By Jake Bernstein, FSC Board Member

rulesbasedtrader@gmail.com

Traders and investors have long debated the possible existence of, for lack of a better term, “economic DNA.” It is impossible to debate the existence of any entity, whether physical or theoretical, whether actual or hypothetical, without knowing exactly what it is that’s being discussed. Consequently, I will offer a definition which we can then debate or decide to accept as reality. 

The implications of what we decide are far-reaching and overarching. History shows that the deeper we dig into the subject of DNA, the more answers we get and the more questions we get. 

While this holds true in the biological sciences, could it also be a significant underlying factor in economics and other social sciences? As always, the true answers are to be found in the data as opposed to the opinions. Even though these opinions may be based on the data, interpretation is always a slippery slope. 

In my experience, the analysis of cycles in economic data – in particular price, history and price patterns – strongly supports the opinion that, yes, there is indeed a substructure of market DNA that supports the vast majority of market movements. 

As an example, and a significant one at that, consider the tendency of U.S. stock markets to rise from the beginning of each calendar year through the end of each calendar year. Clearly this does not mean that the pattern will repeat every year, but it does suggest an underlying bias or, for lack of a better term, genetic tendencies in price trends of stocks and commodities.

Looking at the Data 

As you know, data and predictability are the final determinants of scientific discovery. The process is simple. The mathematics, however, can range from the elementary to the highly sophisticated. Since I am not a mathematician or a true scientist, please do not hesitate to take my assumptions and/or conclusions with several grains of salt. 

I offer you the following normalized price chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average dating back many years.

The chart has normalized the data – by which I mean I have mathematically converted the high price of each year to 100 and the low price of each year to zero. This process has stripped away any individual year and replaced it with the underlying structure of the market, or what I am calling market DNA. 

You might want to do a little experiment yourself by examining any individual year in terms of its trend to the normalized graph shown below. Do you see that each individual year is somewhat similar to the chart’s genetic DNA? 

Therefore, I reach the conclusion, at least initially, that this chart clearly shows an underlying genetic trend. 

Of course, it could be and should be argued that the secular trend of stocks since the mid-1800s has been in the upward bias, which is what accounts for the so-called DNA. Does this negate the existence of that DNA?

The development trend of humans has been upward for thousands of years. Does that negate its validity? 

Let’s think about that until the next installment of my little Gedankenexperiment. I am open to all suggestions and questions.

Jake Bernstein, FSC Board Member

Jake Bernstein has been publishing Jake Bernstein's Weekly Futures Trading Letter since 1972 and trading futures and stocks since 1968. His forecasts and opinions are quoted regularly in the financial press and on financial websites, and he is frequently interviewed on radio and television throughout the U.S. and Canada, including Wall Street Week, CNBC, JagFN.TV, and WebTV.com. In addition to speaking extensively in the U.S., Canada, Europe, and Asia, Bernstein is a consultant for investors, traders, industry, financial institutions, short-term traders, brokerage firms, and commercial firms. Floor traders, professional traders, money managers, hedgers, and traders, both new and experienced, subscribe to his market advisory services. Bernstein is based in California, U.S.

Previously I have interpreted a frequently mentioned figure of 586.24 million years in Afanasiev’s book Nanocycles Method (in Russian) as a geological cycle period and used it extensively in my analysis of cycles. Recently, the whole book was scanned using Optical Character Recognition, and translated into English. We intend to publish the book in English soon. It is now understood that this figure is actually a date (i.e. 586.24 million years ago) of a particular formation rather than a cycle period. I mention this now as it has introduced the possibility of multiple errors into my work. The extent of the errors is being examined at this time. Some background:

1. Western geologists mention in “Megacycles” a collection of papers edited by George Williams in Australia that there are cycles of 600, 300, 150, 74, and 37 million years. Clearly with ratios of 2. The last two figures can be used to estimate the longest cycle as 592 million years, which I took to be 586 million years from Afanasiev’s figure when he gave me a copy of his book.
2. From Wikipedia it can be seen that there are cycles of similar periods to the above in known data such as temperature and CO2 levels:

The black curve shows a clear cycle of a little under 150 million years. There is also a hint of a 36.7-million-year cycle in the blue curve, but it is not very regular.

3. Mass extinctions have been reported to follow a 27-million-year cycle and here is a graph of some mass extinction data.

It can be seen that the two periods of 26.65 and 36.64 million years fit well to the peaks of the mass extinctions. Also, when the two coincide there are higher peaks. These two periods are 293.12 million years (half of 586.24 million years) divided by 11 and 8. This supports there being strong cycles of periods close to 586.24, 293.12, 146.56, 73.28, 36.64, and also 26.65 million years.

The beats between the two cycles are very clear and indicate that the 8:11 ratio is very accurate, while the accuracy of the two periods is probably less that 1% which would make the 586-million-year period uncertain by up to 5 million years.

Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide shows two cycles over the last 600 million years for a cycle period of approximately 300 million years, consistent with the geological cycles periods. Over that period, CO2 levels have risen from about 300 ppm to 6000 ppm, back to 300 ppm and then up to 2000 ppm before falling to 300 ppm again and rising recently to 430 ppm. The period is rather uncertain but looks to be a little less than 300 million years.

When considering all the periods estimated for the longer cycles there is no reason to change the values used but every reason to consider the uncertainties as much higher but still less than 1%.

These periods in years remain as my best estimates of the cycles between hundreds of millions of years and about a week.

Ray Tomes
FSC Science Director and Board Member

While working in systems software development and economic modeling for prediction, Ray Tomes discovered the importance of cycles. After joining the FSC in the 1980s, he spoke at numerous FSC conferences and ran a unit trust operating in futures markets. While studying cycles full time, he developed Harmonics Theory to explain observed patterns of cycles and the entire structure of the universe. He founded Cycles Research Institute, developed CATS cycles analysis software, and speaks internationally. He now acts as the Science Director on the FSC Board. Tomes is based in New Zealand.

Here are 2 monthly cycles, gold and oil, that are mirror images. Gold is headed lower and oil is due to move higher. Here are 4 graphs: monthly cycles and sentiment graphs that make the point.

As to gold, the initial peak in January was the start of an A wave. The March 2-3 top appears to be the start of a C wave (or a 3) down. The 23.6% retracement level has been passed. The 38.2% retracement level is $4,150, and the 50% retracement is $3,700. Here are the targets:

1.383 = $3,660
1.50 = $3,578
1.618 = $3,496

It appears that the low in this down move will be near $3,600-$3,700.

Sentiment is measured by dividing the leveraged gold ETF by its unleveraged ETF. Note the sentiment ratio has already begun to decline. The extreme bullishness is beginning to wane, but it is a long way from a buy signal.

Gold Monthly Cycle

UGL/GLD Gold Sentiment Ratio Has Hit The Sell Level

Here is the same approach as applied to the oil market.

After the sharp move up, price has not retreated by much. The rally created what appears to be a breakaway gap which usually marks the start of a move. The cycles still point up. It appears that a consolidation is underway, not lower prices. The price range runs from $87-$101.

From February 21 through May 21, price has increased 76.2% of the time for a 5.21% gain. This is true for any year. Because the monthly dynamic is also rising, the odds rise to over 83%.

These bullish readings imply that matters in the Gulf will not go well.

Oil Monthly Cycle

UCO/SCO Oil Sentiment Shows Pessimism

Bill Sarubbi Bio
cyclesresearch.com

Bill Sarubbi obtained his BS in 1971 and his MBA in 1972 from NYU, becoming a member of the Foundation for the Study of Cycles in the same year. He trained as a therapist under the direction of Dr. John Pierrakos in New York for nine years. From 1972 to 1990 he worked on the buy and sell sides of Wall Street as an analyst with the Value Line Investment Survey, as an institutional broker, and as a technical strategist with PaineWebber. From 1990 to 2004 Sarubbi was with the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, where he was a technology fund manager, North American strategist, and member of the currency hedging committee. Since 2004 he has been operating his own money management and consulting service. In the course of his work, he developed unique market analysis software. Sarubbi is a Forbes contributor and is active in groups that focus on the future and on cycles, including the Kenos Circle, a Vienna-based group of futurists. Sarubbi is based in Vienna.

 

NOTE: Prepared by FSC Board Member Bill Sarubbi. The views expressed are his own and not investment advice. This article is intended exclusively to provide information and education to help individuals better understand cycles and the markets. However, this information is not to be construed as professional advice as to the buying and selling of securities or other investment instruments. In no event does the host express any opinion with respect to, or make recommendations regarding, the purchase or sale of any particular security or other investment instrument. There is a very high degree of risk involved in trading securities, and buying or selling decisions are solely within the personal discretion of each individual.

Soybean Prices - A 1986 Extrapolation
by Gertrude Shirk
Editor of the Cycles magazine and Vice President of the FSC

From the Archives: This article is reposted as it was published in Cycles Volume Thirty Seven - 1986.

The 1985 extrapolation of soybean prices, first published in the January/February 1985 issue of Cycles is reproduced below as Figure 1. The "How It Came Out" section of the actual price line is completed through December 1985. The prices used in this work are the average monthly cash price of No. 1 Yellow soybeans, Illinois Processor.

The yearly average on a calendar year basis of the calculated line for 1985 was $6.07 which compares to the actual calendar year average price of $5.64 that occurred. In early 1985, low level of the extrapolated calculated line was considered by some members interested in soybean prices to be unduly pessimistic. But, as it turned out, the calculated line ran consistently above the actual prices as they developed.

The calculated/actual price chart covers only five years, and a better perspective can be gained from the entire history of soybean prices. Figure 2 shows this history by crop years, beginning with the figure for the crop year 947-48, and continuing through 1984-85.

This chart is a ratio chart, one on which equal distances measure equal percentage changes. It is obvious that since soybeans have moved to a level of 60 cents and more that the percentage changes from year to year have been much greater than during the earlier period.

The end portion of Figure 2, beginning with the figure for 1972-73 is enlarged on Figure 3, and two possible trend lines are added. The level and direction of trend are important considerations because cycles operate around — above and below — the trend. Although it is tempting to consider the straight line trend as the best description of trend, it is also possible to arrive at a different description — as shown by the bowed line. The top straight line trend gives a 1985-6 value of $6.89 compared to about $6.50 for the curved line.

In any event, actual prices through February 1986 have been well below these trend levels for many months, and the yearly average trend that was used to prepare a 1986 calculated line averaged $5.75. By historical standards (the two trends on Figure 3) the value of $5.75 is low, but it is above the last eight month's experience.

The cycles that were combined with trend were the 12-month, the 24.56-month and the 38.6-month. The record of the 24.56-month cycle is shown on Figure 4, and the 38.6-month cycle is recorded on Figure 5. Both charts are marked to show how the cycle has performed since it was first defined.

The 24.56-month cycle has an average amplitude of 10% of trend at the time of an average crest. There was an ideal crest at May 1985, and the model pattern is now on the way down to a trough at May 1986.

The 38.6-month cycle has an average amplitude of 12% of trend at the time of an ideal crest. The ideal cycle is now going up to a crest at October 1986. Since the low on the seasonal cycle occurs at October, it will be interesting to see what is actually occurring to soybean prices come October.

The combination of the assumed trend and the three cycles is shown on Figure 6 as the broken line.

The cycles used here measure as being statistically significant. That is, the numbers are good. But, even more important is the degree to which these cycles have functioned since they were first postulated.

The average seasonal pattern in soybean prices that was used in the combination is as follows:

By Iain MacKay, FSC Board Member

In the January/February 1986 issue of Cycles magazine, Gertrude Shirk reviewed the performance of cycles in soybean prices previously discussed in Cycles 50 years ago, in the February 1976 issue.

The article made some short-term forecasts based on 12-, 38.6-, and 24.56-month cycles. I wanted to see if a calibration of those cycles made in 1986 would have given a helpful forecast for the time ensuing since.

Our data source is FRED, courtesy the Federal Bank of St Louis.

This is their monthly history of the Soybean Producer Price Index since 1947. They use 1982 as the base for the index.

FRED — Producer Price Index by Commodity: Farm Products: Soybeans

Note: This analysis uses the FRED® API but is not endorsed or certified by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

In 2026 we can vibe code a model that best fits these three cycles to the period 1947 to February 1986 and see how well they have played out since then.

For convenience I used the price gradient (monthly proportionate difference) rather than the raw price, as it is less influenced by the long-term trend but should show similar cyclicity with price turning points occurring at gradient zeros.

A differential evolution algorithm calibrated the phase and amplitude of the gradients, using data from 1947 to 1986, which allows the cycle forecast gradient to be projected from 1986 to the present day and forward to 2030.

Here are the results of the projection, firstly for the last 50 years. The grey-shaded period shows projected gradient, with projected price highs and lows marked with red and green lines respectively.

Soybean Cycle Analysis: 1976 (Jan) - 2030 (Dec)

Looking more closely at the period 1980-2000:

Soybean Cycle Analysis: 1980 (Jan) - 2000 (Jan)

And the years 2020 to 2030:

Soybean Cycle Analysis: 2020 (Jan) - 2030 (Dec)

It is a matter of debate whether cyclic behaviour in financial time series is endogenous (down to the interaction of opposing forces within the system) or exogenous (driven by some external clock).

The distinction is more than academic, because the equations governing endogenous cycles are very sensitive to tiny changes in their parameters. Systems like these can be fundamentally chaotic and unpredictable. On the other hand, exogenous cycles endure over time, so they can be calibrated given sufficient data and they can be modelled with more tractable mathematics like Fourier analysis. While time-local circumstances can shift timing of individual cycles, in the long run the turning points for exogenous cycles remain close to predicted times.

Analysis like this brings evidence to the debate.

The work of the Foundation has identified many apparent exogenous cycles, the work to consolidate and explain them continues.

Iain MacKay Bio

Iain MacKay is the director and founder of Computable Functions Limited, which offers consulting in the application of advanced software technologies for market and survey research, as well as director and co-owner of X-MR Limited, a market research software development firm. MacKay was Deputy Chairman at Pulse Train Technology (now Confirmit), where he developed the company’s mainstream products for over 20 years. As director of UK development for Arbitron Corporation (now Neilson Audio), MacKay set up the development office in the UK. MacKay is based in the UK.

 

NOTE: Prepared by FSC Board Member Iain MacKay. The views expressed are his own and not investment advice. This article is intended exclusively to provide information and education to help individuals better understand cycles and the markets. However, this information is not to be construed as professional advice as to the buying and selling of securities or other investment instruments. In no event does the host express any opinion with respect to, or make recommendations regarding, the purchase or sale of any particular security or other investment instrument. There is a very high degree of risk involved in trading securities, and buying or selling decisions are solely within the personal discretion of each individual.

Edward Dewey established the Foundation for the Study of Cycles in the shadow of the Great Depression. He was searching for the cause of the greatest bust in American history, one in which the US economy contracted by a massive 30%.

Little did he know at the time - though he would later discover - was that the Depression was part of a regular cycle of boom and bust, one that went back to very beginning of the Republic. The boom of the 1920s led to the crisis of the early 1930s in much the same way as it had unfolded in the 1900s, the 1880s, the late 1860s/early 1870s, the 1850s, the 1830s and 1810s.

This cyclical rhythm is so regular, and so fundamental to our economies, that many analysts have built an investment strategy on it. The cycle lasts, on average (and with surprisingly little variation), 18.6 years. If you view history through the lens of this cycle, you can use it to make long-term forecasts and invest accordingly.

At the FSC conference in New York in June, I was pleased, on behalf of my company Property Sharemarket Economics (PSE), to present some of my research on this important cycle to delegates. And as the 18.6 year cycle is entwined with the story of the Foundation, we were honored to be one of the event’s sponsors.

PSE’s mission is to help you to “remember the future”. Our in-depth research on the 18.6 year cycle helps us forecast the main dynamics of the modern economy and provide subscribers with actionable insights.

This 18.6 year cycle continues to this very day. In the second half of the 20th century, it gave rise to the booms of the 1960s and the bust of the early 1970s, the boom of the 1980s and the severe contraction of the early 1990s. The 1990s boom and the housing bubble led to the global financial crisis.

As we move into 2026 we are 18 years on from the events of 2008. I need hardly remind you of what happened then. It’s therefore time to pay close attention to what’s going on in markets, the banking sector and the wider economy. Because, should history repeat, the next few years will be very turbulent indeed. If you think markets and events are disruptive now, just wait to see what will unfold in the years ahead.

Fortunately, by understanding this cycle you can stay ahead of events, be prepared for what’s to come and even take advantage of it.

To help you stay in touch with how the final years of the cycle will play out, I encourage you to sign up to our weekly newsletter, the Property Cycle Investor.

Join now. It’s completely free and you can access it here.

Wishing you well in the challenging times to come.

Yours sincerely,

Akhil Patel
Property Sharemarket Economics

By Bill Sarubbi, FSC Board Member

cyclesresearch.com

The U.S. stock market indices are likely headed higher into January. There are four reasons for this projection.

First, this is a year ending in a 5, the strongest year in the 10-year decennial pattern as developed by Edgar Laurence Smith at Ameritrust Bank. All questions in such "5" years are resolved on the upside. September has been the weakest month in any year, but this bearish month has closed on the upside 66% of the time in these "5" years. The weakest part of September has been the second half of the month, especially the last week. This period could present favorable buying opportunities.

DJIA Histogram of Expected Return in Years Ending in 5

Second, the combination of the 1-, 4- and, 10-year cycles is rising. The first cycle is the annual cycle in any year from 1885. The 4-year cycle has been called the election year cycle. Their summation is below.

1, 4, and 10-Year Cycles in 2025

Third, the dynamic cycle depicted below rises into January. This "catch all" approach accumulates the effect on the S&P of the strongest cycles. It detects cycles that may not be represented by the prior cycles.

S&P Monthly Cycle

And fourth, 60% of all S&P gains have been generated in Q4 of any year.

In order to project a price level, the height of the rectangle from which the S&P 500 broke out is projected up. This points to a price target of 7460.

S&P Daily

What stock should be considered for purchase for Q4? Below is a list of the S&P 100 stock sorted by a unique measure of relative strength. These shares are likely to extend their gains.

Bill Sarubbi Bio
cyclesresearch.com

Bill Sarubbi obtained his BS in 1971 and his MBA in 1972 from NYU, becoming a member of the Foundation for the Study of Cycles in the same year. He trained as a therapist under the direction of Dr. John Pierrakos in New York for nine years. From 1972 to 1990 he worked on the buy and sell sides of Wall Street as an analyst with the Value Line Investment Survey, as an institutional broker, and as a technical strategist with PaineWebber. From 1990 to 2004 Sarubbi was with the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, where he was a technology fund manager, North American strategist, and member of the currency hedging committee. Since 2004 he has been operating his own money management and consulting service. In the course of his work, he developed unique market analysis software. Sarubbi is a Forbes contributor and is active in groups that focus on the future and on cycles, including the Kenos Circle, a Vienna-based group of futurists. Sarubbi is based in Vienna.

 

NOTE: Prepared by FSC Board Member Bill Sarubbi. The views expressed are his own and not investment advice. This article is intended exclusively to provide information and education to help individuals better understand cycles and the markets. However, this information is not to be construed as professional advice as to the buying and selling of securities or other investment instruments. In no event does the host express any opinion with respect to, or make recommendations regarding, the purchase or sale of any particular security or other investment instrument. There is a very high degree of risk involved in trading securities, and buying or selling decisions are solely within the personal discretion of each individual.

Unlocking Life’s Hidden Rhythms: The Ongoing Quest of the Foundation for the Study of Cycles

For centuries, humans have sensed that life doesn’t move randomly — it pulses. From the steady heartbeat and the daily sunrise and sunset, to the rollercoaster pattern of markets, rhythms seem to govern everything. What if these weren’t just coincidences, but the very cyclic DNA of life?

Nearly 100 years ago, economist Edward R. Dewey began a lifelong quest to understand these patterns. His work laid the foundation for what would become the Foundation for the Study of Cycles (FSC) — a global effort to uncover the deeper forces that shape our world.

From Solar Activity to Human Behaviour: A Legacy of Insight

Dewey wasn’t alone in this exploration. He built on the work of early visionaries like William Herschel, Raymond Wheeler, and Alexander Chizhevsky — who discovered striking connections between solar activity, climate, and economic cycles. Their insights suggested that planetary and solar dynamics might subtly shape human activity.

At FSC Live 25, members of the FSC Science team made key contributions: Iain Mackay revisited John Nelson’s work on planetary alignments and communication technology, while Ray Tomes’ harmonics theory demonstrated how complex cycles often emerge from overlapping, simple rhythms — much like chords in a symphony.

Introducing the MMM Framework: Macro, Mood, and Markets

One of the educational highlights at FSC Live 25 was in sharing the Macro, Mood, and Markets (MMM) framework by FSC Development Director Ron William, based on a scientific feedback model developed by Dr. Campion, Associate Professor in Cosmology & Culture at the University of Wales Trinity Saint David.

The MMM model connects three essential layers:

• Macro cycles: Solar and geomagnetic influences, such as sunspot activity and magnetic storms (as re-explored by FSC Director Lars von Thienen)
• Mood cycles: Biological and psychological rhythms studied in heliobiology, a field pioneered by Alexander Chizhevsky
• Market cycles: Patterns in financial behaviour shaped by collective human emotion and sentiment

By linking these layers, the MMM framework offers a practical tool to explore how natural forces resonate through human psychology and ultimately, market dynamics.

For example, periods of intense solar activity have been correlated with spikes in market volatility and shifts in investor sentiment. Market professionals using the MMM framework can anticipate broad mood changes during these times — adding depth to both economic forecasting and psychological understanding.

A Rediscovered Letter and a Renewed Mission

In a fascinating historical twist, a 1973 letter from Dewey to harmonic theorist John Addey was recently uncovered. In it, Dewey expresses his openness to integrating harmonic and cosmological models with empirical cycle data — well ahead of his time. This letter serves as a symbolic bridge between eras — a reminder that the exploration of cycles is both ancient and evolving.

This letter was shared by Dr. Campion, Professor of Cosmology in Culture at the University of Wales Trinity Saint David, during my recent visit for a summer study programme. We are pictured together (below) during the visit, where we discussed the FSC’s legacy and its connections to planetary and harmonic studies.

The Map Is Not the Territory

As the saying goes, models don’t define reality — they help us navigate it. The MMM framework acts as such a map, offering a structured way to explore the connections between nature, psychology, and market dynamics.

FSC Chairman Richard Smith reflected on Dewey’s final hope: that if he couldn’t solve the great cycle mystery, someone else — another Kepler — would carry it forward. Today, the FSC community embraces that vision with growing momentum.

Perhaps It Will Be Us

At the Foundation for the Study of Cycles, we believe the quest to decode life’s deeper patterns is more relevant than ever. Scientists, analysts, and curious minds from around the world are joining forces to reveal what lies beneath the surface of change.

Thank you to all FSC Members for all your kind feedback and insightful questions on our FSC blog series. I welcome more interaction at ron.william@cycles.org

Ron William, CFTe, MSTA

LinkedIn, Twitter

Ron William, CFTe, MSTA, is a market strategist and educator/mentor with more than 20 years of experience working for leading macro research and institutional firms, producing tactical research and trading strategies. He specializes in global, multi-asset, top-down framework, grounded in behavioural technical analysis, driven by cycles based on the "Roadmap" signature model of veteran market technician Robin Griffiths, published in his book “Mapping the Markets.”

Ron also applies a "market & mind" approach at IntensiChi, using the latest techniques in behavioral-risk models and neuroscience sourced from expert groups. He further supplements with mentoring/coaching, trained by the International Coaching Federation (ICF), and teaches a regulatory approved masterclass in Applied Behavioral Science, with investment, private banks and CFA Societies.

Ron's primary work, as part of his current institutional market advisory firm (RWA), acquired global industry recognition as winner of “Best FX Research” in 2020. Financial media programs and industry publications regularly feature his market insights, including “Is the big cycle about to turn?”, predicting the 2020 crash and alerting the “Minsky paradigm” of 2020 H2-2022.

Driven by high-integrity education, Ron serves as part of the education committee of the International Federation of Technical Analysts (IFTA), Development Director at the Foundation of the Study of Cycles (FSC), Head of SAMT’s Geneva Chapter, and an honorary member of ESTA. He is also a visiting lecturer at universities, active guest speaker for the CFA, CAIA and CISI, and senior teacher at colleges offering an accredited diploma in trading and investing.

NOTE: This article is intended exclusively to provide information and education to help individuals better understand cycles and the markets. However, this information is not to be construed as professional advice as to the buying and selling of securities or other investment instruments. In no event does the host express any opinion with respect to, or make recommendations regarding, the purchase or sale of any particular security or other investment instrument. There is a very high degree of risk involved in trading securities, and buying or selling decisions are solely within the personal discretion of each individual.

by Jake Bernstein, FSC Board Member

rulesbasedtrader@gmail.com

Jake Bernstein, FSC Board Member

Jake Bernstein has been publishing Jake Bernstein's Weekly Futures Trading Letter since 1972 and trading futures and stocks since 1968. His forecasts and opinions are quoted regularly in the financial press and on financial websites, and he is frequently interviewed on radio and television throughout the U.S. and Canada, including Wall Street Week, CNBC, JagFN.TV, and WebTV.com. In addition to speaking extensively in the U.S., Canada, Europe, and Asia, Bernstein is a consultant for investors, traders, industry, financial institutions, short-term traders, brokerage firms, and commercial firms. Floor traders, professional traders, money managers, hedgers, and traders, both new and experienced, subscribe to his market advisory services. Bernstein is based in California, U.S.

Since 2020, the Foundation for the Study of Cycles has been rebuilding – quietly, diligently – from remote corners of the globe. Piece by piece, we’ve advanced the science, restored the archives, and reimagined the future of cycles science.

The progress we’ve made is a shared triumph. It belongs to our Members, to the participants of the Live in ’25 conference, and to every person who’s tuned in to a YouTube interview, read a newsletter, or joined a conversation about cycles and their relevance to today’s world.

Live in ’25 marked a turning point. For the first time in years, we gathered in one room – not just to share research, but to celebrate community. And in that spirit, we paused to honor three extraordinary individuals who have been instrumental to the renaissance of the FSC.

Ray Tomes: Lifetime Achievement Award

Joining us live from New Zealand, FSC Science Director Ray Tomes was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award for more than 50 years of pioneering cycles research. Tomes' work transcends disciplines in search of common patterns that shape the world around us. His unwavering curiosity and dedication to uncovering universal cycles have laid a foundation for generations to come.

Lars von Thienen: Innovative Brilliance Award

FSC Board Member and creator of the FSC cycles app, Lars von Thienen, received the Innovative Brilliance Award for his tireless contributions to cycles detection technology. Through his development of the market-leading cycles app and his weekly Market Cycles Report, Lars has made high-level cycles analysis accessible to traders, investors, and analysts – no matter their level of expertise. His work continues to set new standards for what’s possible in this field.

Dr. Richard Smith: Transformational Contribution Award

Dr. Richard Smith, FSC Chairman and Executive Director, was presented with the Transformational Contribution Award, honoring five years of vision, leadership, and deep personal commitment to rebuilding the FSC. From discovering the archives in a dusty Southern California storage unit to hosting a world-class conference at the SUNY Global Center in New York, Dr. Smith has worked to revive and realign the Foundation with the bold mission set forth by Founder Edward R. Dewey: to promote the understanding, application, and exploration of cycles to empower individuals and improve society.

These awards weren’t just a moment of recognition – they were a reminder of the passion, perseverance, and purpose driving the FSC forward.

As we build on the momentum of Live in ’25, we are more inspired than ever to continue this work – together.