Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WTW (was: Which One Is Better - Updated)

From: "Katherine Malm" <kmalm@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WTW (was: Which One Is Better - Updated)
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 16:14:39 -0500
Next Article (by Date): [CANSLIM] PETM - base counting "Scott Gettis"
Previous Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WTW (was: Which One Is Better - Updated) "Bill King"
Top of Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WTW (was: Which One Is Better - Updated) "Bill King"
Next in Thread: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WTW (was: Which One Is Better - Updated) "Bill King"
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]
Hi Bill,

Actually, your error is one that I made frequently when I first started
reading charts. When looking at formations like this, you don't want to use
the points on the way down the left side of the consolidation as your
pivots, instead, you want to watch the *right* side of the consolidation
form, then pay attention to the last spot where up action turns to down
action on fading volume. That's the sign the "shakeout" is occurring.
Normally this happens just *below* the high action on the left side of the
consolidation, and as long as it's in the upper half of the base, it's
valid. In the case of WTW, that pause and fade to form the handle began on
7/31 and therefore defines the pivot point.

You might take a look at the notes I uploaded on base formations in this
morning's CECO post. It shows where the pivots are in each example base.
http://WallStreet-LLC.com/canslim/TypesOfBases.JPG

Katherine

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill King" <wk11@adelphia.net>
To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: WTW (was: Which One Is Better - Updated)


| Hi Katherine,
| Thanks for the annotated chart. You indicated the pivot point was 43.65 +
.1
| with a potential handle. Although it's accidemic after the break out on
| 8/12, why wouldn't the pivot point have been 44.55 back on 5/1?
|
| Bill K.
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Katherine Malm" <kmalm@earthlink.net>
| To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
| Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 10:32 AM
| Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: WTW (was: Which One Is Better - Updated)
|
|
| Hi Mike,
|
| WTW didn't have the smoothest base, but it was a 12 week base nonetheless.
| That's not unusual given the gyrations of the market as it's been groping
| for this latest bottom. So that you can see my personal take on it, I've
| annotated the chart at:
|
| http://WallStreet-LLC.com/canslim/WTW081302.jpg
|
|
| Gene noted that WTW is also featured in IBD's weblink today. They have
also
| annotated a chart, so you can see their interpretation at:
|
| http://www.investors.com/weblink/
|
| Katherine
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: <michael_niemotka@baxter.com>
| To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
| Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 8:50 AM
| Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Which One Is Better - Updated
|
|
|
| Katherine,
|
| Can you expound on the statement that WTW broke out?  In looking at the
| chart, I can sorta see a v shaped cwh, but in the handle, the volume did
| NOT dry up.....what would you say the pivot point was?
|
| Thanks
|
| Mike Niemotka , PE
| Sr. Principal Engineer
| Baxter Healthcare Corporation
| Route 120 & Wilson Road
| Round Lake, IL 60073
| Tel (847) 270-4075
| Fax (847) 270-4525
| michael_niemotka@baxter.com
|
|
|
|                     "Katherine Malm"
|                     <kmalm@earthlink.net>         To:
| canslim@lists.xmission.com
|                     Sent by:                      cc:
|                     owner-canslim@lists.xm        Subject:     Re:
[CANSLIM]
| Which One Is Better - Updated
|                     ission.com
|
|
|                     08/12/2002 08:02 PM
|                     Please respond to
|                     canslim
|
|
|
|
|
|
| You know, I have a simple solution for this kind of dilemma....don't use
| the numbers.
|
| I know it's tempting to use a number like this, as it seems to "tell you
| everything" about the stock. But I think once you summarize summary
| numbers, you're asking for trouble. I rank the composite score as "mildly
| useful."
|
| Here's an example. I'll select a couple of stocks that have come up for
| discussion here in the last few months: WTW and TOL.
|
| Scores?
| WTW = 96
| TOL = 95
|
| Yet, look at the charts. WTW broke out today, TOL is rolling over and
| playing dead. Doesn't sound like a score of 95/96 "tells" me everything I
| need to know about the stocks.
|
| Katherine
|  ----- Original Message -----
|  From: Gene Ricci
|  To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
|  Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 7:41 PM
|  Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Which One Is Better - Updated
|
|  Arghhh!
|  Same definition
|  Same data base
|  Same company
|  different numbers!
|  ----- Original Message -----
|  From: Bill Triffet
|  To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
|  Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 6:58 PM
|  Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Which One Is Better - Updated
|
|  Either way, it appears that the IBD data paints a prettier picture of the
|  stocks.
|
|  -Bill
|
|  ----- Original Message -----
|  From: "Gene Ricci" <genr@swbell.net>
|  To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com>
|  Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:50 PM
|  Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Which One Is Better - Updated
|
|
|  I just had today's update figures for DGO sent to me.
|  The 3 columns are 8/9 DGO data
|  8/12 IBD readings 30 minutes ago
|  8/12 DGO just received today's download
|
|
|  Hi Katherine, I hadn't checked today and after reading your note, I
|  'thought' I was in error.
|
|  However, I just went and checked several stocks:
|                 8/9  8/12  8/12
|                  DGO  IBD  DGO
|  AAON     85     86      83
|  AIR          38     55      32
|  ABCB       89     90     90
|  ABM         77    85      75
|  ABN         58    67       58
|  ACE         69    86        71
|  ACMR     92     95       92
|  AES         24     30       25
|  AFCE      72     79       74
|  AFL         92     95       91
|
|
|  The first ten (10) I checked showed different numbers.
|
|  My question still stands, which one is better?
|
|  Gene
|
|
|
|  ----- Original Message -----
|  From: Katherine Malm
|  To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
|  Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 5:47 PM
|  Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Which One Is Better
|
|
|  Hi Gene,
|
|  There seems to be conflicting information on this...See DGO's reply to my
|  recent inquiry (7/31) about the very same thing:
|
|
|
|
|  Hi Katherine,
|
|  Thank you for your recent email to Daily Graphs Online.
|
|  I apologize, but the recent additions to our services have not yet been
|  reflected in our Image Maps resource.  We plan on making the update soon.
|  TO address your question, I would like to confirm that the Composite
|  Rating
|  you see on our service is the same SmartSelect® Composite Rating that is
|  provided by the Investor's Business Daily and investors.com.
|
|  Please write back if you have any questions or need assistance.
|
|  Best regards,
|  Dan
|  Daily Graphs Online
|  www.dailygraphs.com
|
|  ----- Original Message -----
|  From: Gene Ricci
|  To: canslim@lists.xmission.com
|  Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:06 PM
|  Subject: [CANSLIM] Which One Is Better
|
|
|  Let's see, IBD provides an Overall Rating and now DGO provides a
Composite
|  Rating. Has anyone determined which one is better?
|
|  Gene
|
|  The new SmartSelect® Composite Rating in Investor's Business Daily and
|  the Stock Checkup Overall Rating found on investors.com are based on
|  different formulas.
|
|  The SmartSelect® Composite Rating combines all 5 SmartSelect Ratings
|  into one easy-to-use rating.  More weight is placed on EPS and RS
|  Rating, and the stock's percent off its 52-week high is also included in
|  the formula.  Results are then compared to all other companies, and each
|  company is assigned a rating from 1-99 with 99 being the best.  This
|  rating is designed to help you get a quick feel for how a company's
|  SmartSelect® Ratings compare to all other stocks in our database.  This
|  is intended to be an additional tool to help you find the stocks with
|  the highest SmartSelect® Ratings, quickly and easily.
|
|  The Overall Rating in the Stock Checkup is determined by a proprietary
|  formula incorporating all five of the Stock Checkup ratings. These are
|  the Technical Rating, Fundamental Rating, Attractiveness Rating, Group's
|  Technical Rating and Group's Fundamental Rating.  The Stock Checkup uses
|  over 30 different variables including all the SmartSelect® Ratings to
|  calculate the Overall Rating.  When using the Stock Checkup, focus not
|  only on the Overall Rating but all 6 of the Checkup Ratings.  Also study
|  how the stock compares to its group within the individual Checkup
|  Ratings.
|
|
|
|  -
|  -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
|  -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
|  -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
|
|
|  -
|  -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
|  -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
|  -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
|
|
|
|
|
| -
| -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
| -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
| -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
|
|
| -
| -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
| -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
| -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
|
|
| -
| -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
| -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
| -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.


- -
- -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.