Thanks for the reply, to which I wish I could give a more thorough response, but I can't, due to being too busy IRL.

I did shock you, didn't I? For sure (I can feel it) ! My phrasing was just meant to stress the difference between the two indicators (spot vs. 200 WMA). We both understand full well that spot price is not something to be basing one's financial strategy upon, but it can still be used as a criterion for entry-level f.u. status bragging rights, choo-choos, chopper landings, rockets, etc. As for me, I'm VERY conservative when it comes to price interpretation. Spot price means very little to me -- it's the overall trend that matters, and the 200 WMA indicator reflects that quite nicely.

As for my "5x spot" rule, think about it: it's even more conservative that the 200 WMA was at any point in time during the last 5 years at least, so a 5x spot-based f.u. status is more secure than a 200 WMA-based one, assuming the latter to be the spot price lower bound. Maybe I'm being overly cautious here, but as I said above, it's how I do things. Even in my designs at work, I tend to over-engineer my projects. They cost a bit more, but they don't break and are future-proof.

Regarding your above quoted numbers, my calculations are of the ratio: [spot price @ cycle peak] / [200 WMA value @ cycle peak]. So, the numerator and denominator both refer to the same point in time. Are you also doing the same? Because your numbers don't look similar. Here are mine, for comparison:

End of 2013: $1184 / $42 = 28x
End of 2017: $19326 / $1212 = 16x
End of 2021: $67492 / 17052 = 4x

[Source]

We don't disagree on anything substantive, really...