Yes! Some of those areas look similar, but a few to note are:
(D) In 2011, D was already making higher highs (HH's) above the B. In Elliott wave, that was a subwave of the whole rise to $31.9099. In this case, it was a 3. In 2013, it was still part of the correction, or in the best supporting argument, a subwave of a subwave, 1 of 5. Visually, it makes no HH, so it really doesn't look similar at all.
Next, compare price of everything after the $1200 peak with the 2011/12 data you have there. Your corresponding points hit the bottom and began rising in the latter. In 2014, it continued down. This tells me that we are in a much larger cycle here that isn't really comparable to the 2010-2012 data you have without first stretching that data about 4x. I would argue that your F, G and H are more appropriately set up like this
Where F and G were all of 2014 and we are still somewhere in the H. Or at best, in the I. There is also the possibility that F was the entirety of 2014 and we are in G since January this year. I don't really have an opinion on which is more likely.
OK, so I replotted the data overlaying everything basically since the November 2013 runup to ATH with about a 3x compression.
No questioin that doing this results in a very interesting graph that parallels the previous cycle much closer. This would put us in a situation where we are on the tail end of a phase 2, however, it could mean a phase 3 that more closely follows that of cycle 1. The net result is a possible short term period of uptrend in price, followed by a period of slow growth. Not a bad thing. However, in cycle 1 this phase (3) did not overtake the ATH we reached in phase 2, so if that holds again it would mean we won't get over ~US$1200 for the forseeable future.
As I stated before though, this would mean that there is no discernible cycle to be found, and while I will continue to track it, the time frame of any future peaks becomes much hard to guess at.
OTOH, if we do see a significant growth over the next month or 2, I would say the time frame has not compressed, and the original cycle periods hold. In the above plot we are starting to generate some disparity with the previous cycle at this point using this idea, so I think we will get an idea over the next couple of months which trend fits better.
The other possibility is a period of compressed time as shown above, followed by an expansion in X bringing our timeline back to the original; something like this:
which again puts us close to back to the beginning of a new cycle. Again, time will tell.
My final thought on this, and not working on theories of Elliott waves or TA in general, is that if there is a fractal pattern becoming evident, it would present itself such that you could view similar trends on various time scales, as I have done above. That would mean the original theory is not invalidated, but rather additional trends become evident by changing the scale of the X-axis. Again, we will see.
