The Myth of "Gaps Must Fill" Using $IBM $MSFT $AAPLInternational Business Machines CorporationBATS:IBMROW_PartnersOne of the most persistent dogmas in technical analysis is the belief that every gap eventually gets filled. While common or exhaustion gaps often close quickly, Breakaway Gaps born from major structural or fundamental shifts regularly remain open forever or for decades, which makes the "gap fill" theory practically useless. Look at IBM on the weekly timeframe: Multiple breakaway gaps from early market cycles (including zones near $38 and $55) remain completely untouched. For IBM to "fill" these legacy voids, the stock would have to be decimated by 70–80%+, ignoring decades of institutional rerating and earnings evolution. IBM isn't an isolated case as secular market leaders are full of them: MSFT: Unfilled breakaway gap around $29 (4/18/2013). AAPL: Major unfilled gaps at $30 (1/13/2017) and $96 (7/30/2020). Key Takeaway: Gaps reflect supply/demand imbalances at a specific point in time. Treating multi year or multi decade open gaps as guaranteed target magnets ignores market context, volume profile, and long term economic growth.