Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: c bourgeois <uptickchick2003@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Big Money AGAIN, oh dear! Hay look Andy!
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 02:54:41 -0800 (PST)
Previous Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Big Money AGAIN, oh dear! Hay look Andy! "Tom Worley"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
- --0-671180791-1041072881=:47048 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii JC, I was delighted to read your post this morning. As a new subscriber to IBD and CANSLIM (have received my paper for a week now), I was looking for a way to put all this information together and develop a list of candidates. I had already decided to use a screener and have been fiddling with MultexInvestor - free at www.multexinvestor.com - before investing in a pricier system. I plan to paper trade my picks to gain knowledge and confidence that I am recognizing pivot points. I would be interested to hear recommendations for free screeners that may be superior to the one I use and also which parameters to select for screening that follow the CANSLIM criteria. I am also interested in hearing pros and cons of using the IBD premium tools vs.other available screening software. Anyone care to comment? Cindy B. John Calkins <jcalkins@olypen.com> wrote:Hi Andy, Katherine, Mike or maybe anyone who sees things this way. I don't know if you have seen some of my original posts where I demonstrated how I mined the paper (IBD)physically for data. I did this because first I was a beginner and wanted to have firmly established something in my mind that I could hang my hat on. The sorting of my database worked similar to yours,Andy and Katherine's although on a much simpler scale because mine was a sort of a sort (sort of speek..ha!). This worked for me for about 4 years until I ran out of time and patients with the paper. Also, as you say, I knew there were better ways to get the data, technology has made it possible to have a high speed internet for quick downloads, a laptop to take the offline data with me and an established backbone to keep from straying too far off what I have learned. At first I was like a kid in a candy store and couldn't make up my mind, but the more I follow a plan, the better I feel about it. Your's, Andy, and Katherine's was probably the best advice for me to use the paper as a follow up. I now have the tools to look for a screener (a wireless laptop and highspeed internet). I understand what you and Katherine have done with the Excel sheets for doing the sorting of the data, now I just need to try a site as you say. My only problem here is that I would like to try a couple of free sites like MSN to at least get the terminology down so I don't get too confused right off. I read through Your and Katherine's sheets and see how you sift through your picks. I'm confidant I can follow your guide. I guess I am kind of hung up on this one very important caractristic of CANSLIM that I just cannot seem to get past. VOLUME. As I looked at the paper, all my data started with high volume first as to try to follow the right side of the cup up to its pivot point. This seemed to eliminate the unnessary screening when I was using the manual data entry method. I have brought this up repeatidly in this forum. IBD and WON make such a big deal about volume. I notice how quiet the general media is about it. It's like I have the key to one of the Myst Worlds or something. I know that V for VOLUME is not one of the CANSLIM accronymns, but I believe it is in the "I" for institutional sponcership. If you don't have ABOVE AVERAGE VOLUME in the right side of the cup, then from what I have read, you don't have a Full CANSLIM canidate. I see from your sheet, you show average volume such as Katherine does. You have a scoring system on your personal cryteria. I'm guessing that Katherine sticks with her forward growth > 15%, Price > $6, Average Daily Volume > 30, RS >60, < 15% Below 50 day MA, > (above) 200 day MA. Then does she manually look at each and every stock on a chart to see if it has a proper base? Is this what you do too? You don't have as many stocks in your list, and I haven't tried to examine their charts to see if you picked these because of their bases. OR NOW, because of my tools, do I just enter as close to my prefered CANSLIM cyteria into the screener that I feel the most comfortable with and end up with a few hundred stocks and simply bring up each and every chart and build some sort of chart scoring system that I can sort to give me my list. I understand when building a database that you need to start with the final product and work backwards. So in this case (and what I did with the paper) is to get my list down to a managable size of stocks that were close to their piviots to send myself cell phone alerts and emails to get my attention so I can do my day job. I understand that I could just simply take out a subscription to a service that does most of this for me such as what Mike and Katherine have but the reason I got involved in CANSLIM in the first place was because I had someone else doing most of it for me. I might have stayed with them but not understanding how everything worked made me feel like something was wrong with the method. So before I can feel confident in using a service that takes most of the work out of this method, I need to prove to myself what I'm looking at. After I see that this is indeed the method that I want, and I know that to be a fact, to build on the confidence to replicate the data as close as possible to end up with similar results is my goal as is everyone else's. In screening for volume, do you recommed that I fiddle around with one of the free sites or do you have a site you know of that might help me with this. Am I beating a dead horse with this, do you get the same results when you screen, somehow, for stocks <= 15% of 52 week high and then just flip through the charts like grease lightning! If I could just mind meld with a few of you for a few hours, I won't have to reinvent the wheel again or rewrite "The Universe in a Nutshell"! Thanks any input. JC ----- Original Message ----- From: AJAskey@aol.com To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 11:56 AMSubject: Re: [CANSLIM] stock chart In a message dated 11/17/2002 12:10:16 PM Central Standard Time, jcalkins@olypen.com writes: Now let me get this straight. This group is studying WON's concept of CANSLIM. Granted, it doesn't mean you need to take a subscription to his paper to follow his teaching, BUT! How do you find the quality stocks that the big money is moving into? I use IBD's Where The Big Money's Flowing to get started with my lists. This follows everything that WON teaches. If you do not get the paper, then how do you find those same stocks? JC, Almost everything that IBD provides can be calculated and screened thru subscriptions to other data services such as AAII Stock Investor Pro and TC2000. These relatively inexpensive services did not exist when IBD was created but are popping up regularly since the internet has made it into everyones home. I am hoping that IBD recognizes this and somehow provides more data or it will eventually go out of business. DGO provides services to screen stocks but they are extremely overpriced and under featured based on what is available for free of fee elsewhere. I subscribe to IBD because I like the articles and the constant reminders of CANSLIM rules, but not because I cannot find stocks that have the best IBD rankings without IBD. In fact, using only IBD EPS ranking stocks of 80 or better will keep one out of some of the future best performing stocks. (See a recent "Ask Bill" question as IBD states this.) By using a tool that screens the fundamentals instead of the rankings, one will find the best stocks that may miss some arbitrary cut off by a statistically anomally. By this I mean it makes more sense to screen for companies meeting CANSLIM criteria than to look at a subset of stocks that a good growers to determine if they meet CANSLIM criteria. Stocks that meet CANSLIM criteria will magically have good IBD rankings. If I wanted I could buy one IBD every week or two for verification of my data. To try to duplicate the actual IBD rankings requires some programming knowledge and therefore everyone cannot do it. I do it as I don't want to tie my future to a paper that may go out of business at some point. But my point is that IBD does not do anything mystical to generate this information and the rankings are not the most important thing needed to find quality growers. The data behind the rankings is more important and the data is not available from IBD. Andy - --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now - --0-671180791-1041072881=:47048 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii <P>JC, <P> I was delighted to read your post this morning. As a new subscriber to IBD and CANSLIM (have received my paper for a week now), I was looking for a way to put all this information together and develop a list of candidates. I had already decided to use a screener and have been fiddling with MultexInvestor - free at <A href="http://www.multexinvestor.com">www.multexinvestor.com</A> - before investing in a pricier system. I plan to paper trade my picks to gain knowledge and confidence that I am recognizing pivot points. I would be interested to hear recommendations for free screeners that may be superior to the one I use and also which parameters to select for screening that follow the CANSLIM criteria. I am also interested in hearing pros and cons of using the IBD premium tools vs.other available screening software. Anyone care to comment? <P>Cindy B. <P> <B><I>John Calkins <jcalkins@olypen.com></I></B> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2722.900" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> <DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hi Andy, Katherine, Mike or maybe anyone who sees things this way.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I don't know if you have seen some of my original posts where I demonstrated how I mined the paper (IBD)physically for data. I did this because first I was a beginner and wanted to have firmly established something in my mind that I could hang my hat on. The sorting of my database worked similar to yours,Andy and Katherine's although on a much simpler scale because mine was a sort of a sort (sort of speek..ha!). This worked for me for about 4 years until I ran out of time and patients with the paper. Also, as you say, I knew there were better ways to get the data, technology has made it possible to have a high speed internet for quick downloads, a laptop to take the offline data with me and an established backbone to keep from straying too far off what I have learned. At first I was like a kid in a candy store and couldn't make up my mind, but the more I follow a plan, the better I feel about it.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Your's, Andy, and Katherine's was probably the best advice for me to use the paper as a follow up. I now have the tools to look for a screener (a wireless laptop and highspeed internet). I understand what you and Katherine have done with the Excel sheets for doing the sorting of the data, now I just need to try a site as you say. My only problem here is that I would like to try a couple of free sites like MSN to at least get the terminology down so I don't get too confused right off. I read through Your and Katherine's sheets and see how you sift through your picks. I'm confidant I can follow your guide.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I guess I am kind of hung up on this one very important caractristic of CANSLIM that I just cannot seem to get past. VOLUME. As I looked at the paper, all my data started with high volume first as to try to follow the right side of the cup up to its pivot point. This seemed to eliminate the unnessary screening when I was using the manual data entry method. I have brought this up repeatidly in this forum. IBD and WON make such a big deal about volume. I notice how quiet the general media is about it. It's like I have the key to one of the Myst Worlds or something.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I know that V for VOLUME is not one of the CANSLIM accronymns, but I believe it is in the "I" for institutional sponcership. If you don't have ABOVE AVERAGE VOLUME in the right side of the cup, then from what I have read, you don't have a Full CANSLIM canidate.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I see from your sheet, you show average volume such as Katherine does. You have a scoring system on your personal cryteria. I'm guessing that Katherine sticks with her forward growth > 15%, Price > $6, Average Daily Volume > 30, RS >60, < 15% Below 50 day MA, > (above) 200 day MA. Then does she manually look at each and every stock on a chart to see if it has a proper base? Is this what you do too? You don't have as many stocks in your list, and I haven't tried to examine their charts to see if you picked these because of their </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>bases.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>OR NOW, because of my tools, do I just enter as close to my prefered CANSLIM cyteria into the screener that I feel the most comfortable with and end up with a few hundred stocks and simply bring up each and every chart and build some sort of chart scoring system that I can sort to give me my list.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I understand when building a database that you need to start with the final product and work backwards. So in this case (and what I did with the paper) is to get my list down to a managable size of stocks that were close to their piviots to send myself cell phone alerts and emails to get my attention so I can do my day job.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I understand that I could just simply take out a subscription to a service that does most of this for me such as what Mike and Katherine have but the reason I got involved in CANSLIM in the first place was because I had someone else doing most of it for me. I might have stayed with them but not understanding how everything worked made me feel like something was wrong with the method. So before I can feel confident in using a service that takes most of the work out of this method, I need to prove to myself what I'm looking at. After I see that this is indeed the method that I want, and I know that to be a fact, to build on the confidence to replicate the data as close as possible to end up with similar results is my goal as is everyone else's.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>In screening for volume, do you recommed that I fiddle around with one of the free sites or do you have a site you know of that might help me with this. Am I beating a dead horse with this, do you get the same results when you screen, somehow, for stocks <= 15% of 52 week high and then just flip through the charts like grease lightning! If I could just mind meld with a few of you for a few hours, I won't have to reinvent the wheel again or rewrite "The Universe in a Nutshell"!</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks any input.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>JC</FONT></DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=AJAskey@aol.com href="mailto:AJAskey@aol.com">AJAskey@aol.com</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=canslim@lists.xmission.com href="mailto:canslim@lists.xmission.com">canslim@lists.xmission.com</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, November 17, 2002 11:56 AM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CANSLIM] stock chart</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=arial,helvetica><FONT size=2>In a message dated 11/17/2002 12:10:16 PM Central Standard Time, <A href="mailto:jcalkins@olypen.com">jcalkins@olypen.com</A> writes:<BR><BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" TYPE="CITE">Now let me get this straight. This group is studying WON's concept of CANSLIM. Granted, it doesn't mean you need to take a subscription to his paper to follow his teaching, BUT! How do you find the quality stocks that the big money is moving into? I use IBD's Where The Big Money's Flowing to get started with my lists. This follows everything that WON teaches. If you do not get the paper, then how do you find those same stocks?</FONT><FONT lang=0 style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=Arial color=#000000 size=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></FONT><FONT lang=0 style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"><BR>JC,<BR><BR>Almost everything that IBD provides can be calculated and screened thru subscriptions to other data services such as AAII Stock Investor Pro and TC2000. These relatively inexpensive services did not exist when IBD was created but are popping up regularly since the internet has made it into everyones home. I am hoping that IBD recognizes this and somehow provides more data or it will eventually go out of business. DGO provides services to screen stocks but they are extremely overpriced and under featured based on what is available for free of fee elsewhere.<BR><BR>I subscribe to IBD because I like the articles and the constant reminders of CANSLIM rules, but not because I cannot find stocks that have the best IBD rankings without IBD. In fact, using only IBD EPS ranking stocks of 80 or better will keep one out of some of the future best performing stocks. (See a recent "Ask Bill" question as IBD states this.) By using a tool that screens the fundamentals instead of the rankings, one will find the best stocks that may miss some arbitrary cut off by a statistically anomally. By this I mean it makes more sense to screen for companies meeting CANSLIM criteria than to look at a subset of stocks that a good growers to determine if they meet CANSLIM criteria. Stocks that meet CANSLIM criteria will magically have good IBD rankings. If I wanted I could buy one IBD every week or two for verification of my data.<BR><BR>To try to duplicate the actual IBD rankings requires some programming knowledge and therefore everyone cannot do it. I do it as I don't want to tie my future to a paper that may go out of business at some point. But my point is that IBD does not do anything mystical to generate this information and the rankings are not the most important thing needed to find quality growers. The data behind the rankings is more important and the data is not available from IBD.<BR><BR>Andy</FONT> </FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br> <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com">Yahoo! Mail Plus</a> - Powerful. Affordable. <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com">Sign up now</a> - --0-671180791-1041072881=:47048-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email.
Previous Article (by Date): Re: [CANSLIM] Big Money AGAIN, oh dear! Hay look Andy! "Tom Worley"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]