Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?"

From: Kent Norman <kent_norman@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?"
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 20:11:03 -0800 (PST)

Next Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Back-Burners; Steady-Eddies; Rocking-Chair "Tom Worley"
Previous Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" "Tom Worley"
Next in Thread: RE: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" "Robin Gridley"
Articles sorted by: [Date] [Author] [Subject]

So could we conclude this means sector rotation? Doesn't September mark
the end of the old year for funds (and the chance to abandon old stuff)
while October is a fresh start.

My 2 cents
Kent Norman

- --- John Solarno <workvirt@workvirtual.com> wrote:
> Every weekend, I download a copy of a detailed report off of a
> website
> we all know and love that contains all of the pricing data, earnings
> ratings, relative strength ratings, etc. for several thousand stocks
> as
> of the end of the preceding week.  I keep all of those reports on my
> hard drive, thinking they might prove useful SOMEDAY.  
> 
> Tonight, just for fun, I decided to play a game I call "Where Are
> They
> Now?" I went back to a report I ran about 30 trading days ago and,
> using
> Excel and some current pricing data, I did a very clumsy analysis of
> the
> report to see where all of these stocks now stood, subtotaled by
> various
> criteria. (For example, how did stocks with an earnings rating
> between
> 80-99 vs. stocks with an earnings rating of 70-79 perform in the last
> 30
> trading days?)
> 
> The results were startling, even if my analysis was, as I said,
> pretty
> crude.  I merely looked at price today vs. price 30 trading days ago
> and
> then sorted and subtotaled by various criteria. (I'm sure a
> statistician
> would have a field day pointing out the faults in my methods.)
> 
> Here was the part that surprised me: the worse the ratings, the
> better
> the stock performance!  It seemed as if no matter which criteria I
> used,
> the "bottom of the barrel" ended up out-performing what are usually
> referred to as "the top-rated stocks."
> 
> Here are the results.  (The percentage shown is the average
> percentage
> increase of all stocks in a given category.) I have been very careful
> to
> make sure that I am not violating any copyright laws or user
> agreements,
> so in each case, I have invented a annoyingly cute or confusing
> name/description of my own invention for each criterion just to make
> sure I won't get in trouble.
> 
> I also make no claims as to what any of this analysis means.  I
> merely
> offer it up for amusement.  (But earlier this week, the Large Picture
> in
> that newspaper we all read DID mention that the only people making
> any
> money right now were the bottom fishers!  I guess they weren't
> kidding!)
> 
> One last heartening note: notice that all of the percentages are
> positive.  That means that even though some stocks went into the
> toilet,
> overall, prices were up.
> 
> John
> 
>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------
> 
> 
> CRITERIA: The rating of the growth of a company's sales, their margin
> on
> profit and the return on their equity. (I've assigned a fake letter
> grade of my own invention which mimics the real thing. "V" is
> presumably
> the best letter grade, "Z" the worst.)
> 
> V = 3.4%
> W = 3.58%
> X - 4.68%
> Y = 5.57%
> Z = 10.60%
> 
> CRITERIA: The stock's earnings per share
> 
> 90-99:  2.82%
> 80-89:  3.58%
> 70-79:  1.75%
> 60-69:  3.75%
> 50-59:  4.07%
> 40-49:  7.17%
> 30-39:  5.74%
> 20-29:  8.01%
> 10-19:  6.19%
> 0-9: 9.05%
> 
> CRITERIA: The stock's strength, all things being relative
> 
> 90-99: 1.67%
> 80-89:	3.01%
> 70-79:	3.39%
> 60-69:	3.15%
> 50-59:	2.63%
> 40-49:	4.22%
> 30-39:	5.70%
> 20-29:	4.67%
> 10-19:	10.19%
> 0-9:  10.47%
> 
> CRITERIA: Rating of the stock's group strength, all things being
> relative
> 
> 90-99:	0.87%
> 80-89:	2.28%
> 70-79:	0.18%
> 60-69:	1.98%
> 50-59:	0.45%
> 40-49:	4.53%
> 30-39:	8.94%
> 20-29:	10.39%
> 10-19:	6.24%
> 0-9: 15.34%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
> -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.


=====
There are 3 kinds of people in the world. Those who can count and those who can't.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos
http://launch.yahoo.com/u2

- -
- -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.