Correlated triads — which assets to compare

A correlated triad is a set of three assets that normally move together — for US equity futures, NQ, ES and YM — so that when one steps out of line the disagreement carries information. Every divergence read in Quarterly Theory, the SSMT and the PSP included, is read across one.

Every divergence concept in this framework — SSMT, the PSP, SMT-Fill — rests on the same foundation: a set of assets that normally move together. One chart can't disagree with itself. Pick the wrong set, and every "divergence" you see is noise. This guide is about picking the right one.

Correlation is the measuring stick

A sweep of a prior quarter's low tells you very little on its own — maybe it's a raid, maybe price is simply going down. What turns it into information is a correlated asset that refused to do the same thing. If two assets usually move as one, and at a quarter boundary one breaks a level while the other holds it, something disagreed — and that disagreement is the whole tell.

That only works when the baseline is real. The more reliably the set moves together, the more a crack between them means. Correlation is the ruler you measure divergence against — a bent ruler measures nothing.

Pairs are hints, three is the triad

Quarterly Theory reads divergence across a triad — three correlated assets, not an arbitrary pair. Three assets give you three pair-comparisons (A–B, A–C, B–C), and that structure does two jobs at once:

• Any single diverging pair is already a valid read. If NQ sweeps a prior-quarter low while ES holds, that pair divergence stands on its own.
• All three lining up is the highest conviction. One asset steps out of line while the other two agree — two Peers on one side, one Diverger on the other, and there's no ambiguity about who defected.

Illustrative

swept the prior-Q low — the Diverger (Swept), the odd-one-out (weakest here) held above it — the Peers (the agreement that makes it real)

With only two assets, a disagreement tells you that they disagree — but the third vote settles who broke ranks. (One documented exception: the PSP itself needs a minimum of two correlated assets — a pair works — with the triad acting as the stronger filter. SSMT and SMT-Fill are read across the triad proper.)

The canonical triad: NQ · ES · YM

The canonical triad for this framework is the US equity-futures set: NQ (Nasdaq 100), ES (S&P 500) and YM (Dow). They suit the job unusually well: the same handful of mega-cap names sit in all three, the same macro flows move them, and they run on the same session clock — so their ordinary state is near-lockstep, which is exactly what makes a crack between them loud.

It's also the set most of the source material teaches with — when Daye and the community talk through an SSMT, it's almost always NQ/ES/YM. The micro contracts (MNQ/MES/MYM) form the same triad at smaller size.

Triads by asset class

The same read works anywhere a reliable triad exists. This is the working catalog — the triads the Quarter Sequence engine ships as presets:

The pattern behind the catalog: every good triad shares a common driver — the same underlying constituents, the same metal flow, the same currency on the other side, the same crude in the barrel, the same yield curve. You're not looking for three charts that happen to wiggle alike; you're looking for three expressions of one underlying flow.

How tightly they actually move

Correlation is the ruler this whole framework measures against, so it is worth checking the ruler. Below are published figures for the triads above — from Moore Research Center's inter-market futures correlations, covering the previous 180 trading days. A reading of +100 means the two moved identically, 0 means no relationship at all, and −100 means they moved exactly opposite.

Source: Moore Research Center, Inc. — inter-market futures correlations, previous 180 trading days, as at 7 August 2026. A snapshot: these move, and that table refreshes. Follow the link for current figures. The rates triad isn't shown — the source covers the 30-year and 10-year (they run at +95) but not the full ZF/ZB/TN set. Rankings also shift with the window and the bar size: a six-year study of 5-minute bars puts ES·YM above NQ·ES, the reverse of this 180-day snapshot.

Three things worth taking from it:

• Energy is the tightest triad here — every leg between +92 and +98. Three expressions of one barrel, exactly as the catalog predicts.
• The canonical triad's loosest leg is NQ·YM, at +80 against NQ·ES's +97. Those are the two ends of the set — most tech versus least — so if a crack is going to appear anywhere in the triad first, that's the pair to watch.
• The metals triad holds together well — Silver·Platinum at +94, Gold·Silver at +87, Gold·Platinum at +83. Tight enough to read across, and looser than energy, which is what you'd expect from three metals with partly different demand stories.

Inverse correlation — the mirror

Some triad members move opposite to the others. The classic case is DXY: EURUSD and GBPUSD rise when the dollar falls, so DXY is their mirror image, not their twin. The relationship is just as tight — it's simply upside down.

Before comparing, the inverse asset gets flipped: a higher high on DXY reads as a lower low, and vice versa. Once mirrored, the standard read applies unchanged.

The figures above show how literal that mirror is. EURUSD against DXY came out at −99 — about as close to a perfect inverse as a real asset gets, which is why flipping it works so cleanly. GBPUSD against DXY was looser at −67, and the two majors against each other only +62. So in that triad the mirrored leg is the tightest relationship of the three, not the awkward one.

Illustrative

A triad can mix correlations — on a EURUSD chart, GBPUSD compares directly while DXY compares mirrored. Good tooling flips the inverse leg internally so every comparison reads the same way.

Strongest and weakest

Beyond the setup itself, the triad hands you a free relative-strength read at every divergence:

• The odd-one-out always marks the extreme of relative strength — the question is which end. On a Swept SSMT the Diverger is the lone breaker: it went furthest, so it's the weakest and the two Peers are the stronger side. On a Held SSMT the Diverger is the lone holder while the two Peers break: it stood its ground, so it is the strongest.
• So the reading flips with the mode, but the principle doesn't: the asset that opposed the other two is the one showing the most information about relative strength, in whichever direction it stepped out.

That relative-strength read is context the entry model builds on — which chart carries the trigger and the stop is covered in the PSP guide.

When correlation isn't there

The read has one honest precondition: the three assets have to be behaving like a triad that day. Single-name news, an earnings shock in a heavyweight constituent, a crypto-specific headline — any of these can make one member trade on its own story for a while. Divergence during a genuine decoupling isn't information; it's just two assets doing different things.

The discipline is simple: if the set hasn't been tracking together on the approach, don't read divergence at the boundary. No baseline, no read.

Not all decoupling is noise

The rule above is about one asset trading its own story. There is one recurring exception where the triad comes apart by design, and it is worth telling apart from the noise.

Around the New York open the triad often splits: YM expands hard one way while NQ and ES expand the other. That shape is readable, and it gives YM one of two roles.

• Manipulation. YM takes liquidity first — a sweep of a prior extreme — and the triad reads that as an SSMT with YM as the Diverger. Once the sweep is done, NQ and ES are expected to reverse or expand.
• Foreseen distribution. YM expands aggressively toward its targets without sweeping first. It is already delivering, so on this read it shows the direction the other two will take, and they are expected to reach the same targets once their own manipulation completes.

A PSP can print on any of the three in either case, so it is not what separates them. What separates them is whether YM swept before it ran.

Illustrative

Either way it resolves the same: whichever asset delivered first pauses into consolidation or a retrace while the other two catch up. If a re-sync comes, it typically arrives at the 10:00 candle or, failing that, the 10:30 90-minute open.

What beginners get wrong

• Inventing triads. Two charts that look similar this month aren't a triad. Stick to sets with a common driver — the documented catalog above.
• Forgetting the flip. Comparing DXY to EURUSD without inverting reads every normal day as a "divergence". Mirror first, then compare.
• Reading divergence in a decoupled asset. If one member is trading its own news, the ruler is bent — skip the read.
• Mixing feeds and sessions. Compare like with like: futures with futures, the same session windows, the same anchor clock. A "divergence" caused by one feed's missing hours isn't a divergence.
• Stopping at one pair. A pair divergence is valid — but the third asset is information you already have. Check it: both peers holding upgrades the read.

Common questions

Why three assets and not two?

Three assets give three pair comparisons. A single diverging pair is already a valid read; when one asset diverges and the other two agree — two Peers, one Diverger — there is no ambiguity about who defected.

Which assets are correlated with NQ?

ES and YM — the S&P 500 and Dow futures. The same mega-cap names, the same macro flows, the same session clock. The micro contracts MNQ, MES and MYM form the same triad at smaller size.

How is an inversely correlated asset like DXY handled?

It is flipped before comparing: a higher high on DXY reads as a lower low against EURUSD and GBPUSD. Once mirrored, the standard divergence read applies unchanged.