Skip to content
Reading level

Reading the Market Like a Technician

The Goals and Tenets of Technical Analysis

What technicians are actually looking for on a chart, the three assumptions the whole method rests on, and how much weight those assumptions can carry.


Two ways to size up a stock

There is more than one way to decide whether a stock is worth buying, and the two most common ones barely talk to each other.

Fundamental analysis values a company by its business. You read the financial statements, work out what the company earns and owns and owes, and form your own estimate of what it's worth. Then you compare that estimate to the price. If the two disagree, that gap is the opportunity. Course 2 covers this in full.

Technical analysis studies price and volume history to judge probable future movement. Volume is how many shares changed hands in a period. A technical analyst — a technician — doesn't start from the business. They start from the chart, which is just a picture of price over time, and ask a narrower question: which direction has this been moving, and is that likely to continue?

Fundamental analysis judges a company by its business. You read the company's financial paperwork, work out what it earns and owns and owes, and build your own estimate of what it's worth. Then you hold that estimate up against the price. If the two disagree, that gap is the opportunity. Course 2 covers this in full.

Technical analysis ignores the business and studies price and volume history instead, to judge probable future movement. Volume is how many shares changed hands in a period. Someone who works this way — a technician — starts from the chart, which is just a picture of price over time, and asks a much narrower question: which direction has this been moving, and is that likely to keep going?

Fundamental analysis judges the business. You read the company's paperwork, work out what it earns and owns and owes, and come up with your own idea of what it's worth. Then you compare that to the price. Course 2 is all about this.

Technical analysis doesn't look at the business at all. It looks at the price history — what the price has done, and how many shares changed hands while it did it. That count of shares is called volume.

Someone who works this way is called a technician. They start from the chart, which is just a picture of price over time, and ask a much narrower question: which way has this been moving, and is it likely to keep going that way? Notice the word likely. They are not claiming to know.

Put crudely: a fundamental analyst reads the label on the jar. A technician watches which jars keep leaving the shelf. Neither is checking the other's work.

What technicians are actually trying to do

Technicians are looking for stocks that are already moving, and they want to buy the ones moving up. That sounds almost too simple to be a discipline, and the simplicity is the point — the appeal of technical analysis is that it gives you specific instructions. Buy here. Sell there. Get out at this price. Whatever else you think of it, it tells you what to do, and it tells you before you're in the trade and emotional about it.

That's why people use it, and why they use it in very different amounts. Some run their entire process on charts. Some pick a company on fundamentals and then use a chart only to decide what day to buy. Some hold for an afternoon; some hold for years. The method scales down to a single decision, which is unusual and useful.

Over this course you'll build a technically based trading plan of your own: reading charts and trends, identifying what belongs on a watch list, finding entry and exit signals, sizing a position so a bad trade can't wreck you, and — the part most people skip — testing whether your rules actually work. We'll mostly use stocks, though the same tools get pointed at other markets.

The three tenets, and what they are

Technical analysis rests on three claims: price moves in trends, the market discounts everything, and history repeats itself. These are usually called the tenets, and the word is doing something important. They are not laws anybody has proven. They are the assumptions the method needs in order to work, stated up front so you can see what you're agreeing to.

That's not a knock on the discipline. Every method has premises — fundamental analysis needs to assume that price eventually catches up to value, which is also unproven and also sometimes fails. But you're entitled to weigh a premise instead of swallowing it, so let's take them one at a time and be honest about how much each one holds.

Price moves in trends

Video coming soon

Two charts marked up side by side — an uptrend stepping through higher highs and higher lows, and a range that keeps returning to where it started.

This lesson explains the idea in full without it.

A trend is the general direction a price is heading: up, down, or sideways. Look at a chart cold and it's noise. Mark the first price, mark the last, draw a line between them, and a direction appears. That direction is the trend.

The first rule technicians teach each other is to trade with the trend, not against it. If you're trying to get to New York, you don't board a train pointed at California and hope. Almost everything in the rest of this course is either a way to identify a trend or a way to act on one, so we'll come back to this constantly.

The honest caveat: trends are obvious in the past and ambiguous in the present. On a finished chart you can always see where the direction was. Standing at the right edge, with the last bar just printed, you're guessing whether what you're looking at is a trend or a wiggle. That's not a flaw you can fix with a better indicator — it's the actual job.

The honest caveat: trends are obvious in the past and blurry in the present. On a finished chart you can always see which way the price was going. But standing at the right-hand edge, with the newest mark just printed and nothing after it, you're guessing whether what you're looking at is a trend or a wiggle. That's not a flaw you can fix with a better tool — it's the actual job.

Now the honest catch, and it never goes away.

Trends are obvious in the past and blurry in the present. Look at a finished chart and you can always see which way it was heading — it's right there in front of you.

But you are never standing at the end of a finished chart. You're standing at the edge of one, where the newest mark just appeared and nothing after it exists yet. From there you cannot tell whether what you're looking at is a real trend or just a wiggle.

That isn't a problem a better tool fixes. That's the actual job.

The market discounts everything

This one says the price already reflects what the market collectively knows. Every trade is somebody putting money behind an opinion, and the price is where all those opinions currently balance. A stock grinding higher is a crowd deciding, dollar by dollar, that it's worth more than it was. A stock falling is the same crowd deciding the opposite.

If that's true, it has a consequence a technician takes seriously: you don't need to know why. The reason is already in the price. When news arrives, the market absorbs it and the price adjusts.

The caveat here is bigger than it first looks, and the tenet itself admits it. Absorbing new information can take longer than anyone expects, and when it finishes it may flip the trend entirely. So "the price knows everything" and "the price is about to be very wrong" are both allowed to be true at once. Hold this tenet loosely.

History repeats itself

Third: patterns that showed up before tend to show up again. Not identically — similarly.

The reasoning is about people, not about prices. A chart is a picture of human behavior, and humans behave in recognizable ways under recognizable pressure. When the economy is running hot, greed drags markets into fast upswings. When it turns, fear drags them down just as fast. The shapes recur because the emotions recur.

Say this plainly, because a lot of people don't: past patterns are not a guarantee of anything. Studying how price and volume behaved before lets a technician make an educated guess about what happens next. Educated guesses are worth making. They are still guesses, and they come out wrong on a regular basis. Anyone selling you a pattern that "always" does something is selling you something.

Say this plainly, because a lot of people don't: past patterns are not a guarantee of anything. Studying how price and volume behaved before lets a technician make an educated guess about what happens next. Educated guesses are worth making — that's why anybody does this. They are still guesses, and they come out wrong on a regular basis. Anyone selling you a pattern that "always" does something is selling you something.

Say this plainly, because a lot of people don't: patterns from the past are not a guarantee of anything.

Studying how prices behaved before lets someone make an educated guess about what happens next. Educated guesses are worth making — that's the whole reason anybody does this. But they are still guesses, and they come out wrong on a regular basis.

Anyone who tells you a pattern always does something is selling you something.

Figure

A timeline of well-known historical market bubbles, each drawn as a small price chart on a shared axis so the shapes can be compared side by side: a slow build, a steepening climb into a narrow peak, then a fall that gives back the climb faster than it took to make. The point of the figure is the repetition of the shape across eras and asset types — the specific episodes, dates, and price levels need to be sourced before this is drawn.

Technicians disagree with each other, too

Everyone in this field accepts the three tenets, and they still don't agree on what a chart says. The main fault line is how much of the decision a human should make.

At one end are discretionary technicians, who read the chart and judge it themselves. Personal interpretation is the tool. The strength is flexibility — a person notices that this situation is unusual. The weakness is that three good technicians can look at one chart and see three different stories, which is exactly as maddening as it sounds.

At the other end are non-discretionary technicians, who try to remove judgment entirely. They rely on indicators — calculations run on price and volume data that produce a buy or sell signal from a formula. Once the rules are formulas, a computer can run them, and some do: quantitative analysts trade with algorithms and statistical models, and high-frequency traders fire off enormous numbers of orders a day. The strength is consistency — a formula doesn't get scared. The weakness is that a formula also doesn't notice that today is different.

Most technicians live somewhere in the middle. The tradeoff is real and there's no correct answer to hand you: judgment adapts and drifts, rules hold firm and stay wrong. And the boundary with fundamental analysis is softer than either camp pretends — plenty of investors value a business first and time the purchase with a chart, or the reverse.

You'll find your own position on that scale. What this course asks is that you find it deliberately, knowing what you gain and what you give up — which is the same thing the rest of it will ask about every rule you write.

Key takeaways

  • Technical analysis studies price and volume history to judge probable future movement. Fundamental analysis values the business instead. They ask different questions and neither one checks the other's answer.
  • People use technical analysis because it's prescriptive — it produces specific instructions about when to buy and sell, decided before you're in the trade.
  • Its three tenets — price moves in trends, the market discounts everything, history repeats itself — are assumptions the method rests on, not proven facts. You're entitled to weigh them.
  • "History repeats" means patterns recur because human reactions recur. It does not mean past results predict future ones. Technicians make educated guesses and are regularly wrong.
  • Technicians split over how much a human should decide: discretionary reading adapts but drifts, formula-driven rules stay consistent but stay wrong when conditions change. Most people sit between the two.
  • Technical analysis studies what a price has already done to guess what it will probably do next. Fundamental analysis studies the business instead. They ask different questions, and neither one checks the other's answer.
  • People use it because it gives specific instructions — buy here, get out there — decided ahead of time, before there's any money on the line to make you nervous.
  • It rests on three claims: prices move in trends, the price already reflects what everyone knows, and patterns show up again. Those are assumptions the method needs, not things anybody proved. You're allowed to weigh them.
  • "Patterns show up again" means people react in familiar ways, not that the past tells you the future. These are educated guesses, and they come out wrong regularly.
  • Technicians disagree about how much a person should decide. Reading a chart yourself adapts to what's unusual but drifts over time. Following a formula stays consistent but stays wrong when things change. Most people sit somewhere between.

Check your understanding

Question 1 of 5

A technician and a fundamental analyst both look at fictional UVWXYZ, which has climbed steadily for months on rising volume. The fundamental analyst says the business is mediocre and the stock is overpriced. The technician buys it. Who is misunderstanding the other's method?