Skip to main content
Track Flag and pennant
16 / 26
Library

2006issue C051-8

Testing a bear-flag target after the pause is confirmed

The archive treated a bear flag or pennant as a short pause after a steep drop. After a close through the lower boundary, a later measuring estimate that used historical volatility was presented as closer than a textbook pole projection, while remaining only an estimate.

  • A bear flag or pennant was recorded as a short consolidation after a steep drop, with a slanted rectangle or a converging triangle that paused the decline.
  • A close through the lower boundary of that pause was used to confirm that the decline has resumed.
  • Historical volatility, taken as recent realized price variability, was used to scale how far the next decline is likely to travel.
  • A later measuring estimate drawn from the recorded observations was presented as more accurate than a textbook pole projection, while remaining only an estimate.
Entries in this reading3 entries

What the archive recorded

The archive studied 100 bear flag, pennant, or similar short consolidations from January 2004 through June 2005. Each case required a steep, quick decline into the pattern. Average formation length excluding the pole was eight trading days, with a maximum of 15 trading days, or about three calendar weeks.

How the pause was described

In this workflow, a flag and pennant was a short consolidation after a steep drop, with a slanted rectangle or converging triangle that paused the decline. Bear flags were described as higher highs and higher lows between parallel lines that slope up against the prevailing decline. Pennants were described as short symmetrical triangles with converging upper and lower boundaries.

Pattern identification was treated as subjective. Non-textbook shapes were accepted if the setup was a pause after a sharp move with substantial volume contraction.

Confirming the decline has resumed

A breakout was a close through the lower boundary of that pause, used to confirm the decline has resumed. Recorded observations included pole extremes, the last point before a break of the lower trendline, the first post-flag short-term low, volume trend, market conditions, and historical volatility.

Scaling the next decline

Historical volatility was computed from the standard deviation of one-day log-close changes over a 130-observation window. It was recent realized price variability used to scale how far the next decline is likely to travel. A later measuring formula, derived from those observations, was presented as a more accurate price-objective estimate than earlier textbook-style projections, while remaining only an estimate.

Bear-flag breakdowns versus two measuring rules

After a close through the lower flag boundary, the volatility-aware forecast sits on or within about one percentage point of the first short-term low in this eight-name sheet. The older rule that the drop should reprint the entire pole overshoots every case. Figures are the published closing-price rows from Katsanos’s target-calculation table.
After a close through the lower flag boundary, the volatility-aware forecast sits on or within about one percentage point of the first short-term low in this eight-name sheet. The older rule that the drop should reprint the entire pole overshoots every case. Figures are the published closing-price rows from Katsanos’s target-calculation table.Eight stocks from the 100-pattern sample · Daily closes · 2004-03-04T00:00:00.000Z to 2005-04-06T00:00:00.000Z

Equation 1 combines pole height, 130-day historical volatility, and flag slope. Katsanos said it slightly underestimates the drop, which he treated as conservative for covering shorts. These eight rows are the printed sample, not the full 100-pattern study.

Educational research material, not investment advice. Historical source context does not establish present-day performance.
16 of 26 in the Flag and pennant track
20071-5 pp.Next on Flag and pennantHomebuilder rebound as a bear-flag, trendline, and volume case studyA homebuilder composite with a confirmed head-and-shoulders top later showed a rising bear-flag pause rather than a completed reversal.
All readings on this track · 26 readings
  1. 1986Constructing bounded relative-strength overlays from oscillator limits
  2. 1989Point-and-figure fulcrum, count, and flag as three jobs
  3. 1996The high, tight flag as a three-checkpoint continuation exam
  4. 2000Test chart patterns with confirmation, not names
  5. 2001Failed chart patterns as reverse breakout signals
  6. 2002Ascending triangle and flag: a three-checkpoint QQQ case study
  7. 2002Two-stage chart reading after breakouts
  8. 2002The second pattern after a breakout
  9. 2003Building flags, pennants, and triangles as continuation pauses
  10. 2003When trendline channels age into a wedge or a break
  11. 2004Bearish chart patterns need confirmation before the turn
  12. 2004Constructing flags, pennants, and triangles from swing pivots
  13. 2005Constructing flag and pennant rules from pole to exit
  14. 2005Fanline construction for testing trend health
  15. 2005When flag-and-pennant breakout scans fail a measurement audit
  16. 2006Testing a bear-flag target after the pause is confirmed
  17. 2007Homebuilder rebound as a bear-flag, trendline, and volume case study
  18. 2008Completed chart patterns as reward-to-risk arithmetic
  19. 2012Reading this file
  20. 2012Reading regime change: when to stop trading
  21. 2014Intraday flag construction with breakout and stop rules
  22. 2015Lock lookback and chart scale before you mark a flag or pennant
  23. 2017Constructing delayed buy-stops on bull flags and pennants
  24. 2018Copy an ABC swing as a ruler, then test flags and Fibonacci degree
  25. 2019Failed flags, pennants, and triangles as a completed experiment
  26. 2020Confirming candlestick and flag signals on a weekly chart
All 31 readings tagged Flag and pennant
Also on Flag and pennant5 readings