But why? Because of similar events/conditions? Because the two busts were roughly 6 years apart and it's 7 years since the last?

Because it looks to me like the stock market has a tendency to follow an exponential curve - or at least a high degree polynomial. I also believe that to a certain extent the stock market is bound to the real world and in the real world growth is currently not following an exponential/high degree polynomial curve. The tension between the two is causing an oscillation to develop which overrides the tendency for high disorder in price movements.

In short I think that over long time periods stock markets show some degree of predictability. They are not perfectly disordered because the they are bound to systems operating in the real physical world which display predictable behaviour.

Unfortunately the system operating in the real physical world is based around human behavior, which, despite probably following some heretofore undiscovered law or algorithm, is very difficult to predict.

Depends on the granularity. Total stock market return is a measure of the intersection of time valuation with productivity growth, which has remained consistently exponential for the entire archeological record.

It's amazing how difficult it is to convince people of the ludicrously obvious.

> Double bottom

This is no place for this kind of tea leaf reading nonsense.

Something something head and shoulders pattern, don't you see it?

It's people like you who give chart reading a bad name. There's no double bottom here. A double bottom indicates that a downtrend may have reversed. There's no downtrend on this timeframe.

Chart reading is not voodoo, but bad chart reading is worse than voodoo.

Number Wang!

I also recommend adding S&P500 as a comparison.