8/14/26 Live Trading

Finance-focused summary of the video (8/14/26 Live Trading)

Market regime / macro-style context (as discussed)

• Bitcoin trend: “Trend is still bearish” with price below higher-timeframe VWAPs (daily/weekly/monthly) and below the 20 EMA and the 200 on higher timeframes.
• Overall directional bias: Despite bearish structure, the speaker expects a larger down move first, followed by a potential bounce later (i.e., bottoming isn’t confirmed yet).

Key crypto trading levels & strategy

Bitcoin (BTC) — primary focus

• Major “4-hour supply” identified around: ~63,300

  “4hour supply … right at around 63,300ish”

• Swing shorts trimmed / profit management:

  • Closed ~30%, then another ~30%, then trimmed 50% of the remaining
  • Intention: lock profits, but keep some as “runners” for one more downside move
• Swing long plan (buy the decline, after a sweep):
  • Main target zone to add longs: 61k–62k (discussed as ~61K to 62K, “61 to 62K region”)
  • Multiple prior/working limit entries referenced:
    • 62,300
    • 62,632
    • 63,634
    • “between 62,200 and 62,300”
    • “619” (spoken multiple times; later tied to “last order” levels)
    • Last limit order: 61,900
  • Stop-loss guidance (for swing shorts/strategy): ~60K
  • If price breaks below stops, the speaker notes it doesn’t “invalidate” per se, but would imply more downside and require reassessment
• Upside expectation (post-bounce):
  • Lean/expectation: BTC to ~70K
  • Larger discussion later implied ~70K to 76K
• Structure / Elliott Wave framing (framework):
  • Expects 3-wave down, 3-wave up (B-wave), then 3-wave down (C-wave)
  • Speaker expects the market is in/awaiting completion of the C-wave via a sweep of lows into 61–62K

Ethereum (ETH) — mostly avoided for scalps

• Speaker: not trading ETH due to “insane” chop/range
• Scalp interest not present; only longer-term zones mentioned:
  • Avoid until ~1805 down to ~1720

Solana (SOL) — more swing-oriented

• Primarily waiting for downside zones (no single exact number locked like BTC)
• Commented that a daily supply could appear if downside accelerates from a “rally + base + drop” type structure

Stocks mentioned (zone-based notes; mostly not fundamental)

The speaker framed many names as “watchlist / if it drops into my zone,” rather than valuation or multiples.

• GE
• Mastercard (MA)
• Caterpillar (CAT)
• ServiceNow (NOW) (monthly supply noted, but “not trading” due to prolonged chop)
• HOOD
• B/E (unclear acronym; mentioned as “BE”)
• Palantir (PLTR) (monthly demand but “impulsive,” with “demand inside supply,” so avoiding)
• AMD (chop; not a clean setup)
• Intel (INTC) (might trade if price rises into a daily supply)
• SoFi (SOFI) (back in supply after rejection)
• AVGO (chopping; not a clear edge)
• CrowdStrike (CRWD) (all-time highs; no short opportunity)
• Exxon (XOM) (no attractive supplies)
• CoreWeave (rejection from a zone ~ 11749; viewed as a successful rejection, but not chased)
• Iron (IRN?; weekly supply breakout attempt; daily demand ~4370 mentioned)
• Rocket Lab (RKLB) (still in supply)
• Google (GOOGL) / Microsoft (MSFT)
  • GOOGL: “nice entry”
  • MSFT: “thorn in my side,” expecting further downside; discussed multi-timeframe supply and need for movement within the next week timeframe
• Biddy (unclear ticker; likely BIDU/BIDY; partial TP around ~626)
• City (unclear ticker; possibly “Citi” / “C” mentioned later)
• Upstart (UPST)
• Hims (HIMS)
• Oklo (OKLO)
• Alibaba (BABA) (rejected around ~1382, then moved to ~122)
• IBM (chopping)
• Amazon (AMZN) (“baked us out” then pulled back; traders should be in profit if they’re in)
• Shopify (SHOP) (“massive monthly demand”)
• Counter-trend caution (general note):
  • Shorts into higher timeframe supply sometimes avoided because shorting counter-trend is riskier

Futures & indices (ES/NQ/MNQ) — main intraday trade framework

Instrument mappings

• ES = S&P 500 futures (spoken as “S&P 500 futures”)
• NQ = NASDAQ futures (conceptually like QQQ)
• MNQ = micro version of NQ
• SPY referenced as an ETF equivalent for ES-style stock mapping

ES (S&P 500 futures) — scalp-long setup

• Speaker waited for a specific entry after price sweeps an aftermarket low and then re-enters demand
• “Trap” concept:
  • “Sweep of the aftermarket low into a demand zone and then you rally out” to trap short sellers

• Primary ES numbers mentioned:

  • Entry zone area: ~7118.75–7111.75 (subtitles were messy at one point, but the intent was clarified later)

  • Specific ES entry posted: 7111.75 (repeated as “ES trade … 7811.75 was my entry”)

  • Stop-loss: ~7809.75–7814 (subtitles partially inconsistent; theme was stops just below demand)

  • Target / take-profit zone: ~7825.75
  • Risk sizing example: “I’m risking 250 on this one.”
  • Management after fill:
  • Consider trimming/taking profit earlier if price reclaims VWAP
  • Potentially move take-profit to VWAP if retested

NQ / MNQ — monitored but less preferred

• MNQ hit a zone and bounced, but speaker preferred ES because the ES setup was “cleaner”
• Missed MNQ due to choosing ES

Gold & Silver

• Gold: not much confidence in levels; generally avoided at that moment
• Silver: discussed possible entries, but noted zones were tapped twice and supply/demand quality matters; preferred ES instead

Explicit methodology / step-by-step frameworks (as shared)

Supply zone drawing (technical framework)

• Identify supply structure such as:
  • drop → balance → drop (drop base drop)
  • or rally → balance → drop-out (“rally base up, rally out / rally out for supply”)
• Draw the supply rectangle from:
  • Top of the wick → bottom of the body
• If multiple basing candles:
  • Use tallest wick of the basing candle → lowest body

Demand zone drawing (technical framework)

• Demand structure such as:
  • rally → base → rally out (or analogous structure with reversed polarity)
• Draw the demand rectangle from:
  • Bottom of the wick → top of the body
• If multiple basing candles:
  • Use lowest wick → highest body

Zone validity / invalidation rule

• Supply invalidated after a candle closes through the zone on the same timeframe (described as “close above the top wick” for supply)

• Demand invalidated after a candle closes through on the same timeframe (described as “below the bottom wick” for demand)

• After invalidation, remove/stop trading the zone

“New zone or retest?” rule

• Look left:
  • If the zone is inside a previous zone, it’s a retest, not a brand-new zone → typically don’t redraw it as new

Risk management preference

• Speaker often emphasized trading first taps as higher probability
• Second/other taps are “more tricky” due to filled/consumed institutional orders

Key cautions / disclosures

• No explicit “financial advice” disclaimer was shown in subtitles
• Repeated cautions:
  • Don’t chase trades when supply/demand is already tapped/rejected (“I wouldn’t add… you’d be chasing the trade.”)
  • Be careful about counter-trend shorts (lower probability to short inside higher-timeframe structures)
  • Stop placement: avoid getting stopped out before the larger move; stops may be adjusted as price develops

Performance metrics / outcomes mentioned

• Mentions of performance:
  • “People making bags this morning”
  • “I should have taken NQ”
  • “Nice rejection”
  • “Market open … big wick” and “setup’s valid” moments
• No consistent formal P&L figures given
  • Aside from the ES risk example: “risking 250” on one trade

Tickers / instruments explicitly mentioned

Crypto

• BTC (Bitcoin)
• ETH (Ethereum)
• SOL (Solana)

Futures / indices

• ES (S&P 500 futures)
• NQ (NASDAQ futures)
• MNQ (micro NASDAQ futures)
• SPY (ETF mapping to ES mentioned)
• Chart anchors referenced: VWAP (and “VWOP” terminology)

Stocks

• GE
• MA (Mastercard)
• CAT (Caterpillar)
• NOW (ServiceNow)
• HOOD
• PLTR
• AMD
• INTC
• SOFI
• AVGO
• CRWD (CrowdStrike)
• XOM (Exxon)
• Rocket Lab (RKLB)
• MSFT
• AMZN
• SHOP
• IBM
• BABA
• UPST
• HIMS
• OKLO
• Unclear/ambiguous mentions:
  • Biddy (~626)
  • BE
  • City
  • CoreWeave, Iron (tickers not provided)

Presenters / sources mentioned

• Ivan (co-presenter / moderator referenced throughout)
• David (frequent questioner)
• Grayson (viewer/participant)
• Radio Dan (mentioned as a guest/voice actor in a side moment)
• Other chat usernames referenced inconsistently (some appeared to be entities/institutions rather than speakers): e.g., BlackRock, Riot, MEA