[pcabc]

The market breadth is excellent at helping with market timing, but it is quite subjective and open to interpretation, as different breadth indicators can be telling a different story to each other. So that is why I favour the weight of evidence approach advocated in Weinstein's book, as it gives you a combined result, which helps to filter the noise, and then you can determine which strategy you should be using.

Thomas Dorsey has done some great work on this area, and he uses an American football analogy for the Bullish Percent Chart and Moving Average Breadth, converting the 0-100% range to the American football field zones. i.e. you should be using a different playbook / strategy for when the breadth is in the different zones. So for example when the breadth is still rising above 70% you should add defensive stable positions. But when it's falling and above 70% you should be on Aggressive Defence, and Decreasing Volatility, and Raising Cash Levels etc (see attached Bullish Percent playbook).



So I use a similar approach, but based on the entirety of the market breadth charts that I follow to determine which playbook I should be using. Defensive Strategies, or Offensive Strategies.

Regarding the bullish % or % stocks above their MAs.  Though you talks about weight of evidence you seem to pay particular heed to these?   If so, are you suggesting that if above 70% or below 30% then these indicators should be given more consideration to than other indicators?