ftp.xmission.com

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ ftp.xmission.com / 2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar / ftp.xmission.com / pub / lists / canslim / archive / v02.n195 < prev next >

Wrap

Internet Message Format | 1998-04-18 | 42KB

From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #195 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Saturday, April 18 1998 Volume 02 : Number 195 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Two to watch KELL and SCTC Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS ???? Re: [CANSLIM] Results of Earnings/Momentum Screen Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS???? Re: [CANSLIM] avei Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? [CANSLIM] OBV/MF & Canslim [CANSLIM] Search engines and such Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? Re: [CANSLIM] online firms -- Datek Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? Re: [CANSLIM] Timeliness Interpretation Re: [CANSLIM] Timeliness Interpretation Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS ???? [CANSLIM] Opening a can or worms Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS ???? Re: [CANSLIM] Opening a can or worms Re: [CANSLIM] Opening a can or worms ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 13:11:20 EDT From: DCSquires <DCSquires@aol.com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Two to watch KELL and SCTC In a message dated 98-04-18 12:17:41 EDT, you write: << But, I don't understand SCTC. The chart I pull up on DGO appears to me to be running up, not pulling back to a lower risk buy point. In addition, the last quarter's growth in earnings was the worst advance (albeit still great) in about 2 years. What do you see in SCTC that I don't, and why don't you think it needs to base awhile? >> I know there was not much year over year growth with this one but I have been following it a long time and estimates have been wrong most of the time so I am assuming they are going to surprise on the upside as we approach 2000. Also the tone of the quarterly report was very confident. When I said pullback I was referring to a pullback relative to 50, which I consider the point to buy it at. It may continue to pullback to fill the gap at 49. Either way I would like to see it rest. After looking more closely at the numbers it doesn't appear to be a great CS candidate but I go with the chart first. As many have probably noticed my interpretation of CS is quite loose and slanted heavily to the technical/charting side. I hope this answers your question. DSquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 13:39:02 -0500 From: Bill <wgs@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS ???? Thanks - I guess I need to look up the definition of 'handle.' This would infer that the price is going up while volume is going down. Do you have any recent examples of this phenomenon? Need to see it to really understand the concept. Bill-->> - ------------------------------------------ At 12:50 PM -0400 4/18/98, DCSquires wrote: >In a message dated 98-04-18 12:39:22 EDT, you write: > ><< Tom, can you please explain why 'volume drying up' is a positive breakout > signal? >> > >I'm not Tom but I want to comment on this. I get very excited when I see >volume drying up in the handle..........the more the volume contracts the >better. The reason why is that it signals the exhaustion of weak hands >(sellers) at the brink of a new high. In short, it is last of the "get out >even" croud. Going forward the stock is now in stronger hands and the BO is >more likely to succeed. > >DSquires > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 17:45:27 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Results of Earnings/Momentum Screen On Thu, 16 Apr 1998 19:50:16 -0800, you wrote: :> From: "Tom Worley" <stkguru@netside.net> :> To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com> : :> I agree that the "old" reason of buying only in round lots to avoid :> the surcharge is history. However, the real reason for buying in :> quantity remains, to divide the cost of the round trip transaction :> over more shares. Even if it only costs $20 for the round trip, this :> cost over 40 shares means the first 50 cents of appreciation go to pay :> costs. Had you bot 200 shares for the same cost, then only a dime is :> needed to cover costs. : :Huh? I don't get this. The only thing that seems to count to me is=20 :you are buying X dollars worth of something, and you hope it=20 :appreciates some percentage. Doesn't matter if it is 200 shares for=20 :$3000, or 50 shares for $3000 with the same commission in each case,=20 :you still get the same return on a 30 percent gain, or whatever. The=20 :commission should be the same these days, because usually on anthing=20 :under 1000 shares you are paying the minimum commission. If not=20 :you are overpaying. He meant to say "Had you bot 200 shares at the same *price/share*...", not "cost". Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 13:50:05 EDT From: DCSquires <DCSquires@aol.com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS???? In a message dated 98-04-18 13:40:11 EDT, you write: << Thanks - I guess I need to look up the definition of 'handle.' This would infer that the price is going up while volume is going down. Do you have any recent examples of this phenomenon? Need to see it to really understand the concept. >> No price is going down/sideways as volume contracts. Examples include ASCS... the handle was made during most of March. TRAV.....handle was made during Feb- March. And KELL right now........long handle with a shakeout has occured during March and APril, although I would prefer more volume contraction. DSquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 18:01:37 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] avei On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 13:39:53 -0800, you wrote: :Arterial Vascular caught my eye at the earning surprises page at=20 :Yahoo. Really smoked the estimates, beat them by something like 50%.=20 :Stock opened higher, then traded lower for the rest of the day. I=20 :looked the earning report over, seems like a legitimate increase,=20 :that is, no one time gains or anything, so I don't know why it=20 :wouldn't take off on this news. Anyway, seems like things are going=20 :good for them and if they can continue this way I would think the=20 :stock is eventually going to get moving. Seems to be in a base. : I have so far found it difficult to predict the movement of stocks based on earnings estimates vs. reports. Sometimes a stock will beat estimates significantly and actually turn down (for example MLHR in the first week of Oct.). I think you need more indepth information that what you will see in estimates and on a balance sheet/earnings report in the media to have a feel for what figures are apt to have what effect. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 11:11:19 +0000 From: "Debby Howard" <dhoward@mail.pacificnet.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? Connie Mack, A couple of thank yous, first for your interpretation of ALDA's action yesterday, it helps. (I don't own ALDA but my DH has owned it through a long lag time, and now comes a positive earnings surprise and breakout.) Looks like it's consolidating for today. Interesting how the 3-line EMA's (on BigCharts) are all converging toward the end of today, which should signal a change in direction (would assume up, but will watch closely for what it does do and not for what I think it should do :). Doing your analytical walk-through on NSIT was useful training to see how to analyze the indicators MF and OBV vs. price and for the insight it reveals into a possible downside to that particular canslim stock. Some more thoughts on the Moneyflow divergence issue. Below are various stocks that came up in the scan I put together. These appear to have the positively divergent moneyflow and/or OBV relative to falling or flat prices. Does it work? (I hand-filtered out a lot of junk, so it needs tuning.) Which of these look like good candidates and why or why not? (Also in Group 2, are the ones I found "anomalous" -- where MF and OBV are going in opposite directions; I find that quite strange.) Group 1: With these, OBV/MF are in sync. BFE 2-mo. price rise; OBV/MF rising even more strongly? MAV 1-yr. chart OBV/MF steady rise, price falling WIT 3-mo chart, MF/OBV highly positive vs flat price Group 2. OBV and MF diverge from one another; OBV is negative (throw these out?) * AGP 6-mo. chart, OBV and MF going opposite directions * MBK 1-yr. chart, MF rising, OBV and price falling * NSANY ditto MBK Group 3. MF positively divergent from price; OBV?..can't interpret AEC 6-mo. chart, MF positive vs. price AMCRY 3-mo. chart, OBV erratically tracks flat price, MF up * BIKE 1-mo. chart, MF up despite gap down on 3/17 BKF 2-mo. chart, MF up despite after gap down on 3/25 CIR (picked this up too) MF positive vs. price PTII 6-mo. cht, MF up vs. price beaten down in April RESP MF rising despite 10point gap down on 4/2 RZYM 1-yr chart, long term MF rise vs price plummeting What does your discerning eye see? (Please, no one take these as recommendations. I am strictly in a learning mode!) Debby - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 15:03:05 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea <rea1@dp.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] OBV/MF & Canslim Members-- Today David made mention of MINI. As I recall, others in the past have posted about the stock; so I presume it meets Canslim criteria. What I want to mention is that my OBV/MF/EMA indicators are more often than not useful to Canslimers. I have said that my criteria for day trading and swing trading have passed from the very complex of years ago to the simple and straightforward of the above. Simplicity is not per se better than sophistication, except when looking for a Unified Field theory in physics. But think how many times have the dart board throwers in the Wall Street Journal contest beat the programers. The results do make one wonder. The evolution of MINI for the last three months is an instance of how OBV/MF/EMA complement Canslim criteria. Notice that [in BigCharts] OBV tracks the price; the OBV is not a positive divergence, but it does confirm a conjunction of OBV and price--and any such conjunction, or paralleling, is powerful and promising for a stock. Pull up MF and notice that it is telling some of the same story as OBV but also a different story. From the middle of February to first of April there is a near similar tracking of MF and price. I say "near" because once MF has risen from February it flattens while price continues to rise. This is the first hint of a negative divergence [price rises but MF flattens, hence the divergence]. MF peaks in the first of April and commences to decline to the present. While the MF declines, the price rises still more. This negative divergence is more significant than the negative divergence when the MF was only flattening against the rise in price. Before returning to OBV/MF, let me point out how BC's default 3-EMA [5/10/15] would have put you in the stock at the end of February and kept you in until the present. There was not once that you would have had to sweat any of the three sell signals that the EMA is capable of [5-line through the 10-line, etc.]. The 3/7/10 might have given you the jitters after putting you in also in February, for the 3/7/10 lines coincided a couple of times but never made a pass through. As of today, the 3-line has flattened but has not given a first level signal [the passing of the 3-line through the 7-line]. As we stand today with MINI, the OBV is tracking nicely, the MF has two instances of negative divergence, and the EMA [3/7/10] has not given a sell signal since the entrance in February. All in all, a nice run of 4-plus points and not a single jerking around. What I want to emphasize here is that those who bought MINI as a Canslim candidate have done well but that there is mixed in with your doing well a simultaneous signal of warning: the negative divergence of MF. This is how I read the positive/negative showings. Had both the OBV and MF had intermittent negative divergence, I would show fear, and perhaps loathing, for MINI. When the next EMA sell signal comes, even at the first level [3-line passing through the 7-line], I would be taking half of my profits. Should the indicator move to the third level sell [7-line through the 10-line], I empty the holding. However, since the MF alone has intermittent negative divergences [one a flattening and the other a declining], I would be willing to suffer through a second level sell [passing of the 3-line through the 10-line]. But I don't believe that I would hold if there were a third level sell. I have held through a third level sell, but would not in this instance. Here, the second MF negative divergence occurred in the last ten days of trading. Its recency makes me edgy. Now is the time to look at a 5-day hourly chart of OBV/MF. I see a lot of congestion since the 14th at 11. 625. The EMA is all over the place with buys and sells. It hints of a building of pressure whose resolution is yet unclear. However, to use a jargon phrase--"captial management"--which is a metaphor for not losing your ass because you didn't play the odds, I'd bet that the resolution is for more than a nominal correction. This reading of the OBV/MF/EMA is what you ought to do if you're using the indicator. Run a diary of pre/post results. This pre-result ought to be set aside until the next correction is complete. How sound was your [my] foresight? It would not be difficult to find an instance in which MF were tracking nicely and OBV had one or more intermittent negative divergences. After enough observation, you may decide which of the two is more telling, more influential. To do so is to have weighted one indicator over another. You can't expect your pre-result readings to be of much value if you've not given weight to your indicators, as I mentioned a few days back. If you don't have a weight set to each one, you will find yourself rationalizing the result. When you rationalize a result, you are exercising a low grade of guessing. To do so will make you go broke by degrees, perhaps even by quadrants. A rumor of sharp truth is that each of us, after our last word on a stock, is one word nearer to committing our next blunder. But there is no other way. Connie Mack - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 15:21:02 -0400 From: Jeffry White <"postwhit@sover.net"@sover.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Search engines and such > Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 21:35:12 -0400 (EDT) > From: Deepak Kapur <kapur@cs.albany.edu> > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Search engines and such > > Jeffry, > > I agree with you about the valuation of internet stocks. But the > way they run up, it is kind of a scary to short them. Bu the way, > you have a good call on BALDF(?) a few weeks ago. What kind > of discipline do you use? Give us some examples about where > (at what price) you shorted them, and when you will cover, and what > is stop loss? Thanks, > > Deepak In the Money Puts, 3-6 months out is the firm rule, for me Deepak. BLDPF was a climax top, as described in HTMMIS. Shorted it with 130's and covered when the thing reversed from a climax selloff at around 98. SEEK, LCOS, XCIT are the same, although SEEK is the real comedy (turned 150% of the float on Thursday and 100% on Friday). YHOO maybe a climax as well, but not quite as carried away and it's actually making money and has been leading the charge. Again, in the money Puts, 3-6 months out is the only way I short them, and cover when they return to the origin of the climax run, or show me a significant gap lower with a reversal on higher volume than the prior day's selling (kind of like WON's "bottom" signal in front of a "follow through day"). Time premium is sometimes all you can salvage, but limited risk, no need for stop placement, and with so much leverage, you don't have to (and really shouldn't) commit much more than 5-10% of your capital to play. Have to admit that I mis-timed my shorts of YHOO and LCOS based upon another system which didn't work on these two "tulip bulbs", but my Puts are still 3 months out, and depsite significant price declines in the puts, there's still some time premium. So I've got several months to fulfill my dreams. Kinda like betting the horses, and feeling glum when a sprinter is on the lead at the 1/16 pole, but you've still got your ticket and the closer 15 lengths off is moving hard. XCIT and SEEK are looking fine, however. Got July's on those. AMZN is not a climax top, but I just think it's a joke that it's market cap is equal to Barnes & Nobles and their press releases concede they "will lose money for the foreseeable future." August in the money puts on that one, as well. BTW, YHOO's market cap is now in excess of the recent purchase price of CBS. And for tulips, no less. Does that give you enough of a glimpse? Wish me luck, these things could turn on a dime and run another 50%. Who knows, before it's all over, YHOO may buy CBS with it's stock. :) Jeffry - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 15:28:43 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea <rea1@dp.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? Debby-- BigCharts just notified me that they have updated since my last connection. Their update is so superlative that my OBV button will bring up nothing but SlowStochastics. They're not quite bright enough to do things right the first time. I'll answer when they've uncrossed their synapses. Thanks for the mail. Connie Mack Debby Howard wrote: > Connie Mack, > > A couple of thank yous, first for your interpretation of ALDA's > action yesterday, it helps. (I don't own ALDA but my DH has owned it > through a long lag time, and now comes a positive earnings surprise > and breakout.) Looks like it's consolidating for today. Interesting > how the 3-line EMA's (on BigCharts) are all converging toward the end > of today, which should signal a change in direction (would assume up, > but will watch closely for what it does do and not for what I > think it should do :). > > Doing your analytical walk-through on NSIT was useful training to see > how to analyze the indicators MF and OBV vs. price and for the > insight it reveals into a possible downside to that particular > canslim stock. > > Some more thoughts on the Moneyflow divergence issue. Below are > various stocks that came up in the scan I put together. These appear > to have the positively divergent moneyflow and/or OBV relative to > falling or flat prices. Does it work? (I hand-filtered out a lot of > junk, so it needs tuning.) Which of these look like good > candidates and why or why not? (Also in Group 2, are the ones I > found "anomalous" -- where MF and OBV are going in opposite > directions; I find that quite strange.) > > Group 1: With these, OBV/MF are in sync. > > BFE 2-mo. price rise; OBV/MF rising even more strongly? > > MAV 1-yr. chart OBV/MF steady rise, price falling > > WIT 3-mo chart, MF/OBV highly positive vs flat price > > Group 2. OBV and MF diverge from one another; OBV is negative (throw > these out?) > > * AGP 6-mo. chart, OBV and MF going opposite directions > > * MBK 1-yr. chart, MF rising, OBV and price falling > > * NSANY ditto MBK > > Group 3. MF positively divergent from price; OBV?..can't interpret > > AEC 6-mo. chart, MF positive vs. price > > AMCRY 3-mo. chart, OBV erratically tracks flat price, MF up > > * BIKE 1-mo. chart, MF up despite gap down on 3/17 > > BKF 2-mo. chart, MF up despite after gap down on 3/25 > > CIR (picked this up too) MF positive vs. price > > PTII 6-mo. cht, MF up vs. price beaten down in April > > RESP MF rising despite 10point gap down on 4/2 > > RZYM 1-yr chart, long term MF rise vs price plummeting > > What does your discerning eye see? (Please, no one take these as > recommendations. I am strictly in a learning mode!) > > Debby > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 15:29:30 -0700 From: <hoseco7@concentric.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] online firms -- Datek did you sell??? LMAO - -----Original Message----- From: Dan Musicant <musicant@autobahn.org> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com <canslim@lists.xmission.com> Date: Thursday, April 16, 1998 9:37 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] online firms -- Datek A minus for Datek: Just went to their website, and checked my portfolio, and see that their quote system is screwing up again. It's often wrong, and sometimes absolutely crazy (as it is now). For example, it has one of my stocks at 34 3/4, up 14 7/16 for the day. I wish! Dan - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 17:10:32 -0500 From: Bill <wgs@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? Try entering BigCharts from their home page at http://www.bigcharts.com/, then select the stock/indicators. Worked for me but was unable to save the settings. :-( Looks like they are working on it now - the small box above the Store/Clear Settings pointers is now blank again. Two hours ago, it was streaming a brokerage ad. Bill-->> Connie Mack Rea wrote: > Debby-- > > BigCharts just notified me that they have updated since my last > connection. > > Their update is so superlative that my OBV button will bring up nothing > but > SlowStochastics. They're not quite bright enough to do things right the > first time. > > I'll answer when they've uncrossed their synapses. > > Thanks for the mail. > > Connie Mack > > Debby Howard wrote: > > > Connie Mack, > > > > A couple of thank yous, first for your interpretation of ALDA's > > action yesterday, it helps. (I don't own ALDA but my DH has owned it > > through a long lag time, and now comes a positive earnings surprise > > and breakout.) Looks like it's consolidating for today. Interesting > > how the 3-line EMA's (on BigCharts) are all converging toward the end > > of today, which should signal a change in direction (would assume up, > > but will watch closely for what it does do and not for what I > > think it should do :). > > > > Doing your analytical walk-through on NSIT was useful training to see > > how to analyze the indicators MF and OBV vs. price and for the > > insight it reveals into a possible downside to that particular > > canslim stock. > > > > Some more thoughts on the Moneyflow divergence issue. Below are > > various stocks that came up in the scan I put together. These appear > > to have the positively divergent moneyflow and/or OBV relative to > > falling or flat prices. Does it work? (I hand-filtered out a lot of > > junk, so it needs tuning.) Which of these look like good > > candidates and why or why not? (Also in Group 2, are the ones I > > found "anomalous" -- where MF and OBV are going in opposite > > directions; I find that quite strange.) > > > > Group 1: With these, OBV/MF are in sync. > > > > BFE 2-mo. price rise; OBV/MF rising even more strongly? > > > > MAV 1-yr. chart OBV/MF steady rise, price falling > > > > WIT 3-mo chart, MF/OBV highly positive vs flat price > > > > Group 2. OBV and MF diverge from one another; OBV is negative (throw > > these out?) > > > > * AGP 6-mo. chart, OBV and MF going opposite directions > > > > * MBK 1-yr. chart, MF rising, OBV and price falling > > > > * NSANY ditto MBK > > > > Group 3. MF positively divergent from price; OBV?..can't interpret > > > > AEC 6-mo. chart, MF positive vs. price > > > > AMCRY 3-mo. chart, OBV erratically tracks flat price, MF up > > > > * BIKE 1-mo. chart, MF up despite gap down on 3/17 > > > > BKF 2-mo. chart, MF up despite after gap down on 3/25 > > > > CIR (picked this up too) MF positive vs. price > > > > PTII 6-mo. cht, MF up vs. price beaten down in April > > > > RESP MF rising despite 10point gap down on 4/2 > > > > RZYM 1-yr chart, long term MF rise vs price plummeting > > > > What does your discerning eye see? (Please, no one take these as > > recommendations. I am strictly in a learning mode!) > > > > Debby > > > > - > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 17:13:12 -0400 From: Connie Mack Rea <rea1@dp.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] MF sometimes inverted? Debby and Members-- My complaint to BC about their bug in OBV drew a response [and debugging] faster than Clinton can deny wearing out his zippers. Here we go. Looking only at 3-mos charts. Group 1 MAV: OBV/MF are in sync, but more than that they are positively divergent up until the last two days. The EMA is at a third level sell, but ought to be a good entry when it turns buy. BFE: OBV/MF tracking nicely. EMA buy still intact. WIT: MF positively divergent last 30 days. OBV positively divergent last two months. Group 2 AGP: May need to clarify the nomenclature some. Perhaps better to say that the OBV is tracking negatively, which would mean that the stock is falling and the OBV is tracking, paralleling the fall. Obversely, we could say that tracking positively would mean that the stock is rising and the OBV is tracking, paralleling the rise. The MF has been positively diverging for a month and a half. Your right to say that OBV and MF are diverging. Just how to say which is diverging, and from what, is not expressed by saying they diverge. Could say, I guess, that OBV is negatively diverging from MF. This, too. still leaves room for improvement. MBK: Nice, strong MF positive divergence here. Stock is worth watching. Next EMA buy could produce some profit. NSANY: Right about OBV. MF is a bit more complex than to say it is "ditto" of MBK. Group 3 AEC: Believe that one reason I am seeing some things different from you is that you are moving from charts of different time frames. E.g., on a 3-mos chart MF is tracking falling price until the last five days; for these days there exists a slight positive divergence. OBV has a slight positive divergence. I.e., the price on March 1 is 20 and a fraction and OBV is at its low. Friday the price is a bit lower than on March 1, but the OBV is higher than on the same date. Hence, a slight positive divergence. AMCRY: There is some positive bias of OBV. Draw some trend lines in both windows to see it. You're right about the positive divergence of MF. Debby, perhaps you would excuse me from examining the rest of the stocks because they are all of different time frames. Looks like these have all been drawn from BC because they all look familiar. And all were rejected because one of the other of OBV/MF was not positively divergent. If you were to look at each stock, you would see some pretty fair charts. Remember that my criteria call for both OBV and MF to be positively divergent. A stock might be quite strong using other criteria and not meet mine. Even when a stock has either an OBV or MF positive divergence, it could be quite strong. For any of you who might do any day trading, you will note how little a chart for day trading differs from one for swing trading or investing. Reading charts [and intraday indicators] for day trading is quite different. My criteria are strict, reasonably simple to interpret, and few. They complement any strategy and ought not cause any distortion of other indicators. Debby, thanks for the mail. Seems that you've a good grasp of the system already. Connie Mack Debby Howard wrote: > Connie Mack, > > A couple of thank yous, first for your interpretation of ALDA's > action yesterday, it helps. (I don't own ALDA but my DH has owned it > through a long lag time, and now comes a positive earnings surprise > and breakout.) Looks like it's consolidating for today. Interesting > how the 3-line EMA's (on BigCharts) are all converging toward the end > of today, which should signal a change in direction (would assume up, > but will watch closely for what it does do and not for what I > think it should do :). > > Doing your analytical walk-through on NSIT was useful training to see > how to analyze the indicators MF and OBV vs. price and for the > insight it reveals into a possible downside to that particular > canslim stock. > > Some more thoughts on the Moneyflow divergence issue. Below are > various stocks that came up in the scan I put together. These appear > to have the positively divergent moneyflow and/or OBV relative to > falling or flat prices. Does it work? (I hand-filtered out a lot of > junk, so it needs tuning.) Which of these look like good > candidates and why or why not? (Also in Group 2, are the ones I > found "anomalous" -- where MF and OBV are going in opposite > directions; I find that quite strange.) > > Group 1: With these, OBV/MF are in sync. > > BFE 2-mo. price rise; OBV/MF rising even more strongly? > > MAV 1-yr. chart OBV/MF steady rise, price falling > > WIT 3-mo chart, MF/OBV highly positive vs flat price > > Group 2. OBV and MF diverge from one another; OBV is negative (throw > these out?) > > * AGP 6-mo. chart, OBV and MF going opposite directions > > * MBK 1-yr. chart, MF rising, OBV and price falling > > * NSANY ditto MBK > > Group 3. MF positively divergent from price; OBV?..can't interpret > > AEC 6-mo. chart, MF positive vs. price > > AMCRY 3-mo. chart, OBV erratically tracks flat price, MF up > > * BIKE 1-mo. chart, MF up despite gap down on 3/17 > > BKF 2-mo. chart, MF up despite after gap down on 3/25 > > CIR (picked this up too) MF positive vs. price > > PTII 6-mo. cht, MF up vs. price beaten down in April > > RESP MF rising despite 10point gap down on 4/2 > > RZYM 1-yr chart, long term MF rise vs price plummeting > > What does your discerning eye see? (Please, no one take these as > recommendations. I am strictly in a learning mode!) > > Debby > > - - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 18:51:23 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" <Wolynski@MindSpring.Com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Timeliness Interpretation Thank Tom for the explanation. Obviously much more than pure technical indicators. One more question, this time about IBD's (WON's), use of accumulation / distribution codes A/B/C/D/E. I'm betting proprietary as before. Is this a more timely indicator of current and prior action? Not indicating potential performance but rather more following some conditions of technical a/d or OBV/Money Flow. These indications change quickly in the IBD computer. Beneath the Psychological Market Indicators in IBD, the IBD 6000 Accumulation/Distribution totals are given for each category (A/B/C/D/E) for stocks $5 and above. Daily the numbers move from category to category. Obviously the daily A/D is calculated and each stock is assessed its ranking and counted accordingly. Thus, the number of A's drop and climb, daily. Frank Wolynski At 08:32 4/18/98 -0400, Tom Worley wrote: >Per the Daily Graphs book (I think they had something similar at the >online site, but last time I looked didn't find it): > >TIMELINESS RATING is a proprietary rating based upon recent earnings >changes and price performance indicating possible or potential >relative price performance over the next 12 months. General market >factors are not considered in the stock rating. Ratings presented are >updated weekly. A is highest and E is lowest. While stocks with rating >of A and B may outperform stocks with rating of D and E in up markets, >higher rated stocks can be more volatile and may involve added risk. >Price stability may be improved by giving preference to stocks with >lower betas; no debt or low debt; larger capitalization with more >established markets; and extended in price no more than 5% to 10% >above a recent consolidation or basing area of 8 or more week' >duration. > >Tom W > >-----Original Message----- >From: Frank V. Wolynski <Wolynski@MindSpring.Com> >To: canslim@mail.xmission.com <canslim@mail.xmission.com> >Date: Saturday, April 18, 1998 5:52 AM >Subject: [CANSLIM] Timeliness Interpretation > > >>Does anyone know or have a feel for how WON's staff assigns the >timeliness >>ratings to securities. >>Some questions I have: >> What characteristics does a stock have to possess to receive an >>"A,B,C,D,E"? >> What triggers his system of changing the timeliness ratings? >> >>I get the sense that "A" is of course in a solid trend of new highs, >price >>above the 50 & 200 dma's. >> >>The other apparent easy one is "E", solid trend of new lows, price >beneath >>the 50 & 200 dma's. >> >>Are there more factors that he uses that I have overlooked? >>What are the criteria for "B,C,D"? >> >>Thanks for any help. >> >>Frank Wolynski >> >> >>- >> > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 19:15:23 -0400 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" <Wolynski@MindSpring.Com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Timeliness Interpretation DS, thanks for the input and I couldn't agree more. Actually I made an error in my original question. I couldn't sleep last night, so I was perusing through the Market Data page in IBD and stumbled on the IBD 6000 Accumulation/Distribution totals beneath the Psychological Market Indicators. I was curious how IBD or WON ranked, or what criteria was used to differentiate A/B/C/D/E on the A/D and with Timeliness. The timeliness question was posted without an in depth explanation. The IBD 6000 A/D changes daily and this got me to doodling with a spreadsheet of the data. I'm pretty handy with a spreadsheet and before I know it, I had ratio's to totals of the various rankings all colored for direction and graphed. It turns out to be a pretty good divergence indicator for turns in the overall market. Kinda like an advance/decline line but using only the 5 A/D groups of A-E. I use market analysis to switch my annuity into Money Mkt funds/stocks/bonds, whatever. My annuity account has many types to choose from, even a World Account, been there a couple of times recently! I do not use Market analysis to buy individual stocks. I use a top down ( minus the market ) starting with what I feel about a particular group. My feelings about a group can be originated from something based in canslim, bottom fishing, over corrections, sector rotation, purely technical and others too many to name. I've even bought stock in companies coming out of bankruptcy, I.E. Global Marine in the early 90's, reverse split out of the courts, bought 'em for $1.13/share. I apologize to the group for this out of context ranting. I've learned more from WON and if ever a system were capable of teaching, it is WON's canslim. I don't veer from disrepect or lack of faith, just observations. CANSLIM works best at certain times, WON alludes to this. I've also read a few other books and strategies that have a place also. But back to A/D ratings of A/B/C/D/E. I know A is better than B, but why? And what makes a C/D or E? What is the criteria. I may never know if it is proprietary. Thanks all, Frank Wolynski At 10:44 4/18/98 EDT, DCSquires wrote: > > >Hi Frank, > >I used to use this stat in my screening but I quickly realized it has a >lagging nature. >I don't even look at it anymore. If you can judge the RS and earnings of the >company individually why bother with a combined indicator that responses to >these stats after the fact. JMO. > >DSquires > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 17:22:26 -0700 From: Tim Fisher <tfish@spiritone.com> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS ???? Not CANSLIM but McDonald's entered a volume dry-up going sideways pattern last week. SFSK is CANSLIM and is doing the same, RXSD as well, although it's previous base looks better from a volume standpoint. CXP is an excellent example of where volume totally dies during a base. I also like to see the daily trading range shrivel up to nothing, ala MCD and CXP. At 01:39 PM 4/18/98 -0500, you wrote: >Thanks - I guess I need to look up the definition of 'handle.' This would >infer that the price is going up while volume is going down. Do you have >any recent examples of this phenomenon? Need to see it to really understand >the concept. > >Bill-->> Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site PFB Information tfish@spiritone.com WWW http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish -- See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 21:26:29 -0700 From: <hoseco7@concentric.net> Subject: [CANSLIM] Opening a can or worms I know this is not canslim so forgive me. But I want to get the groups opinion on Internet stocks. What do yall think about SEEK. Is it going to go the way of yahoo and excite ? Or is the whole internet thing a hype or what ?? Are any of you folks already in these stocks . or at least thinking about it. David - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 21:39:28 -0500 From: Bill <wgs@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] NEWBIE question follows... base pattern <> 80+RS ???? Tim - when you look at a chart, what price do you use? Is it the closing price or the median/average for the day? When I look at the closing prices for SFSK, I don't see a cup being formed. Maybe the BC display differs from DG. Price has gone down since 4/3/98 from a closing high of approx. 43 to 35 on 4/17. Volume has indeed dryed up from an ADV 600K to 164K on Friday. On the others, I do see a cup of sorts and will track them to see what they do next week. Thanks for the help, Bill-->> - ------------------------------------------ At 5:22 PM -0700 4/18/98, Tim Fisher wrote: >Not CANSLIM but McDonald's entered a volume dry-up going sideways pattern >last week. SFSK is CANSLIM and is doing the same, RXSD as well, although >it's previous base looks better from a volume standpoint. CXP is an >excellent example of where volume totally dies during a base. I also like to >see the daily trading range shrivel up to nothing, ala MCD and CXP. > >At 01:39 PM 4/18/98 -0500, you wrote: >>Thanks - I guess I need to look up the definition of 'handle.' This would >>infer that the price is going up while volume is going down. Do you have >>any recent examples of this phenomenon? Need to see it to really understand >>the concept. >> >>Bill-->> > >Tim Fisher, 1995 President, Pacific Fishery Biologists >Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site >PFB Information >tfish@spiritone.com >WWW http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish -- See naked fish and rocks! > > >- - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 20:40:46 -0500 (CDT) From: "Jason P. Butler" <jbutler@cbu.edu> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Opening a can or worms SEEK moved up like $20 this past week I think. 100% increase, if I remember correctly. On Sat, 18 Apr 1998 hoseco7@concentric.net wrote: > > I know this is not canslim so forgive me. > But I want to get the groups opinion on Internet stocks. > What do yall think about SEEK. > Is it going to go the way of yahoo and excite ? > Or is the whole internet thing a hype or what ?? > Are any of you folks already in these stocks . > or at least thinking about it. > > David > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 16:09:50 -1000 From: "frank swenson" <frankjs@maui.net> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Opening a can or worms As you say, internet investing is not CANSLIM in any shape or form. I believe investing in the internets is a gamble..I chose to take this gamble because I can't believe the future will be without extensive internet Personally, I like lycos over the others because 1)it is at least on the brink of making some money ,2) it is not as extended as Yahoo, 3) Most importantly, it has 36% institutional sponsorship compared with <18% for any of the others. IMO If the funds are backing it more it is more likely to survive. Frank - -----Original Message----- From: hoseco7@concentric.net <hoseco7@concentric.net> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com <canslim@lists.xmission.com> Date: Saturday, April 18, 1998 3:28 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Opening a can or worms > >I know this is not canslim so forgive me. >But I want to get the groups opinion on Internet stocks. >What do yall think about SEEK. >Is it going to go the way of yahoo and excite ? >Or is the whole internet thing a hype or what ?? >Are any of you folks already in these stocks . >or at least thinking about it. > > David > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #195 ***************************** To unsubscribe to canslim-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe canslim-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.