Recently I read a highly respected trader comments about how his quantified studies showed that indicator divergence was a Wall Street myth. It stopped me cold since I use weekly MACD-H divergence. I decided to reexamine the concept, and went back to the weekly SPY data since late 1999, using Alex’s classic definition–a higher high in price with a lower high in weekly MACD-H, separated by a retracement below the zero line that “breaks the back of the bull”. I used Alex’s traditional, 8,11,15 calculations. Bullish divergences are reversed. I think of weekly MACD-H as institutional accumulation–if it rises, the Generals are buying, if it declines the Generals are selling. So, a bearish divergence means the Generals have tucked in and are probably distributing shares or locking in profits. Starting in late 1999, I counted 13 distinct bearish weekly MACD-H divergences, including 3 that marked primary market tops–Jan 2000, Oct 2007, and April 2010. Each of the 3 primary tops formed complex divergence patterns that involved multiple lower MACD-H highs, and each were also major 1,2,3 Top patterns.There were 3 bullish divergences, July 2002, July 2008, and Jan 2009. July 2002 and Jan 2009 were major bottoms, July 2008 was an intermediate bottom. While there are probably different ways to interpret these events and clarity is often elusive; simply shorting the SPY at each divergence would have been very profitable. After this little study, I’m more confident than ever in the weekly MACD-H