Re: [CANSLIM] Fwd: HANDLE%

From: Warren Keuffel <wkeuffel@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Fwd: HANDLE%
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 19:35:42 -0600

Next Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Re list posting........ "J. Lobatto"
Previous Article (by Subject): [CANSLIM] Fwd: HANDLE% DBell0467@aol.com
Top of Thread: [CANSLIM] Fwd: HANDLE% DBell0467@aol.com
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

I think you are talking about beta and I can't find any reference to 
beta in HTMMIS. I suspect that low-beta stocks also have low(er) growth 
rates. High beta is the price you pay for explosive growth. To address 
your question directly, I would agree with your conclusion, because it 
makes logical sense, but I have no data to back that view up.

Warren

DBell0467@aol.com wrote:

> 
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
>
> Fwd: HANDLE%
> From:
>
> DBell 0467@aol.com
> Date:
>
> Thu, 18 Apr 2002 12:55:50 -0400
> To:
>
> canslim@lists.xmission.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
>
> HANDLE%
> From:
>
> DBell 0467
> Date:
>
> Thu, 18 Apr 2002 12:45:19 -0400
> To:
>
> canslim@lists.xmission.com
>
>
>I ASKED WON UNDER GENERAL QUESTIONS IF VOLITILITY HAD ANY BEARING ON THE HANDLE %.  I DIDN`T RECEIVE AN ANSWER.  MAYBE THE GROUP CAN ENLIGHTEN ME.
>
>CONSIDER 2 STOCKS THAT DROP FROM 40 TO 30 AND RECOVER TO 38 AND ONE HAS A DAILY AVERAGE RANGE OF 1% AND DROPS 10% OVER 10 DAYS IN ITS HANDLE WHILE THE OTHER DROPS 25% OVER THE SAME 10 DAYS BUT SPORTS A 7% AVERAGE DAILY RANGE.
>
>I FIGURE THAT, APPLES TO APPLES, THE 7% STOCK SHOULD HAVE DROPPED 70% AND WHILE IT DROPPED ONLY 25% WAS CONSIDERABLY STRONGER THAN THE STOCKED THAT DROPPED WITHIN THE ACCEPTABLE HANDLE RANGE.
>
>ARTHUR BELANGER
>



- -
- -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.