NY AM, week commencing Monday 17 August 2026
Every one of this week's five forecasts was one the record had already seen, or saw twice. Two of the repeats resolved the same way as before and three did not, the both-sides favourite appeared once and lost, and the per-side view again carried the sessions the branch score buried. Three weeks in, the record is starting to show what the tables are.
At a glance
Three scores, because the indicator makes three separable claims.
| Session | London | Prior sweep | High only | Low only | Both | Inside | First sweep called | Actual | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 17 Aug | 80 pt | Swept high | 28% | 15% | 56% | 1% | ▲ high 58% | ▼ low 08:00 ✗ | low only |
| Tue 18 Aug | 210 pt | Swept low | 24% | 45% | 25% | 6% | ▼ low 62% | ▼ low 08:35 ✓ | low only ✓ |
| Wed 19 Aug FOMC min. | 182 pt | Swept high | 24% | 45% | 25% | 6% | ▼ low 62% | ▲ high 08:35 ✗ | both sides |
| Thu 20 Aug | 265 pt | Swept low | 10% | 52% | 38% | 0% | ▼ low 85% | ▼ low 07:30 ✓ | low only ✓ |
| Fri 21 Aug | 161 pt | Swept high | 52% | 8% | 38% | 2% | ▲ high 88% | ▲ high 07:35 ✓ | both sides |
The four share columns are the indicator's own figures, read off the status table at the session open, and they sum to 100 on every row. Gold marks the branch the tables rated highest. London printed below its own average range on Monday, which made it eleven compressed prior sessions in a row across the record, and then above it on Tuesday and Thursday, ending the run. The only red folder USD release of the week was the FOMC minutes at 14:00 ET on Wednesday, two and a half hours after the session closed; it is marked against the day.
The five NY AM sessions
Left, the session opening at 07:30. Right, the same chart at 11:30 with the outcome latched.
London high 30339.75 at 28%, low 30260.00 at 15%. An 80-point London, the tightest prior session of the record, on the Medium sample that last appeared on Thursday 13 August.
Low taken 08:00, high never approached. Low only, the 15% branch; the 56% both-sides favourite did not land.
The week's strongest both-sides call, and the session took one side and stopped
First sweep ✗ · low only, the 15% branch, against a 56% both-sides favouriteLondon printed 80 points, below average and the tightest prior session of the three weeks published so far, and the tables answered the way they did on Thursday 13 August, which is the same bin: 56% on both sides, the strongest both-sides call of the record, on a sample of 173 marked Medium.
The low went at 08:00, half an hour in, and price fell a further hundred points before turning. The recovery got as far as the middle of London's range and no further. The high, eighty points above the low and carrying an 84% marginal, was never approached, so the session closed low only, a branch the table rated at 15%.
Two misses and one from two. The first-sweep call was the high at 58% and the low went; the branch was both sides and one side went. Thursday the 13th drew this same table and took both levels inside forty-five minutes. Same lookup, opposite branch, which is the week's theme and the section after the charts is about it.
- London range80 pt, below average
- Prior sweepSwept high
- Open vs London EQBelow EQ
- Four-way28 / 15 / 56 / 1
- First sweep▲ 58% · ▼ 42%
- P(high taken)84% → not taken
- P(low taken)71% → taken 08:00
- Samplen 173, Medium
London high 29897.00 at 24%, low 29687.00 at 45%. Price below London EQ after London swept its predecessor's low. The first above-average London in eleven sessions.
Low taken 08:35, high never reached. Low only, the rated favourite at 45%.
A wide London, a near low, and the favourite landed cleanly
First sweep ✓ · low only, the 45% favourite ✓The first London to print above its own average range in eleven sessions, 210 points, and the tables put the low nearer: price opened below EQ, 62% on the low going first, 45% on low only. The low went at 08:35 and the session then ground lower for the rest of the morning, never getting within a hundred and fifty points of the high.
Three from three on the day: first sweep, branch, and both marginals, the low at 70% taken and the high at 49% not. A clean morning, and worth holding the table in mind, because Wednesday returns exactly the same one.
- London range210 pt, above average
- Prior sweepSwept low
- Open vs London EQBelow EQ
- Four-way24 / 45 / 25 / 6
- First sweep▲ 38% · ▼ 62%
- P(high taken)49% → not taken
- P(low taken)70% → taken 08:35
- Samplen 406, High
London high 29641.25 at 24%, low 29459.50 at 45%. Tuesday's table, to the percentage point, from a different London range.
High taken 08:35, low taken 09:45. Both sides, the 25% branch, from Tuesday's identical forecast.
Tuesday's forecast again, and the session did the other thing
First sweep ✗ · both sides, the 25% branch🔴 FOMC minutes · 14:00 ET24 / 45 / 25 / 6, first sweep 38 / 62, n 406: Tuesday's table exactly, drawn from a London that was 28 points narrower and below average where Tuesday's was above. Same bin, same lookup, same numbers.
Tuesday took the low and stopped. Wednesday rallied a hundred points off the open, took the high at 08:35, then reversed 350 points through the whole London range, took the low at 09:45, and recovered into the close. Both sides, the 25% branch, with the first sweep on the side the tables rated at 38.
The FOMC minutes at 14:00 ET came two and a half hours after the session closed and had nothing to do with any of it; the day is marked because the calendar is marked on every page. The per-side view scores two from two, both marginals resolving taken. The other two axes score nothing, and the pair of mornings together is the most useful thing on the page.
- London range182 pt, below average
- Prior sweepSwept high
- Open vs London EQBelow EQ
- Four-way24 / 45 / 25 / 6
- First sweep▲ 38% · ▼ 62%
- P(high taken)49% → taken 08:35
- P(low taken)70% → taken 09:45
- Samplen 406, High
London low 29422.25, taken at 07:30 in the opening bar. High 29686.75 at 10%, 265 points away. Monday 3 August's table.
Low taken 07:30, high never approached. Low only, the rated favourite at 52%.
The low went in the opening bar, and the call was close to arithmetic
First sweep ✓ · low only, the 52% favourite ✓The widest London of the record at 265 points, and a session that opened sitting on London's low. The tables put 85% on the low going first and 52% on low only, and the low went in the opening bar. The high, 265 points away at a 48% marginal, was never a live question.
This is Monday 3 August's bin, 10 / 52 / 38 / 0 from 840 sessions. That morning the low went at 07:35 and the high followed at 10:20, both sides; this one took the low and stayed down. Two from two on the marginals here, the 90% low taken and the 48% high not, and a first-sweep call that was, as on most mornings where a level is within touching distance at the open, closer to arithmetic than to insight.
- London range265 pt, above average
- Prior sweepSwept low
- Open vs London EQBelow EQ
- Four-way10 / 52 / 38 / 0
- First sweep▲ 15% · ▼ 85%
- P(high taken)48% → not taken
- P(low taken)90% → taken 07:30
- Samplen 840, High
London high 29525.50 at 52%, low 29364.75 at 8%. Price pressed against the high at the open. Tuesday 4 August's table.
High taken 07:35, then a 300-point reversal took the low at 09:30. Both sides, the 38% branch.
Tuesday 4 August's forecast, the high at once, then a 300-point reversal took the low
First sweep ✓ · both sides, the 38% branchPrice opened pressed against London's high with 88% on it going first, and it went at 07:35. The table is Tuesday 4 August's, 52 / 8 / 38 / 2 from 766 sessions, and that morning the high went at 07:30 and nothing else did.
This one held near the high until the cash open and then fell three hundred points in an hour, through the low at 09:30, before recovering. Both sides, the 38% branch; high only at 52% was the favourite and did not land. Two from two on the marginals, the 90% high and the 46% low both taken. The flash PMIs printed at 09:45 ET, inside the session; they were a low-impact release that week and the move was already under way.
- London range161 pt, below average
- Prior sweepSwept high
- Open vs London EQAbove EQ
- Four-way52 / 8 / 38 / 2
- First sweep▲ 88% · ▼ 12%
- P(high taken)90% → taken 07:35
- P(low taken)46% → taken 09:30
- Samplen 766, High
The same forecast, more than once
Across the fifteen sessions published so far, six context bins have each come up more than once, and fourteen of the fifteen sessions sit in one of them. Same context bin, same lookup, same numbers to the percentage point, on days weeks apart with different London ranges and different price levels. This week every session was a repeat: one pair repeated within the week, and three sessions drew tables the first two weeks had already produced.
| Forecast | Sessions | First sweep | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 38 / 11 / 50 / 1 · sweep 80 / 20 · n 524 | Fri 7 Aug | ▲ high 80% | high only |
| Wed 12 Aug | ▲ high 80% | high only | |
| Fri 14 Aug | ▲ high 80% | both sides | |
| 34 / 25 / 41 / 0 · sweep 58 / 42 · n 528 | Wed 5 Aug | ▲ high 58% | both sides |
| Thu 6 Aug | ▲ high 58% | both sides | |
| Tue 11 Aug | ▲ high 58% | low only | |
| 28 / 15 / 56 / 1 · sweep 58 / 42 · n 173 | Thu 13 Aug | ▲ high 58% | both sides |
| Mon 17 Aug | ▲ high 58% | low only | |
| 24 / 45 / 25 / 6 · sweep 38 / 62 · n 406 | Tue 18 Aug | ▼ low 62% | low only |
| Wed 19 Aug | ▼ low 62% | both sides | |
| 10 / 52 / 38 / 0 · sweep 15 / 85 · n 840 | Mon 3 Aug | ▼ low 85% | both sides |
| Thu 20 Aug | ▼ low 85% | low only | |
| 52 / 8 / 38 / 2 · sweep 88 / 12 · n 766 | Tue 4 Aug | ▲ high 88% | high only |
| Fri 21 Aug | ▲ high 88% | both sides |
Two things follow, and they matter more than this week's score.
The forecast is a lookup, not a fit. Nothing about Wednesday the 19th was used to produce Wednesday the 19th's numbers. They are the numbers Tuesday got, because both sessions landed in the same measured bin, and the same is true of the three tables this week borrowed from the first two. A table that returns the same answer for the same context bin and then watches the answer resolve both ways is behaving exactly as a table should.
Identical forecasts resolving differently is the system working, not failing. Of the six bins that have repeated, four have now produced more than one outcome. A 56% both-sides figure that landed every time would be evidence the number was wrong; one from two is what 56% looks like at this sample size, and so is two from two. Neither settles anything; both are the point.
What this week actually shows
Four things, from a week that was neither the best nor the worst of the three.
- Every forecast this week was a repeat, and the repeats split. Monday drew Thursday 13 August's table and did the opposite. Tuesday and Wednesday drew the same table and did opposite things. Thursday drew Monday 3 August's and did the opposite. Friday drew Tuesday 4 August's and did the opposite. Four repeated bins, four different outcomes from the earlier draw; only Wednesday 19 August on gold, elsewhere on this site, repeated its predecessor. That is a table of shares doing what shares do, and it is published because it is the clearest thing three weeks can show.
- The both-sides favourite appeared once and lost, which leaves it four from nine. Both sides has been the highest-rated branch on nine of the fifteen mornings published and has landed on four of them. A week is too short to call that a calibration problem, and so is three, but it is the kind of thing that would show up as one if it kept happening, which is what the running record exists to catch.
- The per-side view again carried the sessions the branch score buried. Monday, Wednesday and Friday all score zero on the four-way axis and two from two, or one from two, on the per-side one. Seven of ten levels resolved as their marginals implied, against a mean stated 67%, and twenty-two of thirty across the three weeks against roughly 70%. If you trade one level at a time rather than betting the branch, that remains your column.
- Fifteen sessions still settle nothing, and the indicator's own row is behind. Thirty level events cannot confirm frequencies measured over hundreds. The indicator's realised versus expected row read 51 to 53% against 57% expected across the week, on roughly 265 to 280 setups loaded, which is behind for the third week running. Three weeks in, the honest summary is that the record has a shape, not a verdict, and that row is the number to keep watching.