further.

The Bigger Oil Level Sits Near $82

A second structure sits underneath the parallel channel, and it matters more if the pullback deepens.

Oil previously broke above a declining trend line that also serves as the neckline of a larger bullish reversal pattern. That breakout has not yet been retested. The pattern's measured move projects toward $116.64. While oil holds above the broken trend line, that projection stays technically in play.

That is why a deeper decline would not automatically change the larger read. A drop toward the neckline near $82 would bring price back to where the breakout happened and set up the first retest of that structure. A bounce there would keep the path toward the measured move open. A break back below that neckline would materially weaken the bullish structure and negate the setup.

Why Gold and Silver Are Feeling the Oil Move

Gold and silver have both been under modest pressure over the past two sessions, with gold down only about 0.3%. What may be driving the move matters more than how big it is.

Part of the demand for precious metals has come from inflation concern, and oil feeds directly into that concern. As crude falls, that can take some inflation-hedge demand off the table. It helps explain why gold and silver have moved sideways to lower even as the 10-year yield has eased. Softer crude appears to be offsetting some of the support the metals might otherwise get from lower yields.

Gold: Fighting to Stay Inside Its Channel

Gold is testing the lower boundary of a parallel channel that dates back to April. Price spent roughly a month to six weeks below that structure before reclaiming it. It slipped under again briefly on September 15 and 16, then recovered quickly.

The same boundary is being tested again. On the 10-minute chart, price has been rejected several times and is making another attempt. A close above $4,334 would help gold hold a bullish-to-neutral posture after the recent pullback. If the channel gives way, the next support is near $4,241, where the September pivot low meets a rising trend line.

Silver: A Failed Breakdown Changes the Setup

Silver is sending a different kind of signal. An earlier head-and-shoulders breakdown failed, and price has since stabilized near a rising trend line in what looks like bullish consolidation. Failed breakdowns matter because they can shift pressure back toward the other side of the range.

A developing bullish reversal pattern is now in view, with neckline resistance in the $69.30 to $69.60 area. A confirmed move above that zone would raise the odds of a push toward roughly $85 in the near to mid term. It would also improve the chances of price moving up to retest the longer-term trend line from the August 2025 lows, which silver broke earlier. Silver still has several resistance levels to work through, so a neckline break would be the first confirmation, not a guarantee of the larger move.

Key Levels to Watch

What Matters Next

Oil is still the anchor for the group. The first question is whether crude can stabilize around its current pivot shelf. A reaction there would keep the pullback contained. Continued selling would shift attention to $86.32, and beneath that to the more important neckline near $82.

That matters for the metals because further weakness in crude could keep some inflation-hedge demand on the sidelines. A bounce in oil could restore some of that pressure, but gold and silver still have their own levels to work through.

The key thesis-changing level is oil near $82. For gold, a close above $4,334 keeps the channel intact, and $4,241 is the next support if it fails. For silver, the bullish case needs a break above the $69.30 to $69.60 neckline before the larger upside setup becomes more credible.

Process Over Headlines

Crude looks weak if you only look at the recent decline. Zoom out, and the larger breakout structure has not failed.

That is the more useful distinction. Gold and silver are reacting to a change in oil's inflation signal, while oil itself is approaching the levels that will show whether this is a pullback or the start of something more meaningful.

The job now is to consider which levels strengthen the current read, which ones weaken it, and to let price do the confirming.

Watch on YouTube

The most important chart in this market is not crude oil, the 10-year Treasury yield, AMD, or even Bitcoin.

It is the S&P 500.

After spending the past several sessions absorbing 5% Treasury yields, elevated crude prices, and another round of Federal Reserve tightening, the index finally pushed through the technical level Gareth Soloway had been watching near 7,700. Monday’s 114-point advance took the S&P 500 to 7,764.70 and turned what had been a developing bull flag into a confirmed breakout on Gareth’s chart.

That matters because several other markets are now moving in ways that support the same risk-on setup. Treasury yields have backed away from 5%. Crude oil has fallen sharply. Technology stocks are breaking higher. Bitcoin has pushed through an important prior high.

The question now is not whether Monday was bullish. It clearly was.

The more useful question is what would keep that breakout intact.

7,700 Becomes the S&P 500 Line to Defend

The S&P 500 spent last week consolidating beneath a descending trendline drawn from the August 28 high through the September 3 high. Gareth viewed that consolidation as a bull flag developing after the prior advance.

Monday changed the structure.

The index closed at 7,764.70, clearing the 7,700 area Gareth had identified as the important breakout level. As long as price remains above that zone, his near-term read stays bullish.

That creates a simple hierarchy.

The first level is 7,700. Holding above it keeps the breakout intact.

Above that, Gareth is watching a larger macro trendline around 7,900. Beyond it sits the psychological 8,000 level.

Those are objectives, not promises. The more important information is what happens if the market fails to hold the breakout. A move back below 7,700 would force traders to reassess whether Monday produced a durable breakout or another failed push through resistance.

That is especially important after the market's reaction to last week's Federal Reserve decision. Stocks initially sold off before recovering, suggesting that the market was able to absorb tighter monetary policy without breaking the broader technical structure.

Price ultimately mattered more than the initial headline reaction.

Falling Yields Are Giving Stocks Room

The bond market is helping.

The 10-year Treasury yield recently tested the 5% area but moved back below that threshold Monday and continued easing Tuesday morning.

For equities, that removes some immediate pressure from the discount-rate side of the equation. It does not mean the bond problem has disappeared.

Gareth is watching a developing consolidation in the 10-year yield that could eventually become a bull flag of its own. Right now, however, he considers that pattern immature.

That distinction matters.

A few sideways sessions do not automatically create a high-conviction continuation setup. The longer a structure develops and the more clearly its boundaries form, the more useful it becomes as a technical signal.

For now, falling yields support the equity breakout. If yields stabilize and begin pushing through 5% again, that relationship could change quickly.

The chart does not require traders to predict which outcome is coming. It gives them the level that tells them when the evidence has changed.

Oil Is Reinforcing the Same Risk-On Signal

Crude oil is moving in the same direction.

After surging above $100 per barrel, WTI has fallen sharply as markets react to improving regional oil flows and the possibility of renewed U.S.-Iran diplomacy. Saudi exports through the Strait of Hormuz have increased materially, helping ease some of the supply concerns that drove the earlier spike.

For Gareth, however, the chart came first.

Oil had already reached an important technical resistance area before the recent decline. The change in the fundamental backdrop then helped reinforce that resistance rather than creating the setup by itself.

That is a useful distinction for traders.

A headline can explain why a move accelerates. It does not necessarily identify where the move becomes vulnerable.

Gareth is now watching the low-$90s as the next near-term area of interest, with approximately $87 becoming more important if crude continues breaking lower.

For equities, continued weakness in oil would remove another source of inflation pressure. A renewed crude spike would complicate the S&P breakout, particularly if it pulled Treasury yields higher with it.

AMD Shows Why Entry Strategy Matters at Resistance

Monday's technology rally produced one of the clearest examples of momentum running directly into technical resistance.

AMD surged nearly 10% and reached a $1 trillion market capitalization for the first time as enthusiasm around AI infrastructure returned to semiconductor stocks.

The stock's strength does not automatically make it attractive at any price.

Gareth is watching a major descending trendline extending from the 2024 high. His resistance zone becomes more important as AMD moves above roughly $620.

That creates the type of setup where position management matters as much as identifying the level.

When a stock is accelerating into resistance, immediately taking a full countertrend position means trying to call the exact point where momentum stops. Gareth instead favors scaling into setups like this gradually.

The logic is straightforward. A powerful trend can overshoot resistance before reversing. Beginning smaller gives the chart room to develop while preserving flexibility if price stretches beyond the initial level.

The trade thesis is not simply “AMD is too high.”

It is that AMD is approaching a technically important area after an unusually strong run, and the reaction there should reveal whether buyers still have enough momentum to push through it.

Meta Shows the Other Side of the AI Trade

Meta provides a similar lesson from a different part of the technology complex.

Shares jumped roughly 11% Monday as investors responded to the early traction of Meta's Muse AI assistant, which launched September 8 and climbed to the top of Apple's U.S. App Store.

The move pushed Meta's market capitalization to roughly $1.9 trillion.

The short-term signal is straightforward: markets remain willing to aggressively reward companies that can show credible AI adoption or monetization potential.

The longer-term question is harder.

As more companies develop competing AI products, the economics of those products will matter increasingly alongside the technology itself. Competition could pressure pricing and margins even if aggregate AI demand continues growing.

That is not a reason to fade the current momentum by itself. It is a reason to separate the short-term chart from the longer-term valuation narrative.

Falling Oil Could Help the Beaten-Down Consumer Names

Away from technology, Gareth is also watching another part of the market for a different reason.

Stocks including Nike, Clorox, and McDonald's have spent extended periods under pressure, leaving several of them technically oversold.

Now crude is falling.

Lower energy costs can eventually relieve some pressure on consumers and businesses, but that transmission is neither immediate nor guaranteed. The chart still has to confirm that buyers are returning.

McDonald's is one of the names Gareth is watching most closely.

The stock is moving toward the lower boundary of a large parallel channel. If price reaches that support and begins responding to it, Gareth sees the area as technically interesting.

That is a much cleaner framework than simply buying something because it looks cheap.

Oversold can become more oversold. Support matters when price actually begins respecting it.

Gold and Silver Still Require Patience

Not every market is breaking out.

Gold and silver remain trapped inside their respective parallel channels, producing the kind of back-and-forth price action that can punish traders who chase every daily move.

Until either metal clears its channel, there is little reason to manufacture a directional signal that the chart has not provided.

The same principle applies to natural gas.

Gareth is watching approximately $3.00 on the upside and $2.70 on the downside. A confirmed break above $3.00 would put roughly $3.30 back in focus, while a loss of $2.70 would shift attention toward $2.50.

Until one of those boundaries gives way, the range itself is the story.

Bitcoin's Higher High Changes the Crypto Conversation

Bitcoin may have produced the second-most important chart development behind the S&P 500.

After months of lower highs, Bitcoin pushed above $86,000 Monday and reached its highest level since January.

On Gareth's chart, that move created the first meaningful higher high of the current recovery.

That does not guarantee the broader decline is over, but it changes the structure.

A downtrend is defined by lower highs and lower lows. Once price begins breaking that sequence, traders have to account for the possibility that the trend itself is changing.

The practical implication is that future Bitcoin pullbacks now deserve to be evaluated differently. Instead of automatically treating every rally as another opportunity for sellers to regain control, Gareth is watching whether buyers begin defending higher support levels.

That is the next test.

A higher high becomes much more meaningful if it is eventually followed by a higher low.

The Bottom Line

Monday's rally was bigger than a one-day move in the S&P 500.

Several markets that had been pressuring equities began moving in the opposite direction at the same time. Treasury yields slipped back below 5%. Crude oil continued falling. Technology leadership strengthened. Bitcoin broke through an important prior high.

The S&P 500 remains the anchor.

Above roughly 7,700, Gareth's breakout thesis stays intact, with the larger trendline near 7,900 and eventually 8,000 coming into view. A move back below the breakout zone would weaken that read and force a reassessment.

That is the advantage of working from levels rather than narratives.

You do not need to know in advance whether oil keeps falling, yields resume climbing, or Bitcoin's breakout develops into a larger trend change.

You need to know which levels tell you when the evidence has changed.

Bitcoin is up roughly seven percent since Friday, with today's six percent push doing more than extending the rally. Price is breaking out of what Lawton reads as a potential inverse head-and-shoulders pattern, one that took shape over several weeks before resolving to the upside today. The timing matters. This move is happening while the S&P 500 and Nasdaq sit near all-time highs and crypto has spent the last stretch lagging behind both. Bitcoin's breakout makes the case that the digital asset complex is starting to close that gap.

Lawton frames it as a catch-up trade, since the S&P and the Nasdaq are pushing to new highs while Bitcoin and the rest of crypto have been left behind. The catch-up thesis does not mean there is open air overhead, though. Bitcoin and several of the altcoins Lawton is watching are moving directly toward prior consolidation zones and pivot highs that will test how much strength the move really has.

The Bitcoin Setup: Pattern and Key Levels

The inverse head-and-shoulders on Bitcoin has a smaller right shoulder than left. That is a normal variation. The measured move off the pattern projects toward the $107,000 area. That projection comes from the size of the pattern itself and should be treated as a technical objective if the breakout holds, not a guaranteed destination.

The first major obstacle is the broad resistance zone from roughly $89,000 to $98,000, including the prior pivot high around $90,000. Beyond that, the $100,000 psychological level becomes another obvious test. How Bitcoin behaves at each of these levels will say a lot about whether the catch-up move has real follow-through or needs more time to build a base.

Reading the Altcoin Complex Through Bitcoin

Lawton is filtering the other crypto setups through Bitcoin first. That makes Bitcoin the first chart to check when evaluating the altcoin setups.

Ethereum

Ethereum is the cleanest setup in the group, what Lawton calls a "perfect bull flag": a sharp advance, the flagpole, followed by orderly sideways consolidation. Measuring the flagpole points toward roughly $3,100. A break above $2,800 raises the odds of pushing closer to $3,300. And if Bitcoin reaches $90,000, Lawton sees Ethereum at $3,000 as a very achievable extension of the move. The resistance directly above current price, a wide band of prior consolidation, still has to be absorbed first.

XRP

XRP is lagging the move. It has not reclaimed $1.55, a level already tested twice that should draw sellers on a third attempt, and it remains well under its roughly $1.70 high from earlier this year, the highest print since January. As with the rest of the group, Lawton's expectation is that wherever Bitcoin goes, the rest of crypto tends to follow, XRP included. The levels above are what will confirm whether that catch-up actually shows up in price.

SUI

SUI is a different animal. There is no bull flag here; SUI is still well off its highs. But it reclaimed the $1.00 psychological level today, which is a meaningful line in the sand. A daily close above $1.00 would be constructive. Resistance sits in the $1.15 to $1.17 zone, where a prior pivot high reinforces the level.

PENGU

PENGU is beaten down from its highs but caught a bid alongside Bitcoin today. Lawton is watching a downsloping trend line that converges with prior pivots in the $0.098 to $0.099 area as the level that could cap the current bounce.

What to Watch Next

The Bitcoin resistance zone from roughly $89,000 through $100,000 is the key test for the broader crypto catch-up thesis. A confirmed break through it would support the catch-up thesis across Ethereum, XRP, SUI, and PENGU. A rejection in that area would suggest the move needs more time and would argue against chasing the breakout.

Discipline Over Conviction

None of this is a prediction that Bitcoin reaches $107,000 or that Ethereum trades back above $3,000 on any fixed timeline. It is a set of levels to measure the move against, not a forecast to trade around. Respecting resistance in both directions, rather than assuming the breakout resolves cleanly just because the pattern says it should, is what keeps a catch-up trade like this one tradeable instead of just a story.

Watch on YouTube

Monday's tape opened with the kind of tone traders like to see: broad risk appetite across equities, oil trending lower, and Bitcoin holding above $85,000. On the surface, that backdrop supported a bullish read.

But the more useful signal on this session wasn't the direction of the move — it was where the move ran out of room. Several of the day's biggest single-session gainers, including Intel, AMD, Meta, and Qualcomm, all pushed toward technically important chart levels that had been building for weeks or months: ascending trend lines with multiple confirmed touches, unfilled gaps, and Fibonacci retracement clusters. A few of these names are still constructive. Several are not.

A stock up eight to 13 percent in a single session is not automatically a buy simply because it is strong — it is a name that has now arrived at a level where the prior structure gets tested. That is the framework worth carrying into the rest of the week.

Why the Ceiling Matters More Than the Rally

A trend line with five or more confirmed touches marks a level where sellers have repeatedly stepped in. Unfilled gaps also tend to remain on traders' radar as potential reaction zones. When a trend line, a prior pivot high, and a gap all cluster within a few points of each other, that confluence is the resistance test worth watching — not the size of the day's move.

That's the pattern across today's biggest gainers. The percentage gain gets the attention; the resistance sitting just ahead of it is what determines whether the move has room to continue.

Semiconductors: Strength Running Into a Ceiling

Intel led the group, up 13% as the broader semiconductor space rallied. The stock gapped higher, filled an open gap near $120, filled a second near $122, and pushed to an intraday high of $124.73 before pulling back. The next resistance band sits at $132.75 to $135 — an ascending trend line with five confirmed touches lining up with a prior pivot high at $132.75. Watch that confluence; if Intel works into that zone later this week, the setup favors a pullback rather than a clean break. Above that zone sits another gap fill near $139.63 and a double top from a prior sharp move, reinforcing that the path higher isn't obviously clear.

Qualcomm moved 8% higher on the same semiconductor tailwind and is pressing against its current resistance trend line, tested on increasing volume, with a pivot at $193.58 providing another nearby reference that could introduce near-term friction. Separately, a higher resistance area around $211 to $212 is in view later this week, where another trend-line reference converges with the tops of several prior wicks. The setup is constructive if Qualcomm's move continues.

Mega-Cap Breakouts and the Rest of the Board

Meta's 10% move was the standout of the session, finally clearing a $686 to $690 zone that had capped the stock for months. That's a genuine breakout, but the magnitude of the move puts it into resistance almost immediately: measuring from the all-time high down to the recent swing low, the 78.6% retracement lands at $738, matching an unfilled gap at the same price and a prior pivot high at $740. That $738 to $740 band suggests a short-term setup on the board — a day-short zone for Tuesday, contingent on Meta actually reaching it. If Meta reaches $738 to $740 and rejects the zone, that supports the resistance thesis; sustained trade above the area would weaken it and suggest the breakout still has room.

AMD pushed to an all-time high of $615.99 intraday and is now in price discovery — there is no prior chart history to define resistance. The only structural reference is a four-touch ascending trend line, which projects potential resistance near the psychological $640 level. Price discovery moves can extend further than trend-line math suggests, so this is a level to watch rather.

Two smaller setups round out the board. MongoDB bounced off a trend line dating back to an April 10 pivot low and offers a two-sided read: a momentum continuation if the bounce holds, or a contrarian short in the $434 to $453 zone, where a 78.6% retracement, a pivot high, and two gap fills converge. Coinbase, up 4.2% alongside Bitcoin near $85,000 to $86,000, faces resistance near $230 and then a heavier gap cluster from $241.15 to $255.86. Failing to hold the breakout could put $196.62 back in focus.

Key Levels to Monitor

What to Watch Next

The cleanest near-term test is Meta's $738 to $740 zone. If the stock trades into that band on Tuesday and rejects it, that supports the resistance thesis; sustained trade above the area would weaken it and suggest the breakout still has room.

The same logic applies across the board this week: Intel's reaction at $132.75 to $135, how Qualcomm behaves around its trend line and the $211 to $212 reference, and whether AMD's price-discovery run respects or blows through the $640 area. None of these levels are guarantees. They are the points where the current structure gets tested, and where the next few sessions could provide a clearer answer.

Discipline Over Direction

None of this argues against the bullish tone of the tape. It argues for treating a strong session as information, not automatic confirmation to chase. Intel, Qualcomm, Meta, and AMD are each arriving at a different stage of the same process: a level built over weeks of trading is now being tested by a single day of momentum.

Watch on YouTube

Markets opened the week with three developments pointing in the same direction: oil is retreating, the 10-year Treasury yield is backing away from 5%, and the S&P 500 is pressing into a potential breakout.

For Gareth Soloway, Chief Market Strategist at Verified Investing, that combination matters more than any one headline. Lower oil eases one source of inflation pressure. A retreat in long-term yields takes some pressure off equity valuations. And after holding together through last week's Federal Reserve rate hike, the S&P 500 is now testing the top of a bullish technical structure.

Bitcoin is adding another piece to the picture. After holding the $75,500 area through the failure of the CLARITY Act to advance in the Senate, Bitcoin has pushed above the high of its previous major bounce. That does not confirm a new bull market by itself, but it is the first structural evidence that the bearish sequence may be changing.

Oil Is Giving Stocks Some Breathing Room

Crude oil fell back below $100 Monday as traders reacted to improving indications around Gulf energy flows. U.S. Central Command said oil and LNG movements through the Strait of Hormuz had reached a six-month high, while markets are also looking toward this week's meeting between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

For equities, the immediate importance is straightforward. Oil retreating from recent highs reduces one source of inflation pressure and, alongside falling Treasury yields, removes some of the macro pressure that weighed on stocks last week.

Gareth has also been watching sentiment around crude from a contrarian perspective.

"I always look at it for contrarian aspects," he said. "When I see a ton of people bullish on oil, I'm like, oh, it's coming down."

That does not mean heavily bullish retail positioning mechanically forces oil lower. The more useful takeaway is that Gareth becomes increasingly cautious when positioning and sentiment appear crowded in one direction. Options positioning can also influence dealer hedging and short-term price behavior around major strikes and expiration dates, but the chart still has to confirm the move.

For now, continued weakness toward $90 or $85 would add another tailwind for equities. A renewed surge in crude would begin taking that advantage away.

Why the 10-Year Matters More Than the Fed Headline

The Federal Reserve raised its target range by 25 basis points last week to 3.75%-4.00%, its first rate increase since 2023. The initial reaction was volatile, with the 10-year Treasury yield moving back above 5% before retreating toward 4.95% Monday morning.

Gareth's interpretation is that a more aggressive inflation-fighting Fed can ultimately help the long end if bond investors become more confident that inflation will be contained.

"If they're hawkish, it means you have an adult in the room that's actually taking inflation seriously, which means a better financial future potentially for the United States, and it actually should bring long end rates down," Gareth said.

That is not an automatic relationship. Long-term yields also reflect inflation expectations, fiscal conditions, growth and Treasury supply. But for the current market setup, price is what matters.

The 10-year recently tested the 5% area and is pulling back. As long as that resistance continues to hold, one of the biggest pressures on equities remains contained.

The S&P 500 Is Testing the Breakout

That brings the analysis back to the chart carrying the most weight.

The S&P 500 closed Friday at 7,650.50 and entered Monday with futures sharply higher. The move puts the index back near the descending trendline forming the upper boundary of the bullish consolidation Gareth has been tracking.

The structure resembles a bull flag: a strong advance followed by consolidation near the upper portion of the move rather than a deeper retracement.

The important level is around 7,700.

A decisive break and hold above that resistance would strengthen the breakout thesis and put roughly 7,900 to 8,000 in focus as the measured-move zone. Until that happens, however, 7,700 remains resistance rather than a confirmed breakout.

That distinction matters. Gareth's longer-term concerns about debt and fiscal conditions have not disappeared, but the near-term chart can remain bullish at the same time. Trading the chart does not require the long-term macro view and the short-term technical view to point in the same direction.

Bitcoin Just Changed the Conversation

Bitcoin may be undergoing an equally important structural test.

Last week, the Senate failed to advance the CLARITY Act, with the procedural vote falling short of the 60 votes required. Bitcoin initially traded below $76,000 but held the broader support area Gareth had identified around $75,500. It has since rallied above $85,000.

"As long as we don't close below $75,500, then you favor the upside," Gareth said.

The key development is not simply the size of the rebound. Bitcoin has now pushed above the high of its previous major bounce, interrupting the pattern of lower highs that had defined the bearish structure.

That is an important change, but one higher high does not by itself confirm a new bull market. The next pullback matters because a higher low would add the second piece needed to establish a more convincing bullish sequence.

As Gareth put it:

"We now have a potential low from the bear market in, and we could be entering the bull, the new bull phase on Bitcoin."

Near term, the $85,000-$87,000 area remains the immediate resistance zone. If Bitcoin can break through and hold above it, the next major technical area on Gareth's chart comes in near $97,000. A failure back through the recent breakout structure would weaken that read.

Gold and Silver Still Require Patience

The setup is different in precious metals.

Gold has broken out of its prior wedge but is now trading within an ascending parallel channel, with the upper boundary acting as resistance around the $4,800 area on Gareth's chart. Silver is showing a similar channel structure.

That makes these markets less about anticipating another breakout and more about respecting the range until price proves otherwise. The channel boundaries provide the decision points. A confirmed break changes the framework; continued rejection keeps the range intact.

Natural gas is also compressing after months of sideways trade. Gareth remains constructive heading toward winter, but the range has not resolved yet. The compression is worth watching precisely because direction remains unconfirmed.

Options Expiration May Be Part of the Semiconductor Story

Individual technology stocks are also showing strength after Friday's quarterly expiration.

September 18 marked a major options expiration, with stock index futures, index options, individual stock options and newly returned single-stock futures expiring together.

Gareth raised an interesting possibility around Micron and SanDisk:

"I wonder how many calls had been bought over the last few months on Sandisk, on Micron. And therefore, the institutions didn't want to let them rally significantly until those were cleared off the board."

That should be treated as a market-structure hypothesis rather than a proven explanation for the rally. What matters now is whether the charts confirm the strength after expiration.

Micron is gapping higher toward the $1,154-$1,155 area, where multiple technical references converge on Gareth's chart. That makes the zone more important than any single indicator by itself. Price behavior there will determine whether resistance produces another reaction or gives way.

SanDisk is also pressing through a descending trendline after Friday's surge. The developing cup-and-handle structure keeps the chart constructive while the breakout holds, but I would verify the exact upside target against Gareth's chart before publication.

Microsoft and Tesla Add Confirmation

Microsoft is forming its own bull flag, broadly reinforcing the structure developing in the S&P 500. A confirmed breakout would strengthen that read, while continued consolidation keeps the setup developing rather than complete.

Tesla has already filled a recent gap and is now working toward a descending trendline above $400. That resistance is the decision point. A rejection would keep the longer-term ceiling intact, while a confirmed break would materially change the chart.

The Bottom Line

The strongest signal Monday is not coming from one market.

Oil is retreating. The 10-year is pulling back from the 5% area. The S&P 500 is testing resistance near 7,700. Bitcoin has broken above its previous major swing high. Semiconductor stocks are showing renewed strength after expiration.

The S&P remains the immediate directional anchor. A confirmed break above 7,700 would strengthen the case for a move toward the 7,900-8,000 measured-move zone. Bitcoin's next test is different: after producing a higher high, the market now needs to show whether it can build a higher low.

Those are the levels that matter. The headlines may provide the catalyst, but the next confirmation still has to come from price.

On Holding began with an unusual prototype: retired Swiss athlete Olivier Bernhard experimented with pieces of garden hose attached to a running shoe in search of a softer landing and firmer push-off. That experiment eventually became CloudTec, the cushioning system around which On built its identity.

The more important story for investors, however, is what happened after the product worked.

On managed to cross from specialist running footwear into mainstream lifestyle demand without abandoning the performance credibility that made the brand valuable in the first place. That balance now sits at the center of the ONON investment story. The question is no longer whether consumers recognize the shoes. It is whether On can keep expanding across channels, regions, and product categories without diluting the premium positioning that drove its rise.

From Running Experiment To Public Company

Olivier Bernhard founded On in 2010 with David Allemann and Caspar Coppetti after experimenting with the cushioning concept that became CloudTec. The unusual sole geometry gave the company something every young footwear brand needs: a product consumers could recognize immediately and a sensation runners could distinguish once they put it on.

Running specialty stores helped establish the brand's technical credibility, but the company's reach widened significantly in 2019 when Roger Federer joined as an investor and co-entrepreneur.

The partnership mattered because it expanded On beyond running without forcing the brand into a conventional celebrity endorsement. Federer became involved in product development, including The Roger footwear line, giving On a credible bridge into tennis and lifestyle footwear.

By September 2021, the company was ready for public markets.

On priced its New York Stock Exchange IPO at $24 per share on September 15, 2021. The stock opened at $35.40, roughly 48% above the offer price, as investors assigned a premium valuation to a footwear company still early in its global expansion.

That enthusiasm did not last uninterrupted.

ONON fell below its $24 IPO price during the broader growth-stock selloff of 2022 and spent portions of that year trading below $20. The decline separated the excitement surrounding the listing from the more important question investors would have to answer: could On continue building the business once the IPO narrative disappeared?

The Business Kept Scaling

The clearest evidence is in the company's sales mix.

On generated CHF 3.014 billion in net sales during 2025. Shoes remained overwhelmingly dominant at CHF 2.804 billion, or about 93% of total sales. Apparel contributed roughly 6%, while accessories remained near 1%.

That concentration cuts both ways.

Footwear is still the engine, which means On has not yet demonstrated that apparel or accessories can become major businesses. At the same time, the company continues to grow from a category where it already has substantial consumer recognition rather than relying on adjacent products to sustain the story.

The channel mix is also worth watching.

Wholesale accounted for approximately 58% of 2025 net sales, while direct-to-consumer represented about 42%. Wholesale keeps On visible through retailers and specialist running stores, while DTC gives the company greater control over presentation, customer relationships, and economics.

The useful signal is not simply that DTC is growing. It is whether On can expand its direct business without weakening the wholesale network that helped establish the brand.

Geography Is Becoming More Important

The Americas remained On's largest region in 2025, generating approximately 58% of total sales. EMEA contributed about 25%, while Asia-Pacific accounted for roughly 17%.

The percentages alone miss the more interesting development.

Asia-Pacific sales reached CHF 511.1 million in 2025, up 96.4% from the prior year. That makes international expansion, particularly in Asia, one of the clearest areas where the company's growth profile can broaden beyond its existing Americas-heavy base.

That matters because On does not need every region to resemble the U.S. business immediately. It needs evidence that the brand can travel without depending on deep discounting or sacrificing its premium positioning.

Performance Still Supports The Lifestyle Story

One reason On has avoided becoming purely a fashion-driven sneaker brand is that its performance credibility has continued to develop alongside its lifestyle appeal.

Hellen Obiri's consecutive Boston Marathon victories in 2023 and 2024 were important examples. Results like those reinforce the competitive-running side of the company at the same time its footwear increasingly appears away from the race course.

That combination is difficult to manufacture.

A performance brand that becomes fashionable can expand its audience dramatically. A fashion brand that loses technical credibility can become dependent on trend cycles. On's challenge is preserving the first outcome without drifting toward the second.

The IPO Price Became An Investor Reference Point

ONON's stock history reflects the changing expectations around the company.

The $24 IPO price became an early reference point after shares opened well above it in September 2021. During the 2022 selloff, the stock moved beneath that level and eventually into the teens.

The recovery that followed coincided with continued revenue growth, improving supply conditions, new product launches, and stronger evidence that demand extended beyond the initial enthusiasm surrounding the brand.

For traders, that history matters because old IPO levels often carry investor memory. They mark where early expectations were established and, after a major drawdown, where sentiment can be tested again.

But the more important chart work should come from the current structure, not from forcing significance onto four-year-old prices. Current support, resistance, trend structure, earnings gaps, and volume behavior should carry more weight than the IPO price simply because it is memorable.

What Traders Should Watch

There are several business variables that can eventually show up in ONON's chart.

First is footwear demand. Shoes still generate roughly 93% of revenue, so weakness in the core franchises matters more than growth in a much smaller accessories business.

Second is DTC growth. On's direct channel represented about 42% of 2025 sales. Continued expansion can improve control over the customer relationship, but traders should watch whether it complements rather than cannibalizes wholesale.

Third is Asia-Pacific growth. The region remains much smaller than the Americas but grew far faster in 2025. Sustaining that expansion would make On less dependent on its largest established market.

Fourth is gross margin and inventory discipline. Footwear companies can grow revenue while damaging economics through excess inventory and discounting. The cleaner signal is growth that preserves pricing power.

Finally, traders should separate the company story from the chart setup. A strong brand does not automatically make a stock attractive at every price. The chart still determines where buyers and sellers are actually committing capital.

The Bottom Line

On's rise is not simply a story about an unusual running shoe.

The company built technical credibility first, expanded into lifestyle demand without abandoning performance, and then used that broader appeal to scale internationally. By 2025, sales had passed CHF 3 billion, DTC represented more than 40% of the business, and Asia-Pacific had become its fastest-growing major region.

That gives investors a clearer framework for ONON than the origin story alone.

The key question is whether On can preserve premium demand as it gets larger. Watch footwear strength, DTC expansion, international growth, margins, and inventory for the answer. The stock chart can then tell traders whether the market agrees.

The Bank of Japan raised interest rates Friday morning, but the hike itself was not what moved markets. The bigger signal came from what the BOJ did not say.

The central bank raised its policy rate 25 basis points to 1.25%, its highest level in more than three decades, but gave markets little reason to price an aggressive follow-up move. The yen weakened after the decision, while U.S. Treasury yields pushed sharply higher.

For traders, that puts the focus right back where it was before Wednesday's Federal Reserve decision: the U.S. 10-year Treasury yield and the 5% area.

That is the chart carrying the most weight today. Everything else, from S&P 500 futures to gold, oil and individual equity setups, has to be viewed through that lens.

The BOJ Hiked. The Yen Fell Anyway.

A rate hike would normally be expected to support a currency. Friday delivered the opposite reaction.

The BOJ raised rates to 1.25%, but the decision included two dissenting votes and offered little additional guidance pointing toward another near-term increase. Analysts described the announcement as underwhelming relative to what the market had hoped to hear about the path ahead.

That helps explain why USD/JPY pushed higher instead of lower.

Gareth focused on that change in tone during Friday's My Trading Game Plan Revealed:

“Japan, basically the bank, didn't guide towards raising again significantly. And this is a big change in character.”

The more important reaction for U.S. traders came in Treasuries. The 10-year yield pushed back toward 5%, trading near 4.98% Friday morning after giving back most of its post-Fed decline. WTI crude was also back above $102, keeping another source of inflation pressure firmly in the picture.

That combination matters because higher long-term yields raise the discount rate applied to future earnings. Growth stocks and other long-duration assets tend to feel that pressure most acutely.

It does not mean stocks automatically fall whenever yields rise. It does mean the 10-year remains one of the cleanest macro filters for whether the current equity rally can continue without interruption.

Why 5.02% Is the Decision Point

Technically, Gareth is watching approximately 5.02% on the 10-year yield.

A break through that area would clear the nearby resistance he sees on the daily chart and force traders to look toward the weekly timeframe for the next major technical zone. His larger projection sits around 5.3% to 5.5% if the breakout confirms.

That would materially change the environment for risk assets.

For now, however, the S&P 500 has not broken its own bullish structure. Price remains above the primary rising trend line Gareth has been tracking.

That creates an important separation between the macro concern and the actual trade signal.

Yields near 5% are a warning. They are not, by themselves, confirmation that the equity trend has broken.

A loss of the first S&P trend line would move Gareth's read toward neutral. A break of the secondary trend line would be the more consequential deterioration in structure.

That level-to-level framework matters because it keeps traders from front-running a bearish outcome simply because the macro backdrop looks uncomfortable.

Expiration Could Distort Friday's Tape

Friday also brings quarterly options expiration, adding another layer of market structure to an already active session.

Citadel Securities estimated in late August that roughly $6.2 trillion of U.S. options exposure was then scheduled to expire on September 18, with the figure expected to rise as shorter-dated positions rolled forward. At the time, Citadel said September was tracking toward June's record $7.7 trillion expiration.

The important point for traders is not that institutions can force the market to a predetermined price. It is that dealer hedging, position rolls and the expiration of large options exposures can create mechanical buying and selling that temporarily overwhelms normal chart behavior.

That can make intraday support and resistance less reliable than usual.

For Gareth, the practical takeaway is straightforward: respect the larger technical levels, but recognize that Friday afternoon could produce price action driven more by positioning than by a new fundamental signal.

Oil Keeps the Inflation Problem Alive

The other chart feeding directly into the rates story is crude oil.

WTI recovered from an early drop Friday and moved back above $102 per barrel. Gareth sees resistance approaching $106, but even without another breakout, triple-digit crude keeps pressure on transportation, production and consumer costs.

Diesel makes the transmission mechanism even clearer. U.S. diesel prices have risen to record levels above $6 per gallon, squeezing transportation and agricultural operators and raising concern about higher costs being passed through the supply chain. Reuters reported a national average around $6.29 on Friday.

That is why energy matters to the Treasury chart.

The longer fuel costs remain elevated, the harder it becomes for markets to assume inflation will cool cleanly enough to relieve pressure on rates.

Refiners have benefited enormously from the resulting economics. Valero (VLO), one of Gareth's recurring charts, remains highly extended after its recent run.

There is now a political wrinkle as well. European finance ministers are discussing whether unusually large energy-sector profits should face windfall taxation, although the European Commission said Friday that it is not currently proposing an EU-wide tax and that individual countries remain responsible for their own tax policy.

For Valero, Gareth's short thesis is primarily technical. The policy discussion is an additional risk factor, not the trade itself.

Apple, Netflix and CrowdStrike: Three Different Kinds of Resistance

The individual equity charts reinforce another theme from today's show: an uncomfortable macro backdrop does not eliminate stock-specific setups.

Apple

Apple has returned to an open gap Gareth has been tracking.

That matters because a gap fill can become a decision point once price reaches the other side of the void. In Gareth's framework, the completed fill gives him a defined area to watch for a possible rejection rather than a reason to chase the recent move.

Reports on iPhone 18 preorder demand have been mixed. Some analysts have pointed to strong lead times, while others have characterized demand as softer than expected. That makes the chart more useful than trying to force a clean fundamental conclusion from the early data.

A rejection from the gap would strengthen Gareth's short thesis. A sustained move through it would weaken that read.

Netflix

Netflix is a different setup.

Wells Fargo downgraded the stock to Underweight Friday and cut its price target from $80 to $57, citing concerns about engagement and the strength of Netflix's upcoming content slate.

The stock is moving toward Gareth's first major support area near $71.50.

He does not view that as an attractive swing-long setup given the broader weakness. Instead, he is distinguishing between timeframe and thesis: a damaged chart can still produce an intraday reaction from major support.

That is a better way to frame the level than assuming support automatically means the larger decline is finished.

CrowdStrike

CrowdStrike is the more extended chart of the three.

Gareth is watching overhead trend-line resistance for a potential swing-short setup, with a downside technical zone around $192 to $188 if the reversal develops.

That area combines an open gap with a rising trend line, giving the projection more technical weight than either reference would have on its own.

The setup still needs the rejection first. Reaching resistance is not the same thing as confirming the short thesis.

Gold Is Refusing to Follow the Usual Script

The cross-asset divergence may be most interesting in gold.

The dollar is pushing into resistance while Treasury yields remain elevated, normally a difficult combination for precious metals. Yet gold has remained relatively firm.

That does not confirm another leg higher by itself, but it is a constructive relative-strength signal.

Silver is also pressing toward a descending trend line connecting several major pivots. A confirmed breakout there would improve the bullish case, while continued rejection would leave the existing structure intact.

Copper is showing the opposite setup.

After breaking below a bearish wedge, copper has rallied back toward the underside of the broken trend line. Gareth describes this as a “retrace to the scene of the crime,” and he is watching CPER for evidence that former support is turning into resistance.

That rejection, rather than the mere existence of the trend line, would be the trigger that strengthens the bearish read.

Bitcoin Held the Level That Mattered

Bitcoin is also refusing to break despite a difficult week.

The CLARITY Act failed to advance in the Senate on Tuesday, losing a procedural vote 49-50 and falling short of the 60 votes required. The defeat is a significant setback for the legislation, although its eventual fate remains uncertain.

Bitcoin nevertheless held the support area Gareth has been watching around $76,000.

That response is what matters technically.

“The tell was that it held this level. This is still a bull flag on Bitcoin. I still remain bullish.”

Holding support keeps the bull-flag interpretation alive and gives the chart a relatively close level against which that thesis can be judged. A breakdown would materially weaken the setup. Continued acceptance above support keeps the upside scenario in play.

That resilience has also appeared in parts of the altcoin market, including Zcash and Hyperliquid, although Gareth sees shorter-term resistance developing in Hyperliquid's parallel channel.

Bottom Line

The most important chart today is not Apple, Bitcoin or oil. It is the 10-year Treasury yield.

The BOJ raised rates, but the yen weakened and U.S. yields moved back toward 5%. Oil above $100 adds another source of inflation pressure, while quarterly options expiration creates the potential for unusually noisy intraday price action.