When discussing Elliott Wave theory and use, do people on this board differentiate between EW in simple terms (i.e., impulse = 5 waves, correction = 3 waves, pattern characteristics, etc.), the various EW schools (e.g., NeoWave, Miner's approach, Prechter, etc.) and Fibonacci levels (e.g. 0.618 retracement, Fibonacci patterns, etc.)? EW (of any school) is presumably a function of group behavior (mass psychology) and a crack at describing this phenomenon was made by Plummer in "Forecasting Financial Markets." Fibonacci levels on the other hand are "Fibonacci" and according to some are reflective of natural phenomena. Elliott did not initially incorporate Fibonacci levels in his work and added them later when he tried to explain every "wiggle." The two can be (and are) used independently.
Personally, I find it useful to treat the two individually. EW provides a broad background of where the market is while Fibonacci levels, patterns, etc. give a "heads up" which when combined with other indicators, etc. are useful for specific trades. The confluence of EW, Fibonacci, Gann, and standard indicators is often a powerful combination. Rarely does anything work for very long in a "vacuum" without confirmation from other studies.
Personally, I find it useful to treat the two individually. EW provides a broad background of where the market is while Fibonacci levels, patterns, etc. give a "heads up" which when combined with other indicators, etc. are useful for specific trades. The confluence of EW, Fibonacci, Gann, and standard indicators is often a powerful combination. Rarely does anything work for very long in a "vacuum" without confirmation from other studies.