From: canslim-owner@xmission.com (canslim Digest) To: canslim-digest@xmission.com Subject: canslim Digest V1 #178 Reply-To: canslim@xmission.com Sender: canslim-owner@xmission.com Errors-To: canslim-owner@xmission.com Precedence: canslim Digest Monday, May 19 1997 Volume 01 : Number 178 In this issue: [CANSLIM] HDCO [CANSLIM] Re: New Kid on the Block Re: [CANSLIM] Re: New Kid on the Block [CANSLIM] Re: New Kid on the Block [CANSLIM] 8% Stop Re: [CANSLIM] CBRL (was 8% Stop) Re: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Re: [CANSLIM] CBRL (was 8% Stop) Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Re: [CANSLIM] Tuesday (Quiet List) Re: [CANSLIM] HDCO Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Re: [CANSLIM] HELE [CANSLIM] Friday's mkt, GATE Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS [CANSLIM] CPWR Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS [CANSLIM] GATE/CPWR Re: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop [CANSLIM] AEIS [CANSLIM] David Ryan Re: [CANSLIM] David Ryan [CANSLIM] MS Investor Beta Site - Screening [CANSLIM] USLD Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Re: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the canslim or canslim-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 12:40:51 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] HDCO Anybody else besides me still following Hadco (HDCO)? Looks like its setting up a new entry point for those that missed the move from 40 to 55. Vol drying up, starting a base, RS 96, EPS 92, a/d A, GRS 98, time A, u/d 1.8, debt 1%, funds high at 42%, and a secondary of stock only (they cancelled the debt portion, which was the greater part, and helped collapse the price) still pends. 1997 est up 16% and 98 up 22%, last four qtrs earnings up 29%, 29%, 25% and 28%. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 14:09:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Dbphoenix@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: New Kid on the Block Greetings from AOL (yes, yes, I know)! I just signed up today because it's easier to find snowballs in July than to find substantive CS discussions on AOL. Why this is I have no idea. Perhaps the influence of The Motley Fool is too pervasive. Who knows? At any rate, I've only read the first batch from last October and the most recent batch from the last couple of days, mainly to get an idea of the level of discussion. As time permits, I'll backtrack in order to get a sense of who you all are and what page you're on. In the meantime, I'd like to contribute as the need and opportunity arise, so please keep in mind that it's going to take awhile for me to get up to speed and I may ask questions that have already been answered, or make comments that are redundant. As far as background goes, I've been a full-time investor for about nine years. However, it wasn't until the past year that I finally obtained a charting program and access to daily updates. These two events have changed my approach dramatically. I don't, for example, pay as much attention to IBD's rankings as much as I used to, partly because of the above, but also because of research I've done into RS and EPS rankings of winners over time. What I look for, essentially, are trends rather than absolute rankings. So if I don't post an EPS number or an RS number, it's only because of my relational focus. Since IBD "fiddles" with the numbers by weighting them, they have less value for me than they otherwise might have. If I don't know exactly how a number is derived, I tend to put less emphasis on it. What I'm immersed in at present is a study of price and volume relationships and how they influence and determine chart patterns. This has enabled me, for example, to separate genuine C&H patterns from those that resemble C&H, but aren't. O'N stresses the importance of volume, but his explanations of what to look for are skimpy, to say the least. Actually, detailed explanations of a number of points are pretty skimpy, which may explain why so many people have so many peculiar notions of what CS is all about, at least on AOL. I hope to be a productive member. At least I'll try. - -------Db ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 14:27:26 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: New Kid on the Block Welcome to the group, DB, I think you will find it's a new experience compared to most groups on the net. From your comments, it sounds like you have already read WON's How to Make Money in Stocks. If you are not already subscribing to his Daily Graphs books, you might like to join the beta testing of them online (free for awhile, probably sometime in July) by downloading the software and signing up at http://www.dailygraphs.com. So far, DG Online is unfriendly to UNIX and other platforms, gotta be WIN95 compatible unfortunately. But otherwise it's a great way of looking at the same charts WON is looking at. Don't worry about redundant comments or previously asked questions, we've been there, done that, before. The only dumb question is the one not asked, or asked without reading a little on CANSLIM. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. - ---------- > From: Dbphoenix@aol.com > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: New Kid on the Block > Date: Sunday, May 18, 1997 2:09 PM > > > Greetings from AOL (yes, yes, I know)! > > I just signed up today because it's easier to find snowballs in July than to > find substantive CS discussions on AOL. Why this is I have no idea. Perhaps > the influence of The Motley Fool is too pervasive. Who knows? > > At any rate, I've only read the first batch from last October and the most > recent batch from the last couple of days, mainly to get an idea of the level > of discussion. As time permits, I'll backtrack in order to get a sense of > who you all are and what page you're on. In the meantime, I'd like to > contribute as the need and opportunity arise, so please keep in mind that > it's going to take awhile for me to get up to speed and I may ask questions > that have already been answered, or make comments that are redundant. > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 15:17:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Dbphoenix@aol.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Re: New Kid on the Block In a message dated 97-05-18 14:37:08 EDT, you write: << From your comments, it sounds like you have already read WON's How to Make Money in Stocks. >> Actually, Tom, I'm "teaching" it to a CS e-mail group I sponsor on AOL. Unfortunately, virtually all of them are new, or relatively new, to CS, so at present it's mostly give and not much take on my part (the ones who aren't new to it believe a lot of things that aren't true). Thus I have to make my selections pretty much on my own. The selection part has been very frustrating of late. Lots of failed rallies and "breakouts". And the action in the NASDAQ the past week was very disturbing. Ever higher prices and ever lower volume are not a good combination. What I find myself doing is looking at stocks I like that are rolling over, then calculating probable support levels, so that when this tension in the market is released I'll have a ready list of stocks to focus on. What can I say? It makes me feel like I'm doing something useful. - ------Db ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 12:27:23 -0800 From: pwahl@postoffice.worldnet.att.net Subject: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop I am pretty sure this didn't go through, so resending it. ======================================================== > From: "Tom Worley" > Zoran, I agree that the stop loss (whether hard or mental) should be > picked using the chart and TA as well as your own sense of risk > management. I don't believe WON ever suggested setting a specific 8% > stop loss, I do recall from my readings, including an interview Of course he did. He says 7% in the Market Wizards interview, and in his book he has a section with that rule in big bold letters as the section header (page 87 in my copy). I don't think he meant you should hold every stock that isn't performing well until you hit that 8% stop level, but that is the maxmimum you should allow the stock to decline. - ------------------------------------------------------ Different subject - The Heard in the Street column of today's (Friday) WSJ is pretty funny. Paraphrasing a bit, it starts out more or less like - The average investor isn't as bad an investor as he is commonly believed to be, he is worse. They got this from a study of discount broker accounts. They found that the small investor usually overestimates his investing skill, tends to hold onto his losers too long while selling his winners. Stocks tend to perform better after they are sold than they did when the typical investor held them. Patrick Wahl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 12:27:23 -0800 From: pwahl@postoffice.worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CBRL (was 8% Stop) > From: "Tom Worley" > correctly) than it is after a stock begins to move. However, from > my past training and reading on WON, he does continue to use an 8% > stop once the stock has moved up at least 15% from the "entry > point". Thus, if he entered a stock already in play past a correct > entry point, he still wants to limit the loss to 8%. If he does it > correctly, then a 15% move confirms that and he starts "protecting > the profits" vice insuring against an excessive loss. If a stock > has a nice long and consistent run up, it is healthy for it to > retreat 25% of that move. He wants to be out at 8% from the top, so I would like to see you substantiate this, because I have heard O'Neil say something very different about how much leeway you should give a stock once you have a profit. An 8% stop from any point in a stocks move will get you stopped out of virtually every stock before it has had time to complete its move. Patrick Wahl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 17:17:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Zoran Mitrovski Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop Hemant wrote: > While I have no disagreement about setting stops based on TA, > I think setting a stop at 8% of the price or setting total loss at > 2% of the trading total capital without concerning how the capital is > divided between different positions may be equally blind heuristics. [snip] You are right. Both the 2% (of the capital) and the 8% (of the price) are "equally blind heuristics". However, the "2% of the capital" rule allows you to figure out the protective exit point based on TA and INDEPENDENT of the blind percentage heuristics. O'Neil doesn't care about that. For him an entry at $100 implies stoploss at $92 regardless of the chart and TA. For me, the TA could tell me that $98 (or $88) is the stop-loss place that would maximize my chances for a winning trade. In the case of $98 I could decide to enter with 100% of my capital and in case of $88 with 1/6 of my capital. (give or take). > That brings me to the next point about diversification. > I think you had metnioned this earlier, but I had resisted temptation to > respond at that time but since you bring it again here it goes. > You mention diversification could be done in equities or in time (that > is > putting 100% of the capital in a single equity in different slices of > time > rather than putting it in different equities at the same time). > While that dichotomy has taxomomical value, the risks associated with > both approaches are not identical considering that equity prices are > affected > by random events that can occur at any time. Indeed, one could model those random events as being uniformly distributed within the (2-D) equities-time space. On one axis you have the time and on the other you have the thousands of financial instruments. Just sprinkle the various random events over the time-equities plate to model the mess. ;^) > If one random event can wipe out the value of equity to zero, > diversification > on the time scale requires only one such event to occur to wipe out the > capital > where as diversification into more equities will require N such events > to occur > simultaneously for your capital to be wiped out and the probablity of > the latter > event is smaller than the former, hence has lower worst case risk. It is all a matter of how much exposure you have to the markets. The larger the portion of my trading capital with which I enter a trade, proportionally the larger becomes my attention and the shorter becomes the time span of the trade, thus considerably reducing the probability of such a disasterous event hitting the tiny rectangular patch that models my equities-time exposure. Diversification (in equities) indeed makes more sense for long term investors. They have religiously decided to expose their money on extremely long patches along the time axis, so they better spread them thinly along the equities axis of the plate to avoid being destroyed by such a random disaster. I am different because whenever I feel like making some money (or whenever I find the time to do it) I observe the situation on the patch along the equities axis defined by the present point in time, and I dig out opportunities with the highest probabilities to move in a given direction. > Also tight losses is a blind faith which will generally work but not > always (that is gap down on news). This is also answered by the "large attention" and "short time" arguments from above. Also note that such an extreme case (being 100% in an equity AND being hit by a 100% loss) almost never happens. I used the 100% position size just as an extreme to make my point for the irrelevance of diversification. > If the approach works for you that is great but I do not see them > equivalent; > this response is more of an academic nature than a practical one. We obviously have diferent outlooks and principles about trading, which I find very normal and is to be expected. For me, diversification is not a principle, not even something I find worth planning. If it occurs while I follow my other principles, then that's ok. If it doesn't occur, then that's ok, too. If I only find one good trade that I calculate should require only 10% of my trading capital while the remaining 90% is in cash due to lack of other opportunities, or simply because I was busy doing something else, then 10%long(short)/90%cash it will be. I neither have nor do I feel the obligation to be fully invested and diversified at all times. I guess those are the benefits of managing my own money. As a matter of fact, I have mostly been in cash all this time since I started, which I think also increased my chances for avoiding the surprises that the market prepares for us. (Talking from experience). But that's how I am, I guess, and that's what suits my present life situation (work, studies, and all). Nothing absolute or metaphysical about it. I am comfortably ahead, and feeling comfortable at every point along the way. I admitt that Jim Rogers (with his "I only go for the bird when it is waiting for me to just bend down and get it there in the corner" , or something) and George Soros (with his "going for the juggular") appear to be my most influential role models regarding the above discussion. Once I started writing about this, I found that there is much more that I want to talk and think about. Not here, though. I "massaged" the group enough already. I apologize for the lenghty discourse. Cheers, Zoran zmitrov@ee.rochester.edu http://www.seas.rochester.edu:8080/ee/users/zmitrov/home.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 20:01:56 -0400 From: "Patrick Toy" Subject: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS I sent an e-mail message to IBD asking where I could obtain a list which told me what stocks were in a particular group. The following is the reply. Just thought some of you might be interested. This information will be available shortly. There are two ideas being > tossed around by management at this point. We will either publish a book > where you can access this information or there will be a fax service set up > where you can order individual industry groups. I wish I could give you a > definitive time frame. I can tell you that because of numerous requests, > we will have something in place shortly. Thanks, IBDwebmaster > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 20:31:37 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CBRL (was 8% Stop) What I wrote was from an interview WON did about four years or so ago for the magazine Registered Representative, which is a stockbroker's trade magazine. Will try to find the time to dig thru boxes of old records and give you a more exact quote. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. - ---------- > From: pwahl@postoffice.worldnet.att.net > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CBRL (was 8% Stop) > Date: Sunday, May 18, 1997 4:27 PM > > > From: "Tom Worley" > > > correctly) than it is after a stock begins to move. However, from > > my past training and reading on WON, he does continue to use an 8% > > stop once the stock has moved up at least 15% from the "entry > > point". Thus, if he entered a stock already in play past a correct > > entry point, he still wants to limit the loss to 8%. If he does it > > correctly, then a 15% move confirms that and he starts "protecting > > the profits" vice insuring against an excessive loss. If a stock > > has a nice long and consistent run up, it is healthy for it to > > retreat 25% of that move. He wants to be out at 8% from the top, so > > I would like to see you substantiate this, because I have heard O'Neil > say something very different about how much leeway you should give a > stock once you have a profit. An 8% stop from any point in a stocks > move will get you stopped out of virtually every stock before it has > had time to complete its move. > > > > Patrick Wahl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 20:35:12 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Since changes are made periodically, a book would be quickly outdated. Don't know why they don't just put it online. Do they have to charge for everything? tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. - ---------- > From: Patrick Toy > To: canslim@xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS > Date: Sunday, May 18, 1997 8:01 PM > > I sent an e-mail message to IBD asking where I could obtain a list which > told me what stocks were in a particular group. The following is the > reply. Just thought some of you might be interested. > > > This information will be available shortly. There are two ideas being > > tossed around by management at this point. We will either publish a book > > > where you can access this information or there will be a fax service set > up > > where you can order individual industry groups. I wish I could give you > a > > definitive time frame. I can tell you that because of numerous requests, > > > we will have something in place shortly. Thanks, IBDwebmaster > > > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 16:58:46 -0400 (EDT) From: investor@yvv.com (Trader Jack) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Tuesday (Quiet List) >Thank goodness, there is someone else still alive out there on the >planet. Heh, I dunno what happened with the list. All day Friday I received no posts, thinking that the negative market action just sent all of you on a 3-day weekend. Then, I ended up getting the "digest" version of the list which I did not request. Somehow I had gotten switched to digest without my issuing an instruction to do so. In any case, I've switched back, so I'm still here and reading. :) Trader Jack ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 17:06:48 -0400 (EDT) From: investor@yvv.com (Trader Jack) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] HDCO >Anybody else besides me still following Hadco (HDCO)? Yup, but I think it needs more time in the base. I wouldn't be surprised to see a drop down to 47 to form a new, tighter base and then another move up to retest old highs at 55-56. Rarely do stocks that vault from the bottom of a cup to the top and then b/o on a short base sustain their breakouts. Actually, HDCO's chart doesn't look unlike that of the Nasdaq or the Russell 2000 for that matter. Food for thought. Trader Jack ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 17:09:31 -0400 (EDT) From: investor@yvv.com (Trader Jack) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS >Since changes are made periodically, a book would be quickly >outdated. Don't know why they don't just put it online. Do they >have to charge for everything? > >tom w Yeah, they have to recoup their loss of trading capital from the closure of NUSFX. Heh. Trader Jack ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 21:59:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Dbphoenix@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS In a message dated 97-05-18 20:46:41 EDT, you write: << Since changes are made periodically, a book would be quickly outdated. Don't know why they don't just put it online. Do they have to charge for everything? tom w >> Yes. All smart-assness aside, this IBD Industry Group business has been a big topic of discussion on AOL of late, and it's made me think--always a dangerous outcome. What I've been wondering is if knowing all the constituents of each industry group--whether IBD, TeleScan, VL, or whomever--is really all that important. If, for example, Industry Group A is climbing on the charts, what exactly does that mean? Does it mean that all the stocks in that group are outperforming all other stocks in every group below it? Does it mean that a majority of the stocks in that group are outperforming a majority of all other stocks in every group below it? Does it mean that the leaders in the group are outperforming the leaders in every group below it? If, as good little CSers, we are primarily concerned with the leaders, doesn't it make more sense to focus on those leaders, both within and across groups (or sectors)? In other words, to select those stocks--whether CS or not--within each group which are performing better than the others? How might group rankings change if the dogs in the various groups weren't camouflaging the true strength of the leaders in the groups? If we believe that sector strength is important, we use this as a selection criteria. However, our perception of sector strength may be warped if we consider the sector as a composite. Professional money managers (PMMs) aren't going to rush to scoop up the dogs in a given sector. They're going to go for what they consider to be the cream. If a given sector is overweighted with "under-performing" stocks, the strength of the leaders may be masked by that under-performance, and the sector avoided when it should be embraced. Therefore, perhaps what we should be doing, instead of collecting all the thousands of stocks in the 197 groups, is to collect only the "best" (either in terms of CS criteria or price-performance or both) in each group and come up with a more relevant--if not unique--ranking system which would show true strength. FWIW. - ------Db ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 03:53:04 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] HELE On Thu, 8 May 1997 12:58:51 -0800, you wrote: :I think this stock may have been mentioned before, but one that has a=20 :very good chart pattern, very tight price action, is Helen of=20 :Troy (HELE) : :EPS rank is 84, RS 94, AccDist is C, neutral I suppose. 13.1 million=20 :shares, 25% mutual fund sponsorship, which is probably a bit high. =20 :Earnings forecasts are for earnings to be up about 25 percent next=20 :year. Year ended in Feb, earnings were reported yesterday, for the=20 :quarter up 33%, full year were $1.24 vs $0.98. May need to go=20 :sideways a bit longer, buy point would seem to be in the 26 area. =20 :Avg. Volume is 86,000. I have been watching this stock for a few months now, and agree that the chart looks very good. It looked like it was poised to break out when the market was very soft around 3/10 when it was at an all-time high. It didn't break down like a lot of stocks, but didn't go anywhere. It bears watching now, but I don't expect a real breakout, baring improvement in the markets. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 00:10:05 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] Friday's mkt, GATE Well James, looks like you were right on GATE and I was right on the overall mkt. Took a look at GATE's chart tonite, definitely looks powerful despite HWP missing estimates. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 21:23:39 -0500 From: Luke Lang Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Patrick, In Yahoo Quotes, there is something similar. I believe they have the Zacks industry group. Try http://quote.yahoo.com/. Enter a stock symbol and select "research" in the box to the right and click "get quotes". There are some good information there. In the average recommendation box, your stock's industry is listed along with the ranking in that industry. You can click on the industry to see a list of all companies in ranking order. I hope this is helpful. Good luck. Luke Lang Patrick Toy wrote: > > I sent an e-mail message to IBD asking where I could obtain a list which > told me what stocks were in a particular group. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 00:27:32 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: [CANSLIM] CPWR Took a look at CPWR (#6 in the software group). Despite the group's low RS, looks like it is basing out nicely on declining vol, may be setting up a new entry point. Most of the other top 6, KEA, the absolute leader being the exception, are dropping back on declining vol. tom w Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 06:08:08 -0700 From: "James B. Andrews" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Several years ago, the list was available on a diskette for $20 with $10 quarterly updates.. The prices here may be off a little but that was how the service worked... I would like to see them start that service again,,, or maybe include it with the on-line service... Jim Andrews Phoenix At 08:35 PM 5/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >Since changes are made periodically, a book would be quickly >outdated. Don't know why they don't just put it online. Do they >have to charge for everything? > >tom w > >Any statements or opinions are strictly my own and not that of my >employer. My comments should not be intrepreted as a recommendation >of any kind. I am a licensed (inactive) broker and an active >investor. All investors should do their own research prior to any >investment, especially one learned about on the Internet. > >---------- >> From: Patrick Toy >> To: canslim@xmission.com >> Subject: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS >> Date: Sunday, May 18, 1997 8:01 PM >> >> I sent an e-mail message to IBD asking where I could obtain a >list which >> told me what stocks were in a particular group. The following is >the >> reply. Just thought some of you might be interested. >> >> >> This information will be available shortly. There are two ideas >being >> > tossed around by management at this point. We will either >publish a book >> >> > where you can access this information or there will be a fax >service set >> up >> > where you can order individual industry groups. I wish I could >give you >> a >> > definitive time frame. I can tell you that because of numerous >requests, >> >> > we will have something in place shortly. Thanks, IBDwebmaster >> > >> > > > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 08:19:17 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] GATE/CPWR Hope your right on both - OWN both! I'm scared to death about Tuesday. This market could do "anything" regardless what happens. The smart money, IMHO, was making a statement Friday, but will finalize it's opinion in today's market. Friday's "used to be" a day when there was a lot of closing out of postions going into the week-end but that has NOT been the trend lately. You know, when you think about it, somebody on Margin full invested by closing out Friday and buying back on Monday, would be out of the market interest wise for 150 out of the 356 days in the year. That could amount to be a LOT of money saved, interest wise, over the course of a year. James For those with enough money, there is NO commission of any type. Seems like more and more houses are going to that in different formats. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 09:23:13 -0400 (EDT) From: PPNewell@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop In Market Wizards by Jack D. Schwager there is an interview with David Ryan and he states that when a stock reenters a the base he says he sells half because the odds are too high that it will go all the way to the bottom of the base. A good solid stock which a good chart usually will not go back into the base. Examples would be INVX volume surge at handle around 29 then the final b/o point at 32 buying at 36 increases your risk because you really need to hold out to 30 for a realistic stop. Two more examples QNTM gapping of 35 2 months ago came down to it twice but not into it, there is a difference. And JPMX chart is similar to INVX in that there was a handle then vol surge with large up movement, which is b/o then next day or so a new b/o buying on these two days gives you ample opporunity to get in and out if something goes wrong with a minimal loss. Peter Newell ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 08:42:53 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] AEIS Hmmmmm! James ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 08:47:15 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] David Ryan Mr. Ryan seems to be continually quoted here - is there a reason for this? Forget something that he did last decade, let's deal with the current one. ONCE, he had a period of doing something good and even did it three times in a row. Frankly, since that "Single" accomplishment I am not aware of anything that he has done that rates even thinking about. However, he currently has a LOT of excess baggage that needs to be shed and IMHO he needs to re-make his name and get back to whatever it was that worked for him ONCE and show that it "could work" again. Opinions! James - ---------- > From: PPNewell@aol.com > To: canslim@mail.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop > Date: Monday, May 19, 1997 8:23 AM > > In Market Wizards by Jack D. Schwager there is an interview with David Ryan > and he states that when a stock reenters a the base he says he sells half > because the odds are too high that it will go all the way to the bottom of > the base. A good solid stock which a good chart usually will not go back > into the base. Examples would be INVX volume surge at handle around 29 then > the final b/o point at 32 buying at 36 increases your risk because you really > need to hold out to 30 for a realistic stop. > > Two more examples QNTM gapping of 35 2 months ago came down to it twice but > not into it, there is a difference. And JPMX chart is similar to INVX in > that there was a handle then vol surge with large up movement, which is b/o > then next day or so a new b/o buying on these two days gives you ample > opporunity to get in and out if something goes wrong with a minimal loss. > > Peter Newell > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 10:23:55 -0400 (EDT) From: PPNewell@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] David Ryan In a message dated 97-05-19 10:17:07 EDT, you write: << Mr. Ryan seems to be continually quoted here - is there a reason for this? >> James, I agree I would like to see David Ryan show some more of his market prowness. I quote him a lot due to the fact that I have found that his methods work, ie once a stock reenters a base it goes to the bottom so he sells half, that he and WON disagree on PE's but he has had better luck with pe's less than 1.5 of the market, note WON also was talking about stocks coming out of a recession which have higher pe's and Ryan was not. Another is that an immediate profit is the best indicator of a good stock etc. Peter Newell ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 10:33:44 -0400 From: "James Adams" Subject: [CANSLIM] MS Investor Beta Site - Screening I've been selected as a beta tester for the new Microsoft Investor 4.0 site. One of the most powerful features it offers is the "Investment Finder" which is a screening tool. Being relative a relative novice, I would like some feedback on which of the following categories and sub-categories this group thinks would enhance the information that I have access to in my daily IBDs. Each of the items can be screened with the following: =>; =<; Highest; Lowest; etc. COMPANY BASICS: Snapshot, Mkt Cap, Float, # of Employees INVESTMENT RELAT: ROE, ROI, ROA ROE 5yr avg, ROI Iyr, ROA 5yr avg. PRICE RATIOS: Price/Book, PE Current, PE 1mo ago, 1yr ago, 5yr high 5yr low, 5yr avg, Price/Sale MGMT EFFICEINCY: Rev per employee, Income per emp, Receivable turnover Inventory turnover, Asset turnover FINANCIAL CONDITION Debt to Equity, Current Ratio, Int Coverage Leverage Turnover DIVIDENDS: Latest rate, Current Yield; Payout last year, Payout 5 year avg; Yield 5 yr avg. TRADING/VOLUME: % Inst Owners, Beta, Liquidity Ratio, Short Int shares; Short Int ratio, Net Insider trades, ADV last mo qtr yr. GROWTH RATES; 5yr Rev, 5yr Divid, Rev Gro ytd vs ytd, qtr vs qtr, yr vs yr. EPS Growth ytd vs ytd, qtr vs qtr, yr to yr. PRICE HISTORY; % Change, last mo, last yr, last qtr, ytd. PROFIT MARGINS: Net, Gross, Pre-Tax, 5yr avg for Gross, Net, Pre-Tax CURRENT FINANCIALS: 12 mo Rev; Cont Ops, Total Ops, Eps Cont Ops. ANALYSTS PROJECTIONS Current qtr eps estimates, Current yr eps estimates. Current Qtr & Yr growth rate, Next Year Growth Rate, Recent qtr surprise, Forward Year PE, Next 5yr PE Mean Recommendation Sorry for such a long post. Any comments greatly appreciated. I would be glad to some custom screens based on the input and monitor their progress for this group for the next few weeks if you wish. Jim Adams (jimadams@may-uky.campus.mci.net) Maysville, Kentucky USA Home Page: http://www.cris.com/~jimadams/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 12:10:06 -0500 From: "Brenda" Subject: [CANSLIM] USLD Nobody here seemed to think too much about this one when I mentioned it's S L O W , sttteeeeaaaddddyyyy upward trend it was establishing. Well, it's still doing it. Wonder where it will be 90 days from now? Only time will tell. Have you heard how many think Greenspan will RAISE the rates tomorrow? How about some of the gurus who have been right in the past "EXPECTING" a 50 basis point move? Hmmmmm! Guess there must be some "fantasy" numbers somewhere that nobody knows about but them. Tomorrow will tell! Don't be in the market the wrong way if he "for who knows what reason" would raise the rate 50 basis points. I've never gone short but if I took $1,000 at the close today and bet that them market was going down - If it in fact did go down 200 points how much could I make using options? James ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 14:50:46 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 197 INDUSTRY GROUPS Db, At 09:59 PM 5/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-05-18 20:46:41 EDT, you write: > >If a given sector is >overweighted with "under-performing" stocks, the strength of the leaders may >be masked by that under-performance, and the sector avoided when it should be >embraced. Agreed. For example, take a look at KEA and MANU and notice the Group Relative Strength of that group in DG (14!). >Therefore, perhaps what we should be doing, instead of collecting all the >thousands of stocks in the 197 groups, is to collect only the "best" (either >in terms of CS criteria or price-performance or both) in each group and come >up with a more relevant--if not unique--ranking system which would show true >strength. Nice post, Db. Good to have you with us. Regards, Craig ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 14:50:47 -0400 From: Craig Griffin Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 8% Stop Zoran, A brief note to say how much I have enjoyed your posts (and Hemmant's and Peter's and others) on the "8% Stop" thread. At 05:17 PM 5/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >Once I started writing about this, I found that there is much more that I >want to talk and think about. Not here, though. I "massaged" the group >enough already. I apologize for the lenghty discourse. No need for apology, in fact the group owes you and the others a "Thank you" for the cogent and enlightening posts. Keep up the good work! Regards, Craig PS. For those who want more on what O'Neil says on the subject, I once again point you to what is probably the best chapter in his book, "How to Make Money in Stocks", pages 103-108. There he says, "Winning stocks seldom drop 8% below a correct pivot point buying price". He is in essence saying, "if you buy within a percent or two of the pivot and use an 8% stop, then the price will have to pull back into the base by more than about 5 or 6% for you to get stopped out". Assuming that the pivot point area is a TA support level (which, it almost certainly will be), then he is saying a bit of the same thing Zoran and others have been saying. In most regards, Zoran's approach is more sophisticated and complete. O'Neil's method is easier to teach to beginners who do not know what a chart is, and who are having a hard time dealing with the idea of setting a stop at all and honoring it. Until one understands TA a bit, setting a stop within 8% of anything seems like a simple way to guarantee a loss considering the wide fluctuations one can see in a stock on any given day. Just a few more thoughts. ------------------------------ End of canslim Digest V1 #178 ***************************** To subscribe to canslim Digest, send the command: subscribe canslim-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@xmission.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-canslim": subscribe canslim-digest local-canslim@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "canslim-digest" in the commands above with "canslim". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.xmission.com, in pub/lists/canslim/archive. These are organized by date.