RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool

From: "Tim Fisher" <Tim@orerockon.com>
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool
Date: 3 Apr 2002 04:27:35 -0800
Previous Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] MGAM - Another conventional wisdom question "Tom Worley"
Top of Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool KLall1112@aol.com
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]
Yes, I do. You haven't been here that long,  have you? IBD never has got 
CANSLIM right, never will. However they can bend the rules toward 
self-promotion, they do. Comeback stories are CASLIM in my book. Show me 
the money (N). Best in a group with an F in my book is best of the worst. 
Is that CANSLIM? Hardly. Now you're talking CASIM. I'll even speak for Tom 
when I say that when you bend the rules to include 12% growth because of E 
(read:M), you're CSIM. Oh yeah and you are ignoring M, so it's CSI now. 
Sounds like you should start your own list. You even said it yourself: few 
stocks are perfect. Those few is what this list is about. IMHO. I'll shut 
up before I rant about my perception of your self-promoting motives. You 
wanted someone to question the validity of your data? You've got someone(s) 
questioning it.

At 10:02 PM 4/2/2002 -1000, you wrote:
>To Tim,
>
>I wonder if you would pour such similar scorn on other stocks that rate a 94
>on Investors.com (with two best in groups!).
>
>Yes it's 30% below it's high but does that disqualify it as a CANSLIM stock?
>Also, as I understand CANSLIM, there is nothing in the definition that
>speaks of 50 or 200dma's, although they may well be additional metrics to
>add to the mix of decision making tools. If I'm wrong please correct me.
>
>To Tom's more rational response, I would make the following comments and ask
>for more commentary:
>
>- overhead resistance? when stocks start climbing the right side of the cup,
>the overhead resistance is always there, but many overcome it. We try to
>identify such potential candidates. Would a stock that's 30% off it's high
>be automatically excluded from consideration.
>
>- industry is a D: yup, few stocks are perfect
>
>- no buying? As I see it, the stock experienced buying from 3/4 to 3/7 and
>then formed a classic downward wedging handle. It then rose again and is
>forming a second handle. Is there another source of information I'm missing
>apart from what's in the chart?
>
>- cash flow: Not part of the CANSLIM definition as I understand it but maybe
>I should incorporate it into the analysis. What should be the parameters?
>
>- earnings forecast of "only 12% growth": again not a formal CANSLIM
>component, but I wonder what the average forecast is? 12% sounds pretty good
>to me in an economy that may grow 3.5% if we're lucky. What would be the
>standard that you would look for?
>
>I have no interest in touting this stock, but it came on to my radar screen
>and I shared it with you all as the best CWH and CANSLIM candidate I have
>seen recently. This is the type of discussion I had hoped to generate so I
>can improve the tool. Thank you for your input - I look forward to your
>responses.
>
>Aloha,
>
>Mike Gibbons
>Proactive Technologies, LLC
>http://www.proactech.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com
>[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tim Fisher
>Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 4:19 PM
>To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
>Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool
>
>
>A stock 30% below its 52 wk high and with the 50dma under the 200 gets a
>10? Out of what, 100? Seriously, how is this a CANSLIM chart?
>
>At 04:11 PM 4/2/2002 -1000, you wrote:
> >Duke,
> >
> >(and others) here's one for you... AHMH ... a "10"  - lacking only industry
> >ranking
> >
> >Aloha,
> >
> >Mike Gibbons
> >Proactive Technologies, LLC
> >http://www.proactech.com
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com
> >[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Duke Miller
> >Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 9:09 AM
> >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
> >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool
> >
> >
> >Bill,
> >
> >Great input here.  How about a show of hands of those who've been
> >stopped out of A+ Stock Checkup stocks!
> >
> >And as always, thanks, Mike.  I'm one of the heavy users, and if it
> >doesn't hit 6/11 or better, I'm onto the next one.
> >
> >Duke
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com
> >[mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Bill Triffet
> >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 1:56 PM
> >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
> >Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool
> >
> >
> >Mike,
> >
> >First, I'd like to say thanks for the tool.
> >
> >I have yet to see anyone else - WON's products included - attempt to do
> >something so basic as rate a stock directly to the c-a-n-s-l-i-m acronym
> >attributes. Maybe because it's such a subjective thing that it's easier
> >to dance around the numbers than really grade a stock based on canslim.
> >The Stock Evaluator on the IBD site is pretty weak with in that regard.
> >I guess if they actually graded a stock on ACTUAL IBD canslim data that
> >would be construed as touting a stock. This is why most of us go to at
> >least 3-5 different places to review a stock or use Daily Graphs where
> >the data is all there but not exactly spelled out so as to not tout the
> >issue.
> >
> >I think it's a great tool in addition to several others. Given it's
> >price
> >(g) I have no complaints and it comes close in some of the canslim
> >criteria for me. Things like (M)arket direction and (N)ew can be very
> >subjective and must be reviewed several ways. Come to think of it,
> >lately when I see a high
> >(L) rating it's usually extended as that is how it got there. I'm of the
> >consensus of several others here that with data being so immediate, it's
> >better to look for the gems in rising groups - not at the top.
> >
> >-Bill
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Mike Gibbons" <mike@proactech.com>
> >To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
> >Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 10:24 AM
> >Subject: [CANSLIM] Canslim Evaluation Tool
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Since I released this tool to the group on 3/13, I (and my server)
> > > have
> >been
> > > overwhelmed with the response. 182 of you have used the tool at least
> > > once and several of you have accessed it frequently. Some of you are
> > > using it extensively - the current record is 100 stocks analyzed by
> > > one list subscriber in a single day!
> > >
> > > Apart from being pleasantly surprized at the use that many of you are
> >making
> > > of it, I'm also surprized that only one of you has questioned the
> > > validity of the data, and the assumptions that go into the pass/fail
> > > ranking. I was expecting a lively debate about the definitions of
> > > CANSLIM and their applicability in the recent market conditions.
> > >
> > > For those of you who may have missed it, the link is
> > > http://www.cwhcharts.com/canslim
> > >
> > > Aloha,
> > >
> > > Mike Gibbons
> > > Proactive Technologies, LLC
> > > http://www.proactech.com
>

Tim Fisher
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
Owner, Fisher Fisheries, Ltd.
mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com
WWW http://OreRockOn.com


- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
- -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.