Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: "Katherine Malm" <kmalm@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 09:07:15 -0500
Next Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership "Ira Post"
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership "Ira Post"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership "Ira Post"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C1E84A.C3DDC700
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Ira,
Just a point of clarification on the A/D rating vs. Institutional =
Ownership--
The A/D rating is a weighted ranking on the recent price/volume action =
of the stock. IBD looks for accumulation (up days on volume higher than =
the previous day) of large blocks of stock vs distribution (down days on =
volume higher than the day before) of large blocks and then creates a =
ranking A-E. In that sense, you are right, that when large blocks are =
being accumulated more than they are distributed, the stock would rank =
very high. This is a proxy for current institutional price/volume action =
but does not address, in general, what % of the shares in float are =
*owned* by institutions. For example, 2 stocks could have an A/D rating =
of A, yet one could be 10% owned by institutions while the other could =
be 80% owned by institutions.
On institutional ownership, Matt--
I've noticed large discrepancies like this in the Yahoo/MarketGuide data =
and the DGO data before. As a cautionary approach, if you see a high =
number like 80-90% as you saw for ANSS, it's probably an error in their =
data (I think their shares outstanding in the calculation aren't updated =
to reflect share buy backs, primary offers, etc). Sure enough, DGO has =
banks owning 14% and funds owning 30% of the float for a total =
institutional ownership of 44% of the 13.4m shares in the float. The =
remaining 1m shares outstanding are owned by management (7% of =
outstanding). Though that's what I'd consider the higher end of the =
"acceptable" range, I never let that keep me away from a stock if I feel =
it has everything else going for it, especially when the float is rather =
small.
Katherine
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Ira Post=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 2:57 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership
I think you got that information from Yahoo. If you go to the IBD =
site and do a stock check-up, you'll find an Accumulation/Distribution =
(Acc/Dis) Rating of B-. I think the discrepancy has to do with IBD's =
more recent monitoring of this information and their taking into account =
of more recent institutional buying or selling.
WON feels this is very important. However, IBD's stock check-up gives =
this stock an overall rating of A+. So I wouldn't worry about it the B- =
in this area. The significance lies in the fact that institutions =
control large blocks of money and when they move into or out of a stock =
it influences the price significantly.
Ira
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Matt & Alicia Leverette=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 9:35 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership
Hi,
I have been considering ANSS. It is rated a 98 on IBD Stock Checkup =
and it's chart looks pretty good to me. Also, I have noticed other =
stocks within it's group have been doing well of late.
My question has to do with Institutional Ownership. ANSS is at 81% =
(89% of Float). I know this is high, but how important of a factor is =
this.
I would love some thoughts.
Matt
- ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C1E84A.C3DDC700
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Hi Ira,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Just a point of clarification on the A/D rating vs. Institutional=20
Ownership--</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The A/D rating is a weighted ranking on the recent price/volume =
action of=20
the stock. IBD looks for accumulation (up days on volume higher than the =
previous day) of large blocks of stock vs distribution (down days on =
volume=20
higher than the day before) of large blocks and then creates a ranking =
A-E. In=20
that sense, you are right, that when large blocks are being accumulated =
more=20
than they are distributed, the stock would rank very high. This is =
a proxy=20
for current institutional price/volume action but does not address, =
in=20
general, what % of the shares in float are *owned* by institutions. For =
example,=20
2 stocks could have an A/D rating of A, yet one could be 10% owned =
by=20
institutions while the other could be 80% owned by institutions.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On institutional ownership, Matt--</DIV>
<DIV>I've noticed large discrepancies like this in the Yahoo/MarketGuide =
data=20
and the DGO data before. As a cautionary approach, if you see a high =
number like=20
80-90% as you saw for ANSS, it's probably an error in their data (I =
think their=20
shares outstanding in the calculation aren't updated to reflect share =
buy backs,=20
primary offers, etc). Sure enough, DGO has banks owning 14% and funds =
owning 30%=20
of the float for a total institutional ownership of 44% of the 13.4m =
shares in=20
the float. The remaining 1m shares outstanding are owned by management =
(7% of=20
outstanding). Though that's what I'd consider the higher end =
of the=20
"acceptable" range, I never let that keep me away from a stock if I feel =
it has=20
everything else going for it, especially when the float is rather =
small.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Katherine</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dip108@yahoo.com href=3D"mailto:ip108@yahoo.com">Ira =
Post</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dcanslim@lists.xmission.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:canslim@lists.xmission.com">canslim@lists.xmission.com</A>=
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, April 20, 2002 =
2:57=20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CANSLIM] =
Institutional=20
Ownership</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think you got that information from =
Yahoo. If you go to the IBD site and do a stock check-up, you'll =
find an=20
<FONT size=3D3>Accumulation/Distribution (Acc/Dis) Rating of B-. =
I think=20
the discrepancy has to do with IBD's more recent monitoring of this=20
information and their taking into account of more recent institutional =
buying=20
or selling.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>WON feels this is very important. =
However, IBD's=20
stock check-up gives this stock an overall rating of A+. So =
I=20
wouldn't worry about it the B- in this area. The significance =
lies in=20
the fact that institutions control large blocks of money and when they =
move=20
into or out of a stock it influences the price =
significantly.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Ira</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dmalever@bellsouth.net =
href=3D"mailto:malever@bellsouth.net">Matt=20
& Alicia Leverette</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dcanslim@lists.xmission.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:canslim@lists.xmission.com">canslim@lists.xmission.com</A>=
=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, April 19, 2002 =
9:35=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [CANSLIM] =
Institutional=20
Ownership</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I have been considering ANSS. =
It is rated=20
a 98 on IBD Stock Checkup and it's chart looks pretty good to =
me. =20
Also, I have noticed other stocks within it's group have been doing =
well of=20
late.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My question has to do with =
Institutional=20
Ownership. ANSS is at 81% (89% of Float). I know this is =
high,=20
but how important of a factor is this.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I would love some =
thoughts.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>Matt</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0058_01C1E84A.C3DDC700--
- -
- -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
- -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
- -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email.
Next Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership "Ira Post"
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership "Ira Post"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Institutional Ownership "Ira Post"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]