From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1955 Reply-To: canslim Sender: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-No-Archive: yes canslim-digest Saturday, December 15 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1955 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: BREL Re: [CANSLIM]c/h on chbs & bzh Re: [CANSLIM] accumulation/distribution days ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:54:37 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: BREL This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C1852C.FAB362C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tim, After reading all the comments about this one, I must agree with you. I = believe it was Katherine that mentioned the handle does not get counted = as part of the "basing formation" but I do not recall that being correct = (at least I always counted since it is an essential part of a c&h = formation). One point no one seems to have mentioned is that this is a small cap = stock that was under $12 on 9/28, when it actually began its move. Up to = then, it was characterized by a lengthy flat line base, just the kind of = stock I look for. Can't believe I missed it, because the key was the Q2 = results, where they showed strong growth in earnings both y2y and = sequentially. Sales also showed good growth. Management owns 43% of the issue, leaving only 4.7 million shares in the = float. Of that, funds owned 18% as of the last report (presumably as of = 9/30) so their holdings may have increased substantially. While ADV now = is over 300K shares a day, before the end of Sept it was a sleepy eyed = stock, often trading less than a 1000 shares a day. BIG change in less = than 3 months, and not all due to the anthrax attacks, since growth was = already occurring before then. With the float turning over in just 16 days, you are usually going to = get a shortened "basing formation", so even if the handle is not to be = counted, the five weeks forming the cup is still valid in my book. Some = tolerance and deviation from the strict rules must be given due the = small float and rapid growth in daily volume. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tim Fisher=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:09 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: BREL I see a short, flat handle starting Dec 5 forming at the old high of = 32.50, range of about 29-33. I do not see an upward slope in either the = closing price or the trading range in the handle. At 11:01 AM 12/14/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Doesn't the upward-sloping handle on BREL concern you? > >- >-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" >-In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or >-"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. Tim Fisher Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site Pacific Fishery Biologists Information mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com WWW http://OreRockOn.com - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C1852C.FAB362C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tim,
 
After reading all the comments about this one, I = must agree=20 with you.  I believe it was Katherine that mentioned the handle = does not=20 get counted as part of the "basing formation" but I do not recall that = being=20 correct (at least I always counted since it is an essential part of a = c&h=20 formation).
 
One point no one seems to have mentioned is that = this is a=20 small cap stock that was under $12 on 9/28, when it actually began its = move. Up=20 to then, it was characterized by a lengthy flat line base, just the kind = of=20 stock I look for. Can't believe I missed it, because the key was the Q2 = results,=20 where they showed strong growth in earnings both y2y and sequentially. = Sales=20 also showed good growth.
 
Management owns 43% of the issue, leaving only 4.7 = million=20 shares in the float. Of that, funds owned 18% as of the last report = (presumably=20 as of 9/30) so their holdings may have increased substantially. While = ADV now is=20 over 300K shares a day, before the end of Sept it was a sleepy eyed = stock, often=20 trading less than a 1000 shares a day. BIG change in less than 3 months, = and not=20 all due to the anthrax attacks, since growth was already occurring = before=20 then.
 
With the float turning over in just 16 days, you are = usually=20 going to get a shortened "basing formation", so even if the handle is = not to be=20 counted, the five weeks forming the cup is still valid in my book. Some=20 tolerance and deviation from the strict rules must be given due the = small float=20 and rapid growth in daily volume.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tim = Fisher=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com =
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 = 11:09=20 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Re: = BREL

I see a short, flat handle starting Dec 5 forming at = the old=20 high of 32.50,
range of about 29-33. I do not see an upward slope = in either=20 the closing
price or the trading range in the handle.

At = 11:01 AM=20 12/14/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>Doesn't the upward-sloping handle = on BREL=20 concern you?
>
>-
>-To subscribe/unsubscribe, email = "majordomo@xmission.com"
>= ;-In=20 the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
>-"unsubscribe=20 canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.

Tim=20 Fisher
Ore-ROCK-On Rockhounding Web Site
Pacific Fishery = Biologists=20 Information
mailto:tim@OreRockOn.com
WWW = http://OreRockOn.com

-
-To = subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim".  Do=20 not use quotes in your email.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C1852C.FAB362C0-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 06:15:03 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]c/h on chbs & bzh This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01C1852F.D6653A80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi John, A couple of comments: CHBS - not as smooth a formation as I would prefer, but I agree, there = is a c&h there, with the handle now about a week long. However, I also = note that Management only owns 8% of the issue, leaving the rest in the = float. Of that, funds already own 39%, that's too high for safety in my = opinion. While ROE is very strong at 48%, it is not being translated = thru into cash flow ($1.24 vs $1.00). And earnings in the first half are = only a third of the projection for the full year. Appears that Q3 and Q4 = are the stronger ones, but with retail reports indicating that Xmas = sales are not brisk, I suspect they will have difficulty making full = year forecasts. On BZH - one of the very few home builders that has continued to show = exceptional growth both y2y and sequentially. I have the same problem = with Mngmt/Funds ownership (8%, 37%). As for the c&h formation, I = disagree. I see that actually happening from 8/30 to 11/23, including = the short handle, when it began a stealth breakout on low volume. = Because the b/o was on low volume and well under the left lip makes this = a formation more prone to failure, IMO, even tho it has done well so = far. What you see as the current handle I see as a consolidation since = the b/o, thus should be monitored but not bought to see where it will go = from here. Friday's drop on volume may be the "warning shot across the = bow", or may mean nothing and earnings will continue to drive it higher. = But with such large funds ownership, I would be very careful. I should = also note that the forecast for 2002 calls for only a 5% earnings = growth. They had a great 2001, but that means the quarterly comparisons = in 2002 will be that much more difficult. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: John Adair=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 9:31 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]c/h on chbs & bxh You might check chbs its forming a handle and has a good base. Bzh has = a good base and the cup is formed . No handle yet but it is at the = pivot point ready to start the handle. -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of John Adair Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:49 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] new edition of htmmis Can anyone tell me when the new edition of htmmis by won will be = available -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of camelot.homes@charter.net Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:52 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] clarification eric, but how about the hugh returns that kacher, morales, ryan, kuhn = have gotten in the past using the canslim system. i believe in readings WON = gets a more modest 40% a year-of course i might be wrong about that. david ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tangen, Eric" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:41 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] clarification > The 40% number is an amalgam of a number of anecdotes from a few = different > sources. Its all word of mouth. No names to given protect the = guilty. > > You can almost infer such a number from WON himself...I'd bet if you = asked > the big-O-man in a seminar he'd deflect the question to point out = how much > you are ahead having 1 big gain out of 2-5 trades. > > > ERIC TANGEN > > -----Original Message----- > From: camelot.homes@charter.net [mailto:camelot.homes@charter.net] > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:16 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] clarification > > > eric, how do you get the 40% reliability of the WON breakout? david = frank > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tangen, Eric" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:57 PM > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] clarification > > > > Of course you are right...risk is the stop value itself...it is = what you > > loose when your stop is triggered. It is what I mean but didn't = say > > correctly. > > > > This is what happens when I try to communicate math verbally...the = two > don't > > mix. :) > > > > ERIC TANGEN > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Adair [mailto:xjadair@brightok.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:48 PM > > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] clarification > > > > > > Hi Erick > > If I am reading your post right correctly you would say your risk > > on a $50 > > stock with a $5.00 stop would be $50.00 -$5.00 or $45.00. If that = is what > > you are saying I would not agree I would say your risk is $5.00 = if I > > understand what Tharp suggests. Tharp then limits your risk to = the 1% is > > based on that figure 1% ( 3% for the gunslinger) of your total = capitol. > > John Adair > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tangen, Eric > > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 7:19 PM > > To: 'canslim@lists.xmission.com' > > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] clarification > > > > The latter....your risk is your buy price less the stop. Rule of = thumb: > that > > number should be 1% or less of your total trading capital. So if = you want > in > > on a more volatile stock, just buy less of it...but don't set the = stop at > > 7-8% if the stock has a 10% daily trading range - another point = HTMMIS > > doesn't address. > > > > Trading any system with a 7-8% risk for each trade is a receipe = for > > disaster. The pros use a 1% limit. If (as in HTMMIS suggest) you = split up > > your capital evenly amoung 5-6 stocks and used an arbitrary 7-8% = stop > loss, > > statistically, it would be very easy to get enough losing trades = to loose > > all your money. The unspoken 40% reliability of the WON breakouts = only > makes > > this bad situation worse. > > > > I'm afraid that a quick reading of HTMMIS gives the impression = that if you > > can identify the perfect C+H setup and all the other CANSLIM = criteria are > in > > place, you can get darn near 100% reliability of a breakout. I = have a big > > problem with that. > > > > I'm not down on CANSLIM...just like people to know the reality of = the > > situation. Your going for home runs here and home run hitters have = a lot > of > > strikeouts. > > > > > > ERIC TANGEN > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Katherine Malm [mailto:kmalm@earthlink.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 2:02 PM > > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] clarification > > > > > > >>If you put 7-8% of your trading capital > > > at risk on any one trade > > > > Now that I've been mulling over your comment, it begs another = question. > Are > > you suggesting the *total* monies invested in a trade are "at = risk"? Or > the > > amount which you've specified in downside stop-loss protection as = "at > > risk."? > > > > Katherine > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Tangen, Eric" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 1:46 PM > > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] clarification > > > > > > > Welcome to the club! Breakouts are a high risk and high reward > strategy - > > if > > > you're batting .500, that's pretty darn good. You should expect = 40% > > success > > > at finding successful breakouts long-term. > > > > > > I just have to get this off my chest for the new = subscribers...WON's > 7-8% > > > stop below the pivot is a technical stop. It is a rule of thumb = based on > > > volatility in the handle region before a stock takes off. > > > > > > It is NOT A MONEY MANAGEMENT STOP!. If you put 7-8% of your = trading > > capital > > > at risk on any one trade, you will eventually pay some really = serious > Wall > > > Street tuition on the path to becoming successful trader. > > > > > > WON's work has virtually nothing in the area of money management = (what > he > > > does say is just plain outdated...by 5 stocks with 100k...more > appropriate > > > to an era of high commissions and lower volatility). > > > > > > Tharp's books are the best (only?) work in this area and should = be > > required > > > reading before you head out to the great casino that is Wall = Street. > > > > > > ERIC TANGEN > > > > > > > > - > > -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. - -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. - ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01C1852F.D6653A80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi John,
 
A couple of comments:
 
CHBS - not as smooth a formation as = I would=20 prefer, but I agree, there is a c&h there, with the handle now about = a week=20 long. However, I also note that Management only owns 8% of the issue, = leaving=20 the rest in the float. Of that, funds already own 39%, that's too high = for=20 safety in my opinion. While ROE is very strong at 48%, it is not being=20 translated thru into cash flow ($1.24 vs $1.00). And earnings in the = first half=20 are only a third of the projection for the full year. Appears that Q3 = and Q4 are=20 the stronger ones, but with retail reports indicating that Xmas sales = are not=20 brisk, I suspect they will have difficulty making full year=20 forecasts.
 
On BZH - one of the very few home = builders=20 that has continued to show exceptional growth both y2y and sequentially. = I have=20 the same problem with Mngmt/Funds ownership (8%, 37%). As for the = c&h=20 formation, I disagree. I see that actually happening from 8/30 to 11/23, = including the short handle, when it began a stealth breakout on low = volume.=20 Because the b/o was on low volume and well under the left lip makes this = a=20 formation more prone to failure, IMO, even tho it has done well so=20 far.  What you see as the current handle I see as a consolidation = since the=20 b/o, thus should be monitored but not bought to see where it will go = from here.=20 Friday's drop on volume may be the "warning shot across the bow", or may = mean=20 nothing and earnings will continue to drive it higher. But with such = large funds=20 ownership, I would be very careful. I should also note that the forecast = for=20 2002 calls for only a 5% earnings growth. They had a great 2001, but = that means=20 the quarterly comparisons in 2002 will be that much more = difficult.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 John=20 Adair
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com =
Sent: Thursday, December 13, = 2001 9:31=20 PM
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]c/h on = chbs &=20 bxh

You might check chbs its forming a handle and has a = good base.=20 Bzh has a
good base and the cup is formed . No handle  yet but = it is=20 at the pivot
point ready to start the handle.

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com
[mailto:owner-canslim@lis= ts.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of John Adair
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:49 = PM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Subject:=20 RE: [CANSLIM] new edition of htmmis

Can anyone tell me when the = new=20 edition of htmmis by won will be available

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com
[mailto:owner-canslim@lis= ts.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of
camelot.homes@charter.netSent:=20 Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:52 PM
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Subject:=20 Re: [CANSLIM] clarification

eric, but how about the hugh = returns that=20 kacher, morales, ryan, kuhn have
gotten in the past using the = canslim=20 system. i believe in readings WON gets
a more modest 40% a year-of = course i=20 might be wrong about that. david
----- Original Message = - -----
From:=20 "Tangen, Eric" <tangene@tycoelectronics.com>
To:=20 <canslim@lists.xmission.com= >
Sent:=20 Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:41 PM
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM]=20 clarification


> The 40% number is an amalgam of a number = of=20 anecdotes from a few different
> sources. Its all word of mouth. = No=20 names to given protect the guilty.
>
> You can almost = infer such a=20 number from WON himself...I'd bet if you asked
> the big-O-man = in a=20 seminar he'd deflect the question to point out how much
> you = are ahead=20 having 1 big gain out of 2-5 trades.
>
>
> ERIC=20 TANGEN
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: camelot.homes@charter.net = [mailto:camelot.homes@charter.ne= t]
>=20 Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 9:16 PM
> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>=20 Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] clarification
>
>
> eric, how = do you=20 get the 40% reliability of the WON breakout? david frank
> ----- = Original Message -----
> From: "Tangen, Eric" <tangene@tycoelectronics.com>
>=20 To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com= >
>=20 Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:57 PM
> Subject: RE: = [CANSLIM]=20 clarification
>
>
> > Of course you are = right...risk is=20 the stop value itself...it is what you
> > loose when your = stop is=20 triggered. It is what I mean but didn't say
> > = correctly.
>=20 >
> > This is what happens when I try to communicate math=20 verbally...the two
> don't
> > mix. :)
> = >
>=20 > ERIC TANGEN
> >
> >
> >
> >=20 -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Adair [mailto:xjadair@brightok.net]
= >=20 > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:48 PM
> > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>=20 > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] clarification
> >
> = >
>=20 > Hi Erick
> > If I am reading your post right  = correctly you=20 would say your risk
> > on a $50
> > stock with a = $5.00 stop=20 would be  $50.00 -$5.00 or $45.00. If that is
what
> = > you=20 are saying  I would not agree I would say your risk is = $5.00  if=20 I
> > understand what Tharp suggests. Tharp then limits your = risk=20 to  the 1%
is
> > based on that figure 1% ( 3% for = the=20 gunslinger) of your total  capitol.
> > John = Adair
>=20 >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com
>=20 > [mailto:owner-canslim@lis= ts.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of Tangen, Eric
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 = 7:19=20 PM
> > To: 'canslim@lists.xmission.com'=
>=20 > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] clarification
> >
> > = The=20 latter....your risk is your buy price less the stop. Rule of = thumb:
>=20 that
> > number should be 1% or less of your total trading = capital.=20 So if you
want
> in
> > on a more volatile stock, = just buy=20 less of it...but don't set the stop
at
> > 7-8% if the = stock has a=20 10% daily trading range - another point HTMMIS
> > doesn't=20 address.
> >
> > Trading any system with a 7-8% risk = for=20 each trade is a receipe for
> > disaster. The pros use a 1% = limit. If=20 (as in HTMMIS suggest) you split
up
> > your capital = evenly amoung=20 5-6 stocks and used an arbitrary 7-8% stop
> loss,
> >=20 statistically, it would be very easy to get enough losing trades=20 to
loose
> > all your money. The unspoken 40% reliability = of the=20 WON breakouts only
> makes
> > this bad situation=20 worse.
> >
> > I'm afraid that a quick reading of = HTMMIS=20 gives the impression that if
you
> > can identify the = perfect C+H=20 setup and all the other CANSLIM criteria
are
> in
> = > place,=20 you can get darn near 100% reliability of a breakout. I have = a
big
>=20 > problem with that.
> >
> > I'm not down on=20 CANSLIM...just like people to know the reality of the
> > = situation.=20 Your going for home runs here and home run hitters have a lot
>=20 of
> > strikeouts.
> >
> >
> > = ERIC=20 TANGEN
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> = > From:=20 Katherine Malm [mailto:kmalm@earthlink.net]
&g= t; >=20 Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 2:02 PM
> > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
>=20 > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] clarification
> >
> = >
>=20 > >>If you put 7-8% of your trading capital
> > > = at risk=20 on any one trade
> >
> > Now that I've been mulling = over=20 your comment, it begs another question.
> Are
> > you=20 suggesting the *total* monies invested in a trade are "at risk"? = Or
>=20 the
> > amount which you've specified in downside stop-loss=20 protection as "at
> > risk."?
> >
> >=20 Katherine
> >
> >
> > ----- Original = Message=20 -----
> > From: "Tangen, Eric" <tangene@tycoelectronics.com>
>=20 > To: <canslim@lists.xmission.com= >
>=20 > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 1:46 PM
> > Subject: = RE:=20 [CANSLIM] clarification
> >
> >
> > > = Welcome to=20 the club! Breakouts are a high risk and high reward
> strategy = - -
>=20 > if
> > > you're batting .500, that's pretty darn = good. You=20 should expect 40%
> > success
> > > at finding = successful=20 breakouts long-term.
> > >
> > > I just have = to get=20 this off my chest for the new subscribers...WON's
> 7-8%
> = >=20 > stop below the pivot is a technical stop. It is a rule of thumb=20 based
on
> > > volatility in the handle region before a = stock=20 takes off.
> > >
> > > It is NOT A MONEY = MANAGEMENT=20 STOP!. If you put 7-8% of your trading
> > capital
> = > >=20 at risk on any one trade, you will eventually pay some really = serious
>=20 Wall
> > > Street tuition on the path to becoming = successful=20 trader.
> > >
> > > WON's work has virtually = nothing=20 in the area of money management (what
> he
> > > = does say is=20 just plain outdated...by 5 stocks with 100k...more
> = appropriate
>=20 > > to an era of high commissions and lower volatility).
> = >=20 >
> > > Tharp's books are the best (only?) work in this = area=20 and should be
> > required
> > > reading before = you head=20 out to the great casino that is Wall Street.
> > >
> = >=20 > ERIC TANGEN
> >
> >
> >
> > = - -
>=20 > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
>= ; >=20 -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> > = - -"unsubscribe=20 canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
> >
> = >=20 -
> > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
>= ; >=20 -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> > = - -"unsubscribe=20 canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
> >
>=20 >
> > -
> > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
>= ; >=20 -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> > = - -"unsubscribe=20 canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
> >
> = >=20 -
> > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
>= ; >=20 -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> > = - -"unsubscribe=20 canslim".  Do not use quotes in your = email.
>
>
>=20 -
> -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
>= ; -In=20 the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe=20 canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.
>
> = - -
> -To=20 subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
>= ; -In=20 the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
> -"unsubscribe=20 canslim".  Do not use quotes in your email.


-
-To=20 subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim".  Do=20 not use quotes in your email.


-
-To = subscribe/unsubscribe, email=20 "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= =20 the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim". =20 Do not use quotes in your email.


-
-To = subscribe/unsubscribe,=20 email "majordomo@xmission.com"
-In= the=20 email body, write "subscribe canslim" or
-"unsubscribe = canslim".  Do=20 not use quotes in your email.
- ------=_NextPart_000_0055_01C1852F.D6653A80-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 05:49:49 -0600 From: "Katherine Malm" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] accumulation/distribution days This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_02AB_01C1852C.4EF4B600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Tom, I think it's semantics, so I'll stick with WON words again: What you are describing is what WON refers to as "a stock under = accumulation" or a "stock under distribution." This is reflected in = measures like DGO/IBD's weighted average of A/D over the last 13 weeks. = (Values A to E) It describes the persistency of = accumulation/distribution over a period of time. This is different than "an accumulation day" or "a distribution day" for = the stock or market, which is what I defined. This is a single day's = action rather than action over a period of time. When you read the Big = Picture, they do not distinguish who is buying to determine if a day is = an accumulation or distribution day. However, it is one reason why they = talk about "subtle distribution" at market tops, i.e., high volume with = little or no price movement up. Subtle differences, but with different applications. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 4:39 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] accumulation/distribution days Katherine, I must disagree somewhat on this. You describe what is = probably a more traditional definition. But different sites will do it = differently. DGO describes it as the result of a proprietary formula (so = we don't get to know how they calculate it) which analyzes each days = trading activity for both price and volume, and over a 13 week period. One feature I really like, and use, with my quote service at = FreeRealTime is a VWAP (Volume Weighed Average Price). I can look at it = any time of the day and tell if a stock is being accumulated or = distributed. When I was an active broker, and getting first hand trading by WON = staffers, the way they explained Accum / Dist to me was that = accumulation was when the funds were buying it, distribution was when = the funds were selling it to retail buyers. This latter situation is = often characterized by high volume with little if any price gain. I = suspect the DG / DGO proprietary formula is weighed along similar lines. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Katherine Malm=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:01 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] accumulation/distribution days Hi Rolf, The definitions of A & D are fairly straightforward, whether for a = stock or a market index: An accumulation day is one in which the price ends higher on volume = higher than the previous day. A distribution day is one in which the price ends lower on volume = higher than the previous day.=20 So, for example, a warning sign that the market may be topping would = be 4 distribution days within 2 weeks. For a stock, many would consider it a sell signal if there were 2 = days close together that were either distribution days or were days with = high volume and little/no price progress. The follow-thru day is just a special application of an accumulation = day for a market index. That is, after a market low has been printed, = you're looking for accumulation of 2%+ within 4-7 days of the first = rally off the low. Katherine ----- Original Message -----=20 From: rolf hertenstein=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:59 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] accumulation/distribution days Just dug through HTMMIS and IBD's Investor's Corner Archives, and = I can't seem to come up with definitions for these. Is an = accumulation day one in which the DOW, S&P, or NASD rise on higher volume, or do = they need the same 2% rise on volume as a FT day? Ditto for a = distribution day - simple drop in a major index on higher volume, or is there also a = % drop. Thanks! Rolf - ------=_NextPart_000_02AB_01C1852C.4EF4B600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Tom,
 
I think it's semantics, so I'll stick = with WON=20 words again:
 
What you are describing is what WON = refers to as "a=20 stock under accumulation" or a "stock under=20 distribution." This is reflected in measures like DGO/IBD's = weighted=20 average of A/D over the last 13 weeks. (Values A to E) It describes = the=20 persistency of accumulation/distribution over a period of=20 time.
 
This is different than "an = accumulation=20 day" or "a distribution day" for the stock or = market,=20 which is what I defined. This is a single day's action rather = than=20 action over a period of time. When you read the Big Picture, they do not = distinguish who is buying to determine if a day is an = accumulation or=20 distribution day. However, it is one reason why they talk about "subtle=20 distribution" at market tops, i.e., high volume with little or no price = movement=20 up.
 
Subtle differences, but with different=20 applications.
 
Katherine
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tom = Worley=20
Sent: Saturday, December 15, = 2001 4:39=20 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]=20 accumulation/distribution days

Katherine, I must disagree somewhat on this. You = describe=20 what is probably a more traditional definition. But different sites = will do it=20 differently. DGO describes it as the result of a proprietary formula = (so we=20 don't get to know how they calculate it) which analyzes each days = trading=20 activity for both price and volume, and over a 13 week = period.
 
One feature I really like, and use, with my quote = service at=20 FreeRealTime is a VWAP (Volume Weighed Average Price). I can look at = it any=20 time of the day and tell if a stock is being accumulated or=20 distributed.
 
When I was an active broker, and getting first = hand trading=20 by WON staffers, the way they explained Accum / Dist to me was that=20 accumulation was when the funds were buying it, distribution was when = the=20 funds were selling it to retail buyers. This latter situation is often = characterized by high volume with little if any price gain. I suspect = the DG /=20 DGO proprietary formula is weighed along similar lines.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Katherine=20 Malm
Sent: Friday, December 14, = 2001 11:01=20 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM]=20 accumulation/distribution days

Hi Rolf,
 
The definitions of A & D are = fairly=20 straightforward, whether for a stock or a market index:
 
An accumulation day is one in which = the price=20 ends higher on volume higher than the previous=20 day.
A distribution day is one in which = the price=20 ends lower on volume higher than the previous day. =
 
So, for example, a warning sign = that the market=20 may be topping would be 4 distribution days within 2 = weeks.
For a stock, many would consider it = a sell=20 signal if there were 2 days close together that were either = distribution=20 days or were days with high volume and little/no price=20 progress.
 
The follow-thru day is just a = special=20 application of an accumulation day for a market index. That is, = after a=20 market low has been printed, you're looking for accumulation of 2%+ = within=20 4-7 days of the first rally off the low.
 
Katherine
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 rolf=20 hertenstein
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Friday, December 14, = 2001 8:59=20 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM]=20 accumulation/distribution days

Just dug through HTMMIS and IBD's = Investor's=20 Corner Archives, and I
can't seem to come up with = definitions for=20 these.  Is an accumulation day
one in which the DOW, S&P, or = NASD rise=20 on higher volume, or do they
need the same 2% rise on volume = as a FT=20 day?  Ditto for a distribution day -
simple drop in a major index on = higher=20 volume, or is there also a % drop.
 
Thanks!
 
 =20 Rolf
- ------=_NextPart_000_02AB_01C1852C.4EF4B600-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #1955 ****************************** To unsubscribe to canslim-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe canslim-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.