In fact, the projection doesn't respect the 2015-2017 cycle. We already dropped to the 4-year MA late last year, so immediately dropping back there again suggests something very different is happening this time.
Technically we dropped down to the 200 Week MA, but we didn't reach the 4 Year MA that was slightly lower.
Fair enough but it starts to feel like curve-fitting to focus only on the 4-year MA. I think retreating to the 200-week MA again would make the same point.
Again, I agree, as it would be "close enough" to the 4 Year MA and another example whales front running the market. Arguably as we already had, with a lack of wick below the 200 Week MA last year. Whether you want to see it as the 200 Week (1400 Days) or 4 Year MA (1460 Days) isn't relevant in this case, there's only a couple of months between these long-term MAs. Similarly with the 100 Week (700 Days) or 2 Year MA (730 Days). The Point is not about differentiating between these, but looking at things from a different perspective.
People care more about the time-frame of years, than they do 100 or 200 weeks in my opinion. Hence using these MAs on a daily chart, as oppose to usual on the Weekly.
Hope that explains the irrelevant distinction.