From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #150 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 Tuesday, March 17 1998 Volume 02 : Number 150 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? [CANSLIM] "M" Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Re: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? Re: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Re: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? [CANSLIM] Time (Was: RE: WCOM) RE: [CANSLIM] Time (Was: RE: WCOM) RE: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? [CANSLIM] Please excuse my ignorance- Who is WON? Re: [CANSLIM] Please excuse my ignorance- Who is WON? Re: [CANSLIM] ZOMX BILL GNTX Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Re: [CANSLIM] Please excuse my ignorance- Who is WON? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 06:50:30 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions James, I'm not familiar with MS screens, but the list below doesn't seem to fit with CANSLIM elements. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: James Adams To: Canslim Date: Monday, March 16, 1998 9:44 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions >I'm building a CANSLIM screen for the Microsoft Investor screening utility. >I would like some suggestions from some here on what criteria would be >desired for the following items: > >Price to Book >Price to Sales >Price to Cash Flow >Liquidity Ratio >Interest Coverage >Leverage Ratio >Short Interest Ratio >Short Interest Shares > >TIA >James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA >http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ >Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 06:57:28 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? Concur. I think too much money is funneling into the mkt, mostly thru mutual funds or new investors playing catch up with individual stocks. The mkt is definitely not acting defensive in the fact of earnings estimate cuts. Nonetheless, NYSE has shown a slight positive divergence in the 10DMA on up/down volume, while NASDAQ is tracking in parallel, but still holding some separation. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: DCSquires To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Monday, March 16, 1998 10:28 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? >Hi all, > >Is anyone disturbed by the lack of decisive volume on the Naz and NYSE today. >IMO, the Naz should have hit new highs on 800+ and the NYSE should confirm >with 650+. To me this has been a forced rally all along, mainly because the >new high/ new low list has not responded like it does with a really broad bull >and what seems like off and on distribution on the way up. Anyone? > >DSquires > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 07:32:08 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] "M" Correction to my earlier post, (should have looked at the technical charts at DG Online before posting!). With yesterday's trading, NASDAQ remains in only a marginally overbot condition, however the 10dma on up/down vol did show a small but positive divergence. The new high/low however continues to track in parallel with some separation. On NYSE, it is more overbot, but showed more positive divergence in the new high/low and more parallel tracking in the 10dma of the up/down volume. I suspect this may be as much a reflection of the low volume we have been seeing as any other factor. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 07:36:26 -0500 From: "Frank V. Wolynski" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? I've been watching the waning momemtum for a few days. Although it could pick up, I've also noticed some pretty rag-tag dogs rearing their heads here. I believe WON addresses this as an attempt to carry the market with the lower quality issues. I hardly recognized any of the names in the new high list. Time will tell, but I for one prefer to exercise Dr. Elders first priority, capital preservation. Best Regards, Frank Wolynski At 22:28 3/16/98 EST, DCSquires wrote: >Hi all, > >Is anyone disturbed by the lack of decisive volume on the Naz and NYSE today. >IMO, the Naz should have hit new highs on 800+ and the NYSE should confirm >with 650+. To me this has been a forced rally all along, mainly because the >new high/ new low list has not responded like it does with a really broad bull >and what seems like off and on distribution on the way up. Anyone? > >DSquires > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 12:19:06 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? Hi D, I agree with the fact that the rally is not broad. You have to be in the right stocks. But that alone does not worry me... yet. Keeps me on my toes, though. Most important: The trend is you friend. And the trend is up. At 10:28 PM 16/03/98 EST, you wrote: >Hi all, > >Is anyone disturbed by the lack of decisive volume on the Naz and NYSE today. >IMO, the Naz should have hit new highs on 800+ and the NYSE should confirm >with 650+. To me this has been a forced rally all along, mainly because the >new high/ new low list has not responded like it does with a really broad bull >and what seems like off and on distribution on the way up. Anyone? > >DSquires - --- Johan Van Houtven - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:09:47 -0500 From: "James Adams" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions From: Tom Worley >James, I'm not familiar with MS screens, but the list below doesn't seem to >fit with CANSLIM elements. Tom, I was wondering if these items could be added to a basic CANSLIM stock screen without violating the underlying CANSLIM philosophy and negating it. I understand CANSLIM to being very heavily weighted in favor of momentum and growth indicators, however this is probably an over-simplistic view. I've seen discussions on Price/Book, Liquidity, etc., on this list from time to time and was wondering what are acceptable levels in these items. However, if they will throw the CANSLIM screen off, I'll not include them in it. Hope I'm making myself clear as to what I'm asking. TIA James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:12:55 EST From: DCSquires Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: Volume? In a message dated 98-03-17 07:39:11 EST, you write: << I believe WON addresses this as an attempt to carry the market with the lower quality issues. >> Yes, I love that part of the book. I think he wrote "even turkeys can fly in a wind storm". DSquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 07:10:51 -0800 From: "Patrick Wahl" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions > From: "James Adams" > To: > Tom, I was wondering if these items could be added to a basic CANSLIM stock > screen without violating the underlying CANSLIM philosophy and negating it. > I understand CANSLIM to being very heavily weighted in favor of momentum and > growth indicators, however this is probably an over-simplistic view. I've > seen discussions on Price/Book, Liquidity, etc., on this list from time to > time and was wondering what are acceptable levels in these items. However, > if they will throw the CANSLIM screen off, I'll not include them in it. > Hope I'm making myself clear as to what I'm asking. I think adding the elements you were asking about can help screen stocks some, although I can't help you out on what values you might use. I do know I avoided a stock breakout a few weeks ago because ROE was low, of course, it has gone up very nicely without me. Ideally, if you have some sort of backtesting capabilities, you would want to run historical scans with and without certain criteria and see what how the results differ and if you can improve things with certain fundamental screens. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 98 10:23:56 EST From: dougr@aloft.micro.lucent.com (Douglas_Rhodes) Subject: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? Opinions on whether to sell LBOR? I bought it less than 2 weeks(?) ago for $27 1/2. Today it stands around $34. - --Doug - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 10:46:38 -0500 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Jim, Patrick wrote: >Ideally, if you have some sort of backtesting capabilities, you would >want to run historical scans with and without certain criteria and >see what how the results differ and if you can improve things with >certain fundamental screens. Somewhat along those same lines - I have noticed that book value has little effect in a stock's performance. I used to think that 20 or 25x book was getting excessive. But now I see stocks at 40 and 50 times book performing well. Maybe it is a sign of froth, and just maybe some of them, like Yahoo, are worth it. It might be worthwhile to run the same scan twice: first pull all of the hits with a price to book of 20x and less, and second with a price to book of greater than 20x. My guess is that in the final analysis, you might want to leave book out all together. Best regards, Craig - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 11:21:56 -0500 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Robert, You wrote: > ...snip ... >Just wanted to alert anyone interested to >the breakout. And a worthwhile thing to do. Thank you! I have no complaints with your post what so ever and am quite surprised that anyone did. So the stock wasn't "perfect" Canslim. When have we ever been using "pure" CS on a regular basis. (Lately Tom has been rah-rah'ing EPIQ as though it had formed a base and was about to break out. It did move up on good volume yesterday, but is NOT a valid chart pattern to buy per Canslim. Then again, who cares? Interesting to watch, and maybe it will work out - it has been a strong stock. Not my cup of tea whatsoever, but, we shall see. And Tom is of course not the only one. I sometimes mention stocks that do not exactly meet the criteria in one way or another ;^). One problem is that this will no doubt confuse some newbies. They should of course be paying close attention to Peter Newell, Peter Christians, Patrick Wahl, Jeffrey White, and others who follow the rules a bit more consistently - but how would they know who to listen to?). >I am curious, however, about how others interpret the chart pattern. EPS >rank aside, I feel that this stock meets all other CANSLIM characteristics. Looks good to me. ERG = 6/78/99. As has been pointed out, the 6 EPS is not good, but as you have pointed out, looks like that is about to change dramatically. RS of 78 is fine. GRS of 99 is excellent. High EPS estimates for coming years is nice. I remember David Ryan answering a related questions at a workshop I attended back when biotech was hot and somebody pointed out that there was no hope for earnings for years, yet Ryan maintained that the other factors were in place and that they were valid stocks to buy using Canslim principles. The WCOM chart pattern is excellent IMO. C = not good, but perhaps ok in light of industry and EPS estimates the EPS estimates are more meaningful than with a small co. that is followed by 3 analysts. There are probably at least a half dozen telecom analysts with their names on those numbers. A = inconsistent, but once again, part of the industry pattern N = just bought MCI, New high in price. The market is happy with them. S = too many shares by strict CS (but so is DELL for the last 5 years) L = leader (top 5 or 6 in group), but certainly not top RS in group I = 28% - a bit high but still OK M = very good lately, at least for certain sectors That was not just your Aunt Martha buying yesterday. Of course one never knows - but so far, it looks fine. Closed at its high for the day yesterday. >(I'm only giving my interpretation of the numbers for better or for worse, >and do not claim to be right in my analysis.) But I must admit, the >primary reason I bought this stock was the chart pattern, which, as I >explained in my earlier post, looked like a nice cup and handle. C/Handle, yes, I agree. >snip ... > ... but if you will permit, I will continue to post >occasionally with stocks I feel meet CANSLIM criteria. Please do. Once again, I am not sure why anybody would have any problem with your post, given the LLUR stocks mentioned as buys with no valid base, the TA details that go far beyond CS, the less than $12 stocks that are routinely discussed, etc, etc. Which, I think is great. Canslim is a springboard, and not a religion. I do agree with Tim in one sense, however: the closer we stick to the basic principals, the better we are likely to do. It is just that there are all those exceptions to the basic principles. Beauty is often in the eye of the beholder and the discussion of the blemishes helps us all to learn. Best regards, Craig - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 11:21:36 -0500 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Tim, You wrote: >No "tone" was intended. WCOM clearly does not qualify as a CANSLIM stock >even under a liberal interpretation of HTMMIS because 1) the long term and >last 2 quarters EPS are not anywhere near 18%+ growth (lost over a billion >last year!) and 2) the 900M shares out and 34B market cap clearly put it >out of the range of any stocks discussed in HTMMIS. All that I mentioned in >my post, including all LLURs that I have mentioned in the past, _do_ >qualify as CANSLIM stocks under a moderately strict interpretation of >HTMMIS. So I stand by my request, that obviously _not_ CANSLIM stocks be >discussed somewhere esle. Re: 1) EPS growth rate - David Ryan specificly stated in a workshop that I attended that the C & A are sometimes worth overlooking if the other elements are in place. Especially if the group is strong enough, as was the biotech group at the time (which was the crux of the discussion). Re: 2) If you limit yourself in your market cap so absolutely, then you also exclude the DELL's and the HD's and the INTC's and the MSFT's of the world, which, in spite of their market caps would have been fine purchases a year or two ago. To repeat, you wrote: >So I stand by my request, that obviously _not_ CANSLIM stocks be >discussed somewhere esle.> It is the statement which is re-quoted above, that I have a problem with, and yet which I agree with totally (BIG GRIN) - The problem I have with it is that I (and others on this list) tend to include more stocks in the CANSLIM universe than you apparently do. Some of the things that I am including would clearly also be included by WON and Ryan based on the 2 workshops I have attended and the recent free seminars and online chats I have seen. Yet, as you point out, they are not a part of the CANSLIM principles as presented in HTMMIS. On the other hand, I do think that $2 stocks with no earnings are "obviously _not_ CANSLIM stocks" and so are big cyclical industrial companies with no growth prospects. So, I agree, but I differ in where the line should be drawn. I reconcile that by saying that there are "pure" Canslim stocks and there are "almost" Canslim stocks and there are "stocks that exhibit some chartacteristics" of Canslim stocks. There are infinite variations. I have been wondering for a while now if we should maybe start a subset of this group which limits it's posts to the "pure" Canslim and really try to zero in on what that is. Or maybe we should ammend the charter of this group, to limit the discussion in that way. On a separate issue, you wrote: >P.S. GART, UVSGA, and SFSK moving again (finally) although on relatively >light volume. Glad to hear that since I assume you own them or you would not have mentioned those particular stocks. Sometimes after a breakout, stocks will continue to work higher on lighter volume for a while. Of the 3, SFSK looks the most iffy to me because it is just leaving the base. Occassionally they will break out to new highs on average volume, but then the actual heavy volume will come in a day or two or three later. None-the-less, I would keep a wary eye on SFSK if I owned it, at least until it is well clear or break-out type volume comes and drives it further up. Today at 11:00, SFSK is up a bit more but with only roughly average volume so far ... ok. Best regards, Craig - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 08:44:49 -0800 From: Tim Fisher Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Your comments are the kind of thing that I wish that those who have the $$$ to go to a Ryan seminar would post more frequently. I personally have never heard of allowing 30+B market cap stocks into the CANSLIM universe. I agree that DELL is a good example of a stock which has all the CANSLIM characteristics except cap - and that is much closer to WON's cut-off than WCOM. I have owned DELL twice and have done very nicely both times. I bot it on a CANSLIM "Big Cap" scan I wrote for Zacks database, but I do limit the results to stocks with less than 5B cap. Like WON says, the lumbering giants can't get the momentum to make those doubles and triples very often. 11:21 AM 3/17/98 -0500, you wrote: >Re: 1) EPS growth rate - David Ryan specificly stated in a workshop that I >attended that the C & A are sometimes worth overlooking if the other >elements are in place. Especially if the group is strong enough, as was >the biotech group at the time (which was the crux of the discussion). > >Re: 2) If you limit yourself in your market cap so absolutely, then you >also exclude the DELL's and the HD's and the INTC's and the MSFT's of the >world, which, in spite of their market caps would have been fine purchases >a year or two ago. > >On a separate issue, you wrote: >>P.S. GART, UVSGA, and SFSK moving again (finally) although on relatively >>light volume. > >Glad to hear that since I assume you own them or you would not have >mentioned those particular stocks. Sometimes after a breakout, stocks will >continue to work higher on lighter volume for a while. Of the 3, SFSK >looks the most iffy to me because it is just leaving the base. >Occassionally they will break out to new highs on average volume, but then >the actual heavy volume will come in a day or two or three later. >None-the-less, I would keep a wary eye on SFSK if I owned it, at least >until it is well clear or break-out type volume comes and drives it further >up. Today at 11:00, SFSK is up a bit more but with only roughly average >volume so far ... ok. > I should have taken more time with that post - I wasn't suggesting buying any of them, just wanted to throw some typical CANSLIM stocks out there and get some reaction on them. P.S. COO seems to have topped. I'm out with a lousy couple dollar gain (I BOT on the late breakout to 40). Tim Fisher / tfish@spiritone.com Ore-Rock-On and Pacific Fishery Biologists WWW Sites: http://www.spiritone.com/~tfish See naked fish and rocks! - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:29:25 -0800 From: "Robert Venchiarutti" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? I've been following this stock and wish I had bought it when it broke out. I was asleep at the wheel that day. (lateley, a lot of the stocks I've been following have been breaking out nicely--and of course I've missed some of them because I haven't been as diligent about checking quotes as I'd like to be). LBOR looks really strong to me. Really good positive volume for the last week, and today it is up over a point on healthy volume. MF and OBV are confirming price nicely. My biggest problem is knowing when to sell a stock, so don't put too much emphasis on my analysis. (As Frank Wolynski says, I'm usually wrong, so plan accordingly). But for at least a few more days, I'd let LBOR run. Good luck. - -----Original Message----- From: Douglas_Rhodes To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 7:26 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? >Opinions on whether to sell LBOR? > >I bought it less than 2 weeks(?) ago for $27 1/2. >Today it stands around $34. > >--Doug > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 12:35:33 -0500 (EST) From: "Surindra J. Singh" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? Very difficult question to answer. If you go over HTMMIS, you will find some guideance. I will give you my inexperince answer: I will generally hold the stock unless it has reached my end point, which could have been a number when I bought the stock. If the price dropped to 8% from peak, won says to sell. If there was a reason for me to suspect that the stock will fall, I will sell and watch and may buy back if there is no drop. You have to consider taxes and commission when you do that. On the other hand if volume, price is favorable, I probably will not sell. Regards and hav e a wonderful day. Surindra On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Douglas_Rhodes wrote: > Opinions on whether to sell LBOR? > > I bought it less than 2 weeks(?) ago for $27 1/2. > Today it stands around $34. > > --Doug > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 12:39:17 -0500 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] WCOM Tim, You wrote: >Like WON says, the lumbering >giants can't get the momentum to make those doubles and triples very often. I agree completely. DELL is in a way the exception that proves the rule. WCOM might be just a so-so stock, or it might pick up and go 30% from here rather quickly. But it will likely move a lot slower in general than a SFSK did over the last year or two. I would, all other things being equal, much rather find the small to mid-sized "pure" Canslim companies than the WCOM's of the world. I must, at the same time, admit to having ATI, CSCO, and PFE tucked away as long term holds, which is a very sloowwww version of Canslim. Of course, the risk is somewhat lower in the larger caps and that is worth a lot at times. Recent favorites of mine in the more "pure" CS arena, (which are too extended to buy at the moment), are EAII, THRX, and NSPR. Even those have a few warts as regards being a "perfect" candidate. But they are closer to HTMMIS and likely to perform a lot better than WCOM over the mid-term (when bought on a breakout from a valid base). Unfortunately, I sold two of the three listed above too early. You also wrote: >I personally have never heard of allowing 30+B market cap stocks >into the CANSLIM universe. WON frequently mentions this type of stock as he did with HD in the last few months. But, you can bet when he gives a list of 10 stocks that look interesting, only 2 or 3 will be in that size range. And we must remember that he is not just talking to an audience of small investors like us, his audience also includes institutions who want to see what his ideas are (and they need the size to be able to get in and out of positions). Sometimes, I think, if I could just pick a couple of nice steady performers like ATI, put all my money in them and check the price and news once a day, I would be a lot better off over the long haul than with all the trading I do. Maybe not better off financially, but just have a lot more time to do other things with. Best regards, Craig - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 09:56:10 -0800 From: "Robert Venchiarutti" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions After reading Ken Fisher's "Superstocks" last year, I spent a good deal of time working with price to sales ratios (PSR's). But this ratio, and his book, definitely fall into the buy low, hold, and sell high school of investing. I really couldn't find good CANSLIM pick that also had a low PSR. As a rule of thumb, PSR should be below 1, and ideally below .75 (although this number can be higher if a company has high profit margins). And Fisher recommends selling a stock when the PSR exceeds 1.5. But many, if not all, of the CANSLIM stocks I find have PSR's of over 2, so as a practical matter, I don't rely on this figure much anymore. However, if I found a CANSLIM stock with a low PSR, I'd think it would be an excellent pick. I am interested in the idea of your screen. Of the stocks you posted earlier, I like JDAS. I do wish that the basing area, or handle, were forming below the high that was made last October, but I think I'll put it on my watch list just in case :-) - -----Original Message----- From: James Adams To: Canslim Date: Monday, March 16, 1998 6:46 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions >I'm building a CANSLIM screen for the Microsoft Investor screening utility. >I would like some suggestions from some here on what criteria would be >desired for the following items: > >Price to Book >Price to Sales >Price to Cash Flow >Liquidity Ratio >Interest Coverage >Leverage Ratio >Short Interest Ratio >Short Interest Shares > >TIA >James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA >http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ >Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 12:59:22 EST From: DCSquires Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? In a message dated 98-03-17 10:26:18 EST, you write: << Opinions on whether to sell LBOR? I bought it less than 2 weeks(?) ago for $27 1/2. Today it stands around $34. --Doug >> Nice trade Doug. This stock is powerful but extended. Consolidation is likely. If you don't feel comfortable sitting through a consolidation my advice would be to sell half your position here and hold the other half until the trend is broken. DSquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 19:12:47 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] Time (Was: RE: WCOM) Craig wrote: >Sometimes, I think, if I could just pick a couple of nice steady performers >like ATI, put all my money in them and check the price and news once a day, >I would be a lot better off over the long haul than with all the trading I >do. Maybe not better off financially, but just have a lot more time to do >other things with. Boy, do I agree with that. :) I always laugh when I read about this or that investment technique that supposedly requires only 1 hour per week. I can only dream about that... How many hours do the list members put in per week? I'll go first: I watch real-time quotes during market hours 95% of the time. During the weekend I put in another 5 to 15 hours. I like reading and doing research. I love learning. But I do not always like the stress of watching the market and real-time quotes. But I still do it, because I think it is the responseable thing to do for the way *I* am trading. I will change the way I'm trading, I'm sure. Just a stage in the learning process. The markets are so fascinating. So much to explore and test. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 11:47:39 -0800 From: Mike Lucero Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Time (Was: RE: WCOM) I spend a couple of hours at the end of the trading day, mainly looking over the stocks I own before the trading day ends so I'm not surprised after it's too late to do anything about it. Then, another couple of hours at night running the scan, looking over the portfolio again, updating the watch list. I've been trying to cut down on the time I spend at this, so I've decided to be more patient. Being impatient has cost me HD and THRX. Mike On Tuesday, March 17, 1998 10:13 AM, Johan Van Houtven [SMTP:Johan.VanHoutven@ping.be] wrote: > Craig wrote: > > >Sometimes, I think, if I could just pick a couple of nice steady performers > >like ATI, put all my money in them and check the price and news once a day, > >I would be a lot better off over the long haul than with all the trading I > >do. Maybe not better off financially, but just have a lot more time to do > >other things with. > > Boy, do I agree with that. :) > > I always laugh when I read about this or that investment technique that > supposedly requires only 1 hour per week. I can only dream about that... > > How many hours do the list members put in per week? > > I'll go first: I watch real-time quotes during market hours 95% of the > time. During the weekend I put in another 5 to 15 hours. > > I like reading and doing research. I love learning. But I do not always > like the stress of watching the market and real-time quotes. But I still do > it, because I think it is the responseable thing to do for the way *I* am > trading. I will change the way I'm trading, I'm sure. Just a stage in the > learning process. The markets are so fascinating. So much to explore and test. > > > > > > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 11:53:07 -0800 From: Mike Lucero Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] LBOR--time to sell? That's not one of the sell rules, is it? I see one that says that at the point you can examine to see if the advance is over or you're in a normal correction. Mike On Tuesday, March 17, 1998 9:36 AM, Surindra J. Singh [SMTP:sjs7b@avery.med.virginia.edu] wrote: > Very difficult question to answer. If you go over HTMMIS, you will find > some guideance. I will give you my inexperince answer: > > I will generally hold the stock unless it has reached my end point, which > could have been a number when I bought the stock. If the price dropped to > 8% from peak, won says to sell. If there was a reason for me to suspect > that the stock will fall, I will sell and watch and may buy back if there > is no drop. You have to consider taxes and commission when you do that. On > the other hand if volume, price is favorable, I probably will not sell. > > Regards and hav e a wonderful day. > > > Surindra > > > > > > > On Tue, 17 Mar 1998, Douglas_Rhodes wrote: > > > Opinions on whether to sell LBOR? > > > > I bought it less than 2 weeks(?) ago for $27 1/2. > > Today it stands around $34. > > > > --Doug > > > > - > > > > > > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 14:57:58 -0500 From: "Bud Barton" Subject: [CANSLIM] Please excuse my ignorance- Who is WON? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BD51B5.134596A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable sorry but I have never heard of WON until this forum. Please fill me in = and give a url if available to find out more. - ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BD51B5.134596A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
sorry but I have never heard of WON = until this=20 forum.  Please fill me in and give a url if available to find out=20 more.
- ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01BD51B5.134596A0-- - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 15:05:46 EST From: DCSquires Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Please excuse my ignorance- Who is WON? In a message dated 98-03-17 15:03:23 EST, you write: << Who is WON? >> William O'Neil Sorry for the confusion DSquires - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 21:28:14 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ZOMX BILL GNTX DSquires wrote: >ZOMX-- I like this one too. Nice chart pattern. Very good volume action with a >couple of good spikes showing "elephant trracks". Breaking NOW. - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 18:36:42 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Not at all, James, what I hear you asking is "can a fundamental approach also be used in conjuction with a CANSLIM (which is inherently technical) approach to selecting stocks?". One of the beautiful attractions of the CANSLIM philosophy, at least in my mind, is that you don't have to be rigid about it. I am by nature (for those few that hadn't already guessed) a fundamentalist. I spent a lot of years, and mine and client money, arguing with the mkt about the intrinsic worth of a company. Once I began studying CANSLIM, and applying it, I began to understand why stocks that appeared to have great fundies didn't perform. I used to do exhaustive "due diligence" on stocks, now I do very little beyond studying the DG chart on it. The DG charts do provide some of the types of fundamental info you list, such as inventory turnover, debt, book value, etc. and I do look at this info when considering a chart. However, this info is mostly background noise to me unless something about it sets off alarms (in other words it would never compel me to buy a stock or add weight to a buy decision, but might cause me to reassess a buy decision and look closer). My suggestion would be to first do a screen based on traditional CANSLIM elements. Then, after you apply the human touch and study the charts, you might want to run the remaining list thru the criteria you listed and see what survives. It likely would be educational to go back and review the charts on those that failed the second test, as well as following their future performance, as I suspect a lot of the best performers may fail tests such as return on equity. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: James Adams To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 9:10 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions >From: Tom Worley > > >>James, I'm not familiar with MS screens, but the list below doesn't seem to >>fit with CANSLIM elements. > > >Tom, I was wondering if these items could be added to a basic CANSLIM stock >screen without violating the underlying CANSLIM philosophy and negating it. >I understand CANSLIM to being very heavily weighted in favor of momentum and >growth indicators, however this is probably an over-simplistic view. I've >seen discussions on Price/Book, Liquidity, etc., on this list from time to >time and was wondering what are acceptable levels in these items. However, >if they will throw the CANSLIM screen off, I'll not include them in it. >Hope I'm making myself clear as to what I'm asking. > >TIA >James Adams......................Maysville, KY USA >http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ >Internet Pager 1343361@pager.mirabilis.com > > >- > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 18:53:55 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions Price is driven by earnings expectations, thus a company with rapid growth and accelerating earnings will likely have a high price, and thus a high PSR. Of the few stocks I have found over the years that had otherwise good CS elements, when I found the price low enough that the PSR was rational, it was usually with a terrible, gap down stock after the mkt realized that earnings were going to (or already did) fall. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Robert Venchiarutti To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 12:55 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Technical Questions >After reading Ken Fisher's "Superstocks" last year, I spent a good deal of >time working with price to sales ratios (PSR's). But this ratio, and his >book, definitely fall into the buy low, hold, and sell high school of >investing. I really couldn't find good CANSLIM pick that also had a low >PSR. As a rule of thumb, PSR should be below 1, and ideally below .75 >(although this number can be higher if a company has high profit margins). >And Fisher recommends selling a stock when the PSR exceeds 1.5. But many, >if not all, of the CANSLIM stocks I find have PSR's of over 2, so as a >practical matter, I don't rely on this figure much anymore. However, if I >found a CANSLIM stock with a low PSR, I'd think it would be an excellent >pick. > - - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 19:16:25 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Please excuse my ignorance- Who is WON? Bud, WON is our (and many others) shorthand for William O'Neil, father and creator of the CANSLIM concept in its published form. He is the author of HTMMIS (How To Make Money In Stocks) which is strongly recommended reading (and studying) for any investor trying to use CANSLIM. He is also owner of his own broker-dealer, where many of his institutional clients do their trades in return for credit against what they would otherwise owe for his institutional services and advice. His "publications" include IBD (Investor's Business Daily, the only newspaper designed for the investor vice advertisers) and DG (and its online version DGO) which is a two volume weekly pub of his Daily Graphs. You can learn more about these two pubs at www.investors.com and www.dailygraphs.com. HTMMIS will tell you more about who WON is and what is his philosophy. Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be interpreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. Hopefully my comments will better inform and educate all investors. tom w - -----Original Message----- From: Bud Barton To: canslim Date: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 2:59 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Please excuse my ignorance- Who is WON? sorry but I have never heard of WON until this forum. Please fill me in and give a url if available to find out more. - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #150 ***************************** 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.