NanoViricides Inc. (NNVC)

[JG36]

In both of your examples technical analysis is irrelevant. If there is bad news we can expect the stock to go down. If there is good news we can expect the stock to go up. Those price changes are due to fundamentals, not the previous price action of the stock, which would be case with technical analysis.

I suspect that none of the published trading rules work any better than chance. Why? Because any rule that both works and is widely known will soon cease to work, as more and more market players try to apply the rule. It becomes impossible to buy at the right price when the rule tells you to buy (because of all the other players trying to buy at the same time) and impossible to sell at the price the rule tells you to sell (because of all the other players trying to sell at the same time).

There are a few traders who consistently make money with technical rules. They keep quiet about what those rules are, and if asked, will answer with a useless generality such as, "we seek inefficiencies in the market." (By definition, if a trading rule makes above market returns it is exploiting an inefficiency in the market.) The best known example of successful technical traders is the hedge fund Renaissance Technology, and they don't talk about what they do. If a trader is selling you a method, it's because that method no longer works. Otherwise he'd be making much more money by using the trading method.