From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #3023 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, November 9 2002 Volume 02 : Number 3023 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" Re: [CANSLIM] Back-Burners; Steady-Eddies; Rocking-Chair RE: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" [CANSLIM] Will the bear market rally continue? RE: [CANSLIM] Will the bear market rally continue? [CANSLIM] STST Re: [CANSLIM] STST ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 22:53:53 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" rats, John, you are giving away all my secrets to my personal success. I much prefer future winners to current winners, looking for the stock that is producing superb fundies, and shining in its group, while the group remains way out of favor. Seems most of my best stocks when I found them were in groups rated "D" or "E" at the time, as is also typical of my watch list. For me to focus in on the internet / computer security sector was novel, first time I was remotely "group oriented", or recognized the potential of an entire sector in time to not only research it, but to enter before the rest of the market already priced everything out of reach. Next 18 months will tell if I was correct in my assessments. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Solarno" To: Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 9:50 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" Every weekend, I download a copy of a detailed report off of a website we all know and love that contains all of the pricing data, earnings ratings, relative strength ratings, etc. for several thousand stocks as of the end of the preceding week. I keep all of those reports on my hard drive, thinking they might prove useful SOMEDAY. Tonight, just for fun, I decided to play a game I call "Where Are They Now?" I went back to a report I ran about 30 trading days ago and, using Excel and some current pricing data, I did a very clumsy analysis of the report to see where all of these stocks now stood, subtotaled by various criteria. (For example, how did stocks with an earnings rating between 80-99 vs. stocks with an earnings rating of 70-79 perform in the last 30 trading days?) The results were startling, even if my analysis was, as I said, pretty crude. I merely looked at price today vs. price 30 trading days ago and then sorted and subtotaled by various criteria. (I'm sure a statistician would have a field day pointing out the faults in my methods.) Here was the part that surprised me: the worse the ratings, the better the stock performance! It seemed as if no matter which criteria I used, the "bottom of the barrel" ended up out-performing what are usually referred to as "the top-rated stocks." Here are the results. (The percentage shown is the average percentage increase of all stocks in a given category.) I have been very careful to make sure that I am not violating any copyright laws or user agreements, so in each case, I have invented a annoyingly cute or confusing name/description of my own invention for each criterion just to make sure I won't get in trouble. I also make no claims as to what any of this analysis means. I merely offer it up for amusement. (But earlier this week, the Large Picture in that newspaper we all read DID mention that the only people making any money right now were the bottom fishers! I guess they weren't kidding!) One last heartening note: notice that all of the percentages are positive. That means that even though some stocks went into the toilet, overall, prices were up. John - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - ----------------------- CRITERIA: The rating of the growth of a company's sales, their margin on profit and the return on their equity. (I've assigned a fake letter grade of my own invention which mimics the real thing. "V" is presumably the best letter grade, "Z" the worst.) V = 3.4% W = 3.58% X - 4.68% Y = 5.57% Z = 10.60% CRITERIA: The stock's earnings per share 90-99: 2.82% 80-89: 3.58% 70-79: 1.75% 60-69: 3.75% 50-59: 4.07% 40-49: 7.17% 30-39: 5.74% 20-29: 8.01% 10-19: 6.19% 0-9: 9.05% CRITERIA: The stock's strength, all things being relative 90-99: 1.67% 80-89: 3.01% 70-79: 3.39% 60-69: 3.15% 50-59: 2.63% 40-49: 4.22% 30-39: 5.70% 20-29: 4.67% 10-19: 10.19% 0-9: 10.47% CRITERIA: Rating of the stock's group strength, all things being relative 90-99: 0.87% 80-89: 2.28% 70-79: 0.18% 60-69: 1.98% 50-59: 0.45% 40-49: 4.53% 30-39: 8.94% 20-29: 10.39% 10-19: 6.24% 0-9: 15.34% - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -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: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 20:11:03 -0800 (PST) From: Kent Norman Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" So could we conclude this means sector rotation? Doesn't September mark the end of the old year for funds (and the chance to abandon old stuff) while October is a fresh start. My 2 cents Kent Norman - --- John Solarno wrote: > Every weekend, I download a copy of a detailed report off of a > website > we all know and love that contains all of the pricing data, earnings > ratings, relative strength ratings, etc. for several thousand stocks > as > of the end of the preceding week. I keep all of those reports on my > hard drive, thinking they might prove useful SOMEDAY. > > Tonight, just for fun, I decided to play a game I call "Where Are > They > Now?" I went back to a report I ran about 30 trading days ago and, > using > Excel and some current pricing data, I did a very clumsy analysis of > the > report to see where all of these stocks now stood, subtotaled by > various > criteria. (For example, how did stocks with an earnings rating > between > 80-99 vs. stocks with an earnings rating of 70-79 perform in the last > 30 > trading days?) > > The results were startling, even if my analysis was, as I said, > pretty > crude. I merely looked at price today vs. price 30 trading days ago > and > then sorted and subtotaled by various criteria. (I'm sure a > statistician > would have a field day pointing out the faults in my methods.) > > Here was the part that surprised me: the worse the ratings, the > better > the stock performance! It seemed as if no matter which criteria I > used, > the "bottom of the barrel" ended up out-performing what are usually > referred to as "the top-rated stocks." > > Here are the results. (The percentage shown is the average > percentage > increase of all stocks in a given category.) I have been very careful > to > make sure that I am not violating any copyright laws or user > agreements, > so in each case, I have invented a annoyingly cute or confusing > name/description of my own invention for each criterion just to make > sure I won't get in trouble. > > I also make no claims as to what any of this analysis means. I > merely > offer it up for amusement. (But earlier this week, the Large Picture > in > that newspaper we all read DID mention that the only people making > any > money right now were the bottom fishers! I guess they weren't > kidding!) > > One last heartening note: notice that all of the percentages are > positive. That means that even though some stocks went into the > toilet, > overall, prices were up. > > John > > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ----------------------- > > > CRITERIA: The rating of the growth of a company's sales, their margin > on > profit and the return on their equity. (I've assigned a fake letter > grade of my own invention which mimics the real thing. "V" is > presumably > the best letter grade, "Z" the worst.) > > V = 3.4% > W = 3.58% > X - 4.68% > Y = 5.57% > Z = 10.60% > > CRITERIA: The stock's earnings per share > > 90-99: 2.82% > 80-89: 3.58% > 70-79: 1.75% > 60-69: 3.75% > 50-59: 4.07% > 40-49: 7.17% > 30-39: 5.74% > 20-29: 8.01% > 10-19: 6.19% > 0-9: 9.05% > > CRITERIA: The stock's strength, all things being relative > > 90-99: 1.67% > 80-89: 3.01% > 70-79: 3.39% > 60-69: 3.15% > 50-59: 2.63% > 40-49: 4.22% > 30-39: 5.70% > 20-29: 4.67% > 10-19: 10.19% > 0-9: 10.47% > > CRITERIA: Rating of the stock's group strength, all things being > relative > > 90-99: 0.87% > 80-89: 2.28% > 70-79: 0.18% > 60-69: 1.98% > 50-59: 0.45% > 40-49: 4.53% > 30-39: 8.94% > 20-29: 10.39% > 10-19: 6.24% > 0-9: 15.34% > > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ===== There are 3 kinds of people in the world. Those who can count and those who can't. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos http://launch.yahoo.com/u2 - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 23:18:23 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Back-Burners; Steady-Eddies; Rocking-Chair This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00A7_01C286B3.F7C97C00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Gene, I recently ventured into this to a degree, trying to find = something to buy for the grandkids (Lili and Ely, so LLY was the first = one I took a look at, seemed like a natural). Dividend was a decent 2.4% = yield or so, but chart looked terrible, so I didn't pick it up for them = at 48 and change. Now a few months later sitting in the high 50s to low = 60s, you can hear the sound of the thumps as I kick my butt. For me, trying to analyze a big cap stock with slow growth, but going to = still be around in ten years, steadily making money (unless it's bought = out, a possibility with LLY), has been difficult and still trying to get = the hang of it. - ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gene Ricci=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 5:08 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] Back-Burners; Steady-Eddies; Rocking-Chair Interested in learning how to modify the CANSLIM criteria in order to = locate stocks to buy 'for Mom'. Anyone have something they are willing = to share? Thanks, Gene - ------=_NextPart_000_00A7_01C286B3.F7C97C00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Gene, I recently ventured into this to a degree, = trying to=20 find something to buy for the grandkids (Lili and Ely, so LLY was the = first one=20 I took a look at, seemed like a natural). Dividend was a decent 2.4% = yield or=20 so, but chart looked terrible, so I didn't pick it up for them at 48 and = change.=20 Now a few months later sitting in the high 50s to low 60s, you can hear = the=20 sound of the thumps as I kick my butt.
 
For me, trying to analyze a big cap stock with = slow=20 growth, but going to still be around in ten years, steadily making money = (unless=20 it's bought out, a possibility with LLY), has been difficult and still = trying to=20 get the hang of it.
 
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Gene Ricci =
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 5:08 PM
Subject: [CANSLIM] Back-Burners; Steady-Eddies;=20 Rocking-Chair

Interested in learning how to modify = the CANSLIM=20 criteria in order to locate stocks to buy 'for Mom'. Anyone have = something they=20 are willing to share?
 
Thanks,
Gene
- ------=_NextPart_000_00A7_01C286B3.F7C97C00-- - - - -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: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 21:16:19 -0800 From: "Robin Gridley" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" So THAT'S the problem with my Fidelity funds all this time... they've only been buyin' the good rated stuff! (Note to self... send Fidelity an email to start buying the crappy looking stocks....) - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of John Solarno Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 6:51 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" Every weekend, I download a copy of a detailed report off of a website we all know and love that contains all of the pricing data, earnings ratings, relative strength ratings, etc. for several thousand stocks as of the end of the preceding week. I keep all of those reports on my hard drive, thinking they might prove useful SOMEDAY. Tonight, just for fun, I decided to play a game I call "Where Are They Now?" I went back to a report I ran about 30 trading days ago and, using Excel and some current pricing data, I did a very clumsy analysis of the report to see where all of these stocks now stood, subtotaled by various criteria. (For example, how did stocks with an earnings rating between 80-99 vs. stocks with an earnings rating of 70-79 perform in the last 30 trading days?) The results were startling, even if my analysis was, as I said, pretty crude. I merely looked at price today vs. price 30 trading days ago and then sorted and subtotaled by various criteria. (I'm sure a statistician would have a field day pointing out the faults in my methods.) Here was the part that surprised me: the worse the ratings, the better the stock performance! It seemed as if no matter which criteria I used, the "bottom of the barrel" ended up out-performing what are usually referred to as "the top-rated stocks." Here are the results. (The percentage shown is the average percentage increase of all stocks in a given category.) I have been very careful to make sure that I am not violating any copyright laws or user agreements, so in each case, I have invented a annoyingly cute or confusing name/description of my own invention for each criterion just to make sure I won't get in trouble. I also make no claims as to what any of this analysis means. I merely offer it up for amusement. (But earlier this week, the Large Picture in that newspaper we all read DID mention that the only people making any money right now were the bottom fishers! I guess they weren't kidding!) One last heartening note: notice that all of the percentages are positive. That means that even though some stocks went into the toilet, overall, prices were up. John - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - ----------------------- CRITERIA: The rating of the growth of a company's sales, their margin on profit and the return on their equity. (I've assigned a fake letter grade of my own invention which mimics the real thing. "V" is presumably the best letter grade, "Z" the worst.) V = 3.4% W = 3.58% X - 4.68% Y = 5.57% Z = 10.60% CRITERIA: The stock's earnings per share 90-99: 2.82% 80-89: 3.58% 70-79: 1.75% 60-69: 3.75% 50-59: 4.07% 40-49: 7.17% 30-39: 5.74% 20-29: 8.01% 10-19: 6.19% 0-9: 9.05% CRITERIA: The stock's strength, all things being relative 90-99: 1.67% 80-89: 3.01% 70-79: 3.39% 60-69: 3.15% 50-59: 2.63% 40-49: 4.22% 30-39: 5.70% 20-29: 4.67% 10-19: 10.19% 0-9: 10.47% CRITERIA: Rating of the stock's group strength, all things being relative 90-99: 0.87% 80-89: 2.28% 70-79: 0.18% 60-69: 1.98% 50-59: 0.45% 40-49: 4.53% 30-39: 8.94% 20-29: 10.39% 10-19: 6.24% 0-9: 15.34% - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. - - - -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: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 06:20:57 -0800 From: "Larry Worden" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" Robin, thanks for the work. I have also looked at this. The bottom groups have more up potential when the market turns up, but more down potential when the market turns down? I would like to see your % when the market turns down. Lary - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin Gridley" To: Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 9:16 PM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" > So THAT'S the problem with my Fidelity funds all this time... they've > only been buyin' the good rated stuff! (Note to self... send Fidelity > an email to start buying the crappy looking stocks....) > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of John Solarno > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 6:51 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: [CANSLIM] Let's play "Where are they now?" > > > Every weekend, I download a copy of a detailed report off of a website > we all know and love that contains all of the pricing data, earnings > ratings, relative strength ratings, etc. for several thousand stocks as > of the end of the preceding week. I keep all of those reports on my > hard drive, thinking they might prove useful SOMEDAY. > > Tonight, just for fun, I decided to play a game I call "Where Are They > Now?" I went back to a report I ran about 30 trading days ago and, using > Excel and some current pricing data, I did a very clumsy analysis of the > report to see where all of these stocks now stood, subtotaled by various > criteria. (For example, how did stocks with an earnings rating between > 80-99 vs. stocks with an earnings rating of 70-79 perform in the last 30 > trading days?) > > The results were startling, even if my analysis was, as I said, pretty > crude. I merely looked at price today vs. price 30 trading days ago and > then sorted and subtotaled by various criteria. (I'm sure a statistician > would have a field day pointing out the faults in my methods.) > > Here was the part that surprised me: the worse the ratings, the better > the stock performance! It seemed as if no matter which criteria I used, > the "bottom of the barrel" ended up out-performing what are usually > referred to as "the top-rated stocks." > > Here are the results. (The percentage shown is the average percentage > increase of all stocks in a given category.) I have been very careful to > make sure that I am not violating any copyright laws or user agreements, > so in each case, I have invented a annoyingly cute or confusing > name/description of my own invention for each criterion just to make > sure I won't get in trouble. > > I also make no claims as to what any of this analysis means. I merely > offer it up for amusement. (But earlier this week, the Large Picture in > that newspaper we all read DID mention that the only people making any > money right now were the bottom fishers! I guess they weren't kidding!) > > One last heartening note: notice that all of the percentages are > positive. That means that even though some stocks went into the toilet, > overall, prices were up. > > John > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ----------------------- > > > CRITERIA: The rating of the growth of a company's sales, their margin on > profit and the return on their equity. (I've assigned a fake letter > grade of my own invention which mimics the real thing. "V" is presumably > the best letter grade, "Z" the worst.) > > V = 3.4% > W = 3.58% > X - 4.68% > Y = 5.57% > Z = 10.60% > > CRITERIA: The stock's earnings per share > > 90-99: 2.82% > 80-89: 3.58% > 70-79: 1.75% > 60-69: 3.75% > 50-59: 4.07% > 40-49: 7.17% > 30-39: 5.74% > 20-29: 8.01% > 10-19: 6.19% > 0-9: 9.05% > > CRITERIA: The stock's strength, all things being relative > > 90-99: 1.67% > 80-89: 3.01% > 70-79: 3.39% > 60-69: 3.15% > 50-59: 2.63% > 40-49: 4.22% > 30-39: 5.70% > 20-29: 4.67% > 10-19: 10.19% > 0-9: 10.47% > > CRITERIA: Rating of the stock's group strength, all things being > relative > > 90-99: 0.87% > 80-89: 2.28% > 70-79: 0.18% > 60-69: 1.98% > 50-59: 0.45% > 40-49: 4.53% > 30-39: 8.94% > 20-29: 10.39% > 10-19: 6.24% > 0-9: 15.34% > > > > > > - > -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" > -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or > -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email. > > - > -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. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:41:10 -0600 From: "Fred Richards" Subject: [CANSLIM] Will the bear market rally continue? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C28702.96578E40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The number of A rated stocks in IBD's Accumulation/Distribution ratings have increased. Does this portend good things for this rally? The charts can be viewed at: http://www.adrich.com/SI/Info/A's.htm - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Fred Richards Corruptisima republica plurimae leges. [The more corrupt a republic, the more laws.] - - Tacitus, Annuals III 27 www.adrich.com - ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C28702.96578E40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The = number of A=20 rated stocks in IBD's Accumulation/Distribution ratings have = increased. =20 Does this portend good things for this rally?
 
The = charts can be=20 viewed at:
 
http://www.adrich.com/SI/I= nfo/A's.htm
 
Fred Richards
 
Corruptisima republica plurimae = leges.  [The=20 more corrupt a republic, the more laws.]  - - Tacitus, Annuals III=20 27
 
www.adrich.com
 
- ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C28702.96578E40-- - - - -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: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 09:43:09 -0500 From: "Rocky Sanghvi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Will the bear market rally continue? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_009B_01C2870B.3F3DF410 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fred, This is pretty encouraging. The A's have been one of the best indicators of the market I have seen so far. Rocky - -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Fred Richards Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:41 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: [CANSLIM] Will the bear market rally continue? The number of A rated stocks in IBD's Accumulation/Distribution ratings have increased. Does this portend good things for this rally? The charts can be viewed at: http://www.adrich.com/SI/Info/A's.htm _____ Fred Richards Corruptisima republica plurimae leges. [The more corrupt a republic, the more laws.] - - Tacitus, Annuals III 27 www.adrich.com - ------=_NextPart_000_009B_01C2870B.3F3DF410 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Fred,

 

This is pretty encouraging.  = The A’s have been one of the best indicators of the market I have seen so = far. 

 

Rocky

 

-----Original = Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Fred Richards
Sent: Friday, November = 08, 2002 9:41 AM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: [CANSLIM] Will = the bear market rally continue?

 

The number of A rated = stocks in IBD's Accumulation/Distribution ratings have increased.  Does this = portend good things for this rally?

 

The charts can be viewed = at:

 

 

Fred = Richards

 

Corruptisima republica = plurimae leges.  [The more corrupt a republic, the more laws.]  - - = Tacitus, Annuals III 27

 

 

- ------=_NextPart_000_009B_01C2870B.3F3DF410-- - - - -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: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 08:12:34 -0800 From: Ian Subject: [CANSLIM] STST This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --Boundary_(ID_z5doA8kZGzFt0xiidJwXog) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi all: I can't even remember the last time I proposed a stock to the group ... but here goes: STST is a Nasdaq Small Cap stock, with an ADV of just 7000 shares, trading at $9.30 right now. I do not know their EPS/RS numbers as IBD doesn't seem to print them anymore for the Small Caps. The company is Sensytech (STST - Nasdaq Small Cap). They are a defense contractor that manufactures passive surveillance systems - early warning systems, airborne imaging systems, communications reconnaissance systems, shipboard support systems etc... The current interest/growth in homeland security seems to bode well for Sensytech, as their backlog has increased a whopping 635% through the first 9 months of the year. For their June Q this year, they made $0.16 per share on revenue of $9,000,000 (compared to $0.08 per share on revenue of $4.1 million a year earlier). They currently only have about 4,000,000 shares outstanding, but they did file a share registration in late August to issue a secondary of 2,000,000 shares. I do not know the status of this, and realize that it is definitely a 'question mark' on the stock right now. With this week's Republican victory in the House and Senate, I've got to figure that these 'under the radar' defense/security stocks have a big chance of becoming insitutional darlings over the next 2 years, as their revenues and earnings ramp. I have no idea what the current institutional interest in STST is though. The chart is very interesting to me right now. They have been flat-lining for many months now, with $9.25 as a 4-month resistance level, and with $10.46 as the 52-week high. There have been 3 days in the past week (including the last 2 days), where ADV is much higher than normal (around 20,000) - so there has definitely been some accumulation going on. There is resistance here at the $9.25-$9.30 level, again at $10, and at the high of $10.50. I suspect they will report Q3 earnings next week. For those with a tolerance/taste for "illiquid CANSLIM", STST is one to watch for a significant, sustained increase in ADV, and a penetration through support levels. Cheers, Ian - --Boundary_(ID_z5doA8kZGzFt0xiidJwXog) Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Hi all:
 
I can't even remember the last time I proposed a stock to the group ... but here goes:
 
STST is a Nasdaq Small Cap stock, with an ADV of just 7000 shares, trading at $9.30 right now. I do not know their EPS/RS numbers as IBD doesn't seem to print them anymore for the Small Caps.
 
The company is Sensytech (STST - Nasdaq Small Cap). They are a defense contractor that manufactures passive surveillance systems - early warning systems, airborne imaging systems, communications reconnaissance systems, shipboard support systems etc... The current interest/growth in homeland security seems to bode well for Sensytech, as their backlog has increased a whopping 635% through the first 9 months of the year.
 
For their June Q this year, they made $0.16 per share on revenue of $9,000,000 (compared to $0.08 per share on revenue of $4.1 million a year earlier).
 
They currently only have about 4,000,000 shares outstanding, but they did file a share registration in late August to issue a secondary of 2,000,000 shares. I do not know the status of this, and realize that it is definitely a 'question mark' on the stock right now.
 
With this week's Republican victory in the House and Senate, I've got to figure that these 'under the radar' defense/security stocks have a big chance of becoming insitutional darlings over the next 2 years, as their revenues and earnings ramp. I have no idea what the current institutional interest in STST is though.
 
The chart is very interesting to me right now. They have been flat-lining for many months now, with $9.25 as a 4-month resistance level, and with $10.46 as the 52-week high. There have been 3 days in the past week (including the last 2 days), where ADV is much higher than normal (around 20,000) - so there has definitely been some accumulation going on. There is resistance here at the $9.25-$9.30 level, again at $10, and at the high of $10.50.
 
I suspect they will report Q3 earnings next week.
 
For those with a tolerance/taste for "illiquid CANSLIM", STST is one to watch for a significant, sustained increase in ADV, and a penetration through support levels.
 
 
Cheers,
 
Ian
- --Boundary_(ID_z5doA8kZGzFt0xiidJwXog)-- - - - -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, 09 Nov 2002 19:50:45 +0000 From: rjjick@att.net Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] STST Hi. Just to introduce myself: Jeanne Jickling, a long-time lurker, who enjoys this board and values it for educational reasons, thanks to the many generous contributors. Ian: I checked STST on the Investor's Business Daily website which I access as a subscriber to IBD. STST rates a C+, a 72 score. EPS 87, RS 91, industry group strength D+; Sales,Profit Margin,Return on Equity A, Acc/Distribution B+. Letter ranks: Technical C+, Fundamental C, Attractiveness B-, Group Technical C, Group Fundamental C. > Hi all: > > I can't even remember the last time I proposed a stock to the group ... but here > goes: > > STST is a Nasdaq Small Cap stock, with an ADV of just 7000 shares, trading at > $9.30 right now. I do not know their EPS/RS numbers as IBD doesn't seem to print > them anymore for the Small Caps. > > The company is Sensytech (STST - Nasdaq Small Cap). They are a defense > contractor that manufactures passive surveillance systems - early warning > systems, airborne imaging systems, communications reconnaissance systems, > shipboard support systems etc... The current interest/growth in homeland > security seems to bode well for Sensytech, as their backlog has increased a > whopping 635% through the first 9 months of the year. > > For their June Q this year, they made $0.16 per share on revenue of $9,000,000 > (compared to $0.08 per share on revenue of $4.1 million a year earlier). > > They currently only have about 4,000,000 shares outstanding, but they did file a > share registration in late August to issue a secondary of 2,000,000 shares. I do > not know the status of this, and realize that it is definitely a 'question mark' > on the stock right now. > > With this week's Republican victory in the House and Senate, I've got to figure > that these 'under the radar' defense/security stocks have a big chance of > becoming insitutional darlings over the next 2 years, as their revenues and > earnings ramp. I have no idea what the current institutional interest in STST is > though. > > The chart is very interesting to me right now. They have been flat-lining for > many months now, with $9.25 as a 4-month resistance level, and with $10.46 as > the 52-week high. There have been 3 days in the past week (including the last 2 > days), where ADV is much higher than normal (around 20,000) - so there has > definitely been some accumulation going on. There is resistance here at the > $9.25-$9.30 level, again at $10, and at the high of $10.50. > > I suspect they will report Q3 earnings next week. > > For those with a tolerance/taste for "illiquid CANSLIM", STST is one to watch > for a significant, sustained increase in ADV, and a penetration through support > levels. > > > Cheers, > > Ian - - - -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 #3023 ****************************** 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.