From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #521 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 Thursday, February 4 1999 Volume 02 : Number 521 In this issue: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT Re: [CANSLIM] CANSLIM and Day Jobs Re: [CANSLIM] frustration + PLXS [CANSLIM] Online Brokerage Firms Next Mania RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT [CANSLIM] FLEX RE: [CANSLIM] FLEX Re: [CANSLIM] frustration + PLXS Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT Re: [CANSLIM] Online Brokerage Firms Next Mania Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT (DGO funds/bank %) Re: [CANSLIM] Go figure! Re: [CANSLIM] How do we know we are "winning?" [CANSLIM] Trading Addiction (was: FLEX) [CANSLIM] Why not watch RT quotes? [CANSLIM] Divergences [Technical stuff. Connie Mack.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 04:17:00 -0500 From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT Tom, You raise a couple of good points. I did not check management's interest. I have some different figures on float, 113 and Inst % at 67. I wonder why the difference. I will look at some other sites later today and see what they have to say. I got my info from QP2. I was considering the breakout day as 2/1 the vol was 3.9 million. So far I have been unable to get the earnings estimates down. Every time I look at them they seem low. Any suggestions on how to do this? Thanks, I will check further on the info you provided. It makes me concerned when I see such discrepancies and dont know the reason why. Could be the two organizations count the beans differently but that seem a pretty far spread. Thanks again Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 11:12 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > Charlie, > > Here's some further CANSLIM data on this one from DGO: > > Management - 1% > Funds - 16% > Personally, I like management to be a co-investor with me, > not just sucking down a salary. A 1% stake doesn't impress > me at all. > > ROE - 18%, acceptable > > Earnings growth - 32%, but the earnings estimate for the > next two years is 20% and 23%. > > Chart - sloppy base around 40, todays volume only 2.4 mil vs > ADV of 1.75 mil, so not even 150% of ADV. > > Size and Institutional holdings - funds already have 16% of > the 133 mil share float, still some room for them to add, > but not tremendously. And a big cap, needless to say. > > Most of the basic CANSLIM (RS, EPS, up/down ratio, A/D, > Timeliness) look strong to excellent. While not in the top > five of its group, the GRS is 88, and it's not that far out > of the top five. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi > To: canslim > Date: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 7:04 PM > Subject: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > For those who like contrary indicators, here is my newest > future fiasco. > ADCT. > This time I am hoping that my system is correct, at least in > concept. > IBD's ranking 94 94 AAA, so the fundies check out. It broke > out on heavy > volume the day before yesterday. Not a spectacular break out > but a new 52 > week high and out of what my perception of a base is. The > ADV was almost > 200%. The triple screen confirms it as a potential buy. I > waited yesterday > because I was still bleeding from FLEX and because I wanted > to see if the > market was going to continue down today. I reasoned that Mr. > Greenspan would > have an impact if he had acted against the common belief > that he would do > nothing. He cooperated and did nothing. Worked for me > because I got in > within 5% of the BO the other day because it had to pick up > yesterdays loss. > Got my stop set at 8%. Now of course as soon as the market > king whoever he > is sees that I put some money there the company will be in > bankruptcy > reorganization. > Charlie > > > - > > > > - > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 07:09:10 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT Hi Charlie, I'm not familiar with Quotes Plus, but can tell you how DGO "counts the beans". The total nr of shares (DGO shows 134.8 mil) should be pretty much the same at all sites. The float should likewise be at least similiar (DGO shows 133.4 mil). However, the percentage owned by funds, banks, management, etc can vary widely depending on how it is counted. Daily Graphs shows management percentage ownership as a percent of the total issue, while the percentage for funds and banks is shown as a percentage of the float, thust the percentages can't be added together. When management still owns a large percent of the issue, the percentage owned by funds may seem larger at DG as the float is then smaller. Funds ownership data comes from the quarterly reports made by the funds; nr of shares issued comes from the individual companies in their SEC reports and can be checked by going to the SEC site and reviewing the latest report. This can also give you data on "fully diluted" vs "issued", which can sometimes alter the data reported at different sites. Management ownership comes from company reports, typically annually, adjusted by any buying or selling reported thru SEC filings. On earnings estimates, bear in mind that individual analyst's estiimates can vary widely. DGO only shows an estimate if there are at least three analysts following the company, and then shows the average. Other sites may break this down in more detail, including what kind of recommendation each analyst is making on the company. As for the specifics on this one, the forecast at DGO for $1.30 for the current year and $1.60 the next year looks consist with their annual growth, as well as with the past several quarters. Note also that they have an easy comparison on the first quarter that just ended, due to the fact that in FY98 they had zero earnings growth in Q1 on a 12% increase in sales. Could have been good reasons for this, you would have to research it. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - -----Original Message----- From: Charles Cangialosi To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Thursday, February 04, 1999 4:16 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT Tom, You raise a couple of good points. I did not check management's interest. I have some different figures on float, 113 and Inst % at 67. I wonder why the difference. I will look at some other sites later today and see what they have to say. I got my info from QP2. I was considering the breakout day as 2/1 the vol was 3.9 million. So far I have been unable to get the earnings estimates down. Every time I look at them they seem low. Any suggestions on how to do this? Thanks, I will check further on the info you provided. It makes me concerned when I see such discrepancies and dont know the reason why. Could be the two organizations count the beans differently but that seem a pretty far spread. Thanks again Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 11:12 PM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > Charlie, > > Here's some further CANSLIM data on this one from DGO: > > Management - 1% > Funds - 16% > Personally, I like management to be a co-investor with me, > not just sucking down a salary. A 1% stake doesn't impress > me at all. > > ROE - 18%, acceptable > > Earnings growth - 32%, but the earnings estimate for the > next two years is 20% and 23%. > > Chart - sloppy base around 40, todays volume only 2.4 mil vs > ADV of 1.75 mil, so not even 150% of ADV. > > Size and Institutional holdings - funds already have 16% of > the 133 mil share float, still some room for them to add, > but not tremendously. And a big cap, needless to say. > > Most of the basic CANSLIM (RS, EPS, up/down ratio, A/D, > Timeliness) look strong to excellent. While not in the top > five of its group, the GRS is 88, and it's not that far out > of the top five. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi > To: canslim > Date: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 7:04 PM > Subject: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > For those who like contrary indicators, here is my newest > future fiasco. > ADCT. > This time I am hoping that my system is correct, at least in > concept. > IBD's ranking 94 94 AAA, so the fundies check out. It broke > out on heavy > volume the day before yesterday. Not a spectacular break out > but a new 52 > week high and out of what my perception of a base is. The > ADV was almost > 200%. The triple screen confirms it as a potential buy. I > waited yesterday > because I was still bleeding from FLEX and because I wanted > to see if the > market was going to continue down today. I reasoned that Mr. > Greenspan would > have an impact if he had acted against the common belief > that he would do > nothing. He cooperated and did nothing. Worked for me > because I got in > within 5% of the BO the other day because it had to pick up > yesterdays loss. > Got my stop set at 8%. Now of course as soon as the market > king whoever he > is sees that I put some money there the company will be in > bankruptcy > reorganization. > Charlie > > > - > > > > - > > - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 04:14:14 -0800 (PST) From: Chris Thornlow Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] CANSLIM and Day Jobs Tom, a voice of reasoned experience. I thank you for taking the time and putting your thoughts to paper (or computer screen). Being in the military is a full time job, going beyond the strict 9-5 nature of many careers. I have found time to do my investing and my results to date have not been bad. As I have said, I have been following CS and WON for a while. I have massaged how I do it to match the lifestyle and family/career demands. i do look forward to the day that I hange up my uniform and grab the suit and do this for a living. I like it so much, some times it gets in the way of my job (but don't tell my bosses that). I will take you advice/opinions and evaluate what I am, doing and how I am doing it. I look to dB's site ont he web, another good source of info and tactics to investigate. I am aware that the method or actions I use will be shaped by me to fit my style and comfort level. But these mediums (mail lists, message boards, chat rooms) afford the ability to learn from a variety of folk you never would have been able to learn from before. More to the CS method, I'm still looking at GPSI to have a breakout at 49 1/2 with volume of over 90,000 (150% of its ADV). Once again, Thanx. ct == LCDR Chris Thornlow, USN nimaio@yahoo.com _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 07:11:58 -0500 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] frustration + PLXS David, Be careful that the site you are using for institutional ownership isn't grouping management with funds. Of the ones on my list, none that I recall had funds ownership all that high, and certainly none in the 50% category. I checked the two you mentioned below, and neither had 50% institutional ownership even including the small percentages owned by banks. And that's using DGO, where this is measured as a percent of the float, not the issue. Tom W stkguru@netside.net ICQ # 5568838 - -----Original Message----- From: David S. Pinhasik To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Thursday, February 04, 1999 3:39 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] frustration + PLXS After my near disaster with imaxf I am looking for another good pick, and frankly I am growing impatient. I took Ron Russells list and merged it with Tom Worleys DGO new highs, filtered out according to C and A (as well as I can, I am using www.stocksheet.com, any better suggestions are welcome - I can't afford DGO) and S. At this point there actually were a few interesting picks BUT I can't seem to find anything outstanding with less than 50% institutional backing! The only one is PLXS - advice appreciated. Am I searching incorrectly? Are others also feeling this problem? In case anyone is interested here is my list after the abovementioned filtering BEFORE discarding heavy institutianal ownership: ARX AVTC CDWC CMVT (43M outstanding) CHKPF (35M) COGIF CREE FM (38M) INSS MDCC (this one has 70% !!) MELI MRX PLCE SALT SWFT (42M and 53%!!) TECH One more point of frustation: Although I understand the reasoning behind the S, honestly, does it really matter any more? I have let so many good ones go by, just because they were larger then 50 or 60M and yet they still managed to move up nicely. Any comments? David - - - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 01:35:13 +1300 From: "Dean Edwards" Subject: [CANSLIM] Online Brokerage Firms Next Mania Anyone got any ideals/opinions or following any stocks in particular, in this sector. It looks like a hot sector to me. Has anyone got this on their radar scope? - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:13:03 -0500 From: "Charles Cangialosi" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT Tom; I checked QP2 again and also a couple of internet sites, they are close to agreement. I have Total shares at 135 float at 113. I am not sure where the other 22 went. However I get 67% institutional on QP2 and 74 on Etrade (on line broker wannabe. You have 16 from DGO. I am not sure how to reconcile this in the future. I guess if I always use the same source I will get consistent information according to how they count it. The fun continues. Sorry to be a bother thanks for the info. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 7:09 AM > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > Hi Charlie, > > I'm not familiar with Quotes Plus, but can tell you how DGO > "counts the beans". > > The total nr of shares (DGO shows 134.8 mil) should be > pretty much the same at all sites. The float should > likewise be at least similiar (DGO shows 133.4 mil). > However, the percentage owned by funds, banks, management, > etc can vary widely depending on how it is counted. Daily > Graphs shows management percentage ownership as a percent of > the total issue, while the percentage for funds and banks is > shown as a percentage of the float, thust the percentages > can't be added together. When management still owns a large > percent of the issue, the percentage owned by funds may seem > larger at DG as the float is then smaller. > > Funds ownership data comes from the quarterly reports made > by the funds; nr of shares issued comes from the individual > companies in their SEC reports and can be checked by going > to the SEC site and reviewing the latest report. This can > also give you data on "fully diluted" vs "issued", which can > sometimes alter the data reported at different sites. > Management ownership comes from company reports, typically > annually, adjusted by any buying or selling reported thru > SEC filings. > > On earnings estimates, bear in mind that individual > analyst's estiimates can vary widely. DGO only shows an > estimate if there are at least three analysts following the > company, and then shows the average. Other sites may break > this down in more detail, including what kind of > recommendation each analyst is making on the company. As for > the specifics on this one, the forecast at DGO for $1.30 for > the current year and $1.60 the next year looks consist with > their annual growth, as well as with the past several > quarters. Note also that they have an easy comparison on the > first quarter that just ended, due to the fact that in FY98 > they had zero earnings growth in Q1 on a 12% increase in > sales. Could have been good reasons for this, you would have > to research it. > > Tom W > stkguru@netside.net > ICQ # 5568838 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles Cangialosi > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > Date: Thursday, February 04, 1999 4:16 AM > Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > Tom, > You raise a couple of good points. I did not check > management's interest. I > have some different figures on float, 113 and Inst % at 67. > I wonder why the > difference. I will look at some other sites later today and > see what they > have to say. I got my info from QP2. I was considering the > breakout day as > 2/1 the vol was 3.9 million. So far I have been unable to > get the earnings > estimates down. Every time I look at them they seem low. Any > suggestions on > how to do this? > Thanks, I will check further on the info you provided. It > makes me > concerned when I see such discrepancies and dont know the > reason why. Could > be the two organizations count the beans differently but > that seem a pretty > far spread. > Thanks again > Charlie > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com > > [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom > Worley > > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 11:12 PM > > To: canslim@lists.xmission.com > > Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > > > > Charlie, > > > > Here's some further CANSLIM data on this one from DGO: > > > > Management - 1% > > Funds - 16% > > Personally, I like management to be a co-investor with me, > > not just sucking down a salary. A 1% stake doesn't impress > > me at all. > > > > ROE - 18%, acceptable > > > > Earnings growth - 32%, but the earnings estimate for the > > next two years is 20% and 23%. > > > > Chart - sloppy base around 40, todays volume only 2.4 mil > vs > > ADV of 1.75 mil, so not even 150% of ADV. > > > > Size and Institutional holdings - funds already have 16% > of > > the 133 mil share float, still some room for them to add, > > but not tremendously. And a big cap, needless to say. > > > > Most of the basic CANSLIM (RS, EPS, up/down ratio, A/D, > > Timeliness) look strong to excellent. While not in the top > > five of its group, the GRS is 88, and it's not that far > out > > of the top five. > > > > Tom W > > stkguru@netside.net > > ICQ # 5568838 > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Charles Cangialosi > > To: canslim > > Date: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 7:04 PM > > Subject: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > > > > > For those who like contrary indicators, here is my newest > > future fiasco. > > ADCT. > > This time I am hoping that my system is correct, at least > in > > concept. > > IBD's ranking 94 94 AAA, so the fundies check out. It > broke > > out on heavy > > volume the day before yesterday. Not a spectacular break > out > > but a new 52 > > week high and out of what my perception of a base is. The > > ADV was almost > > 200%. The triple screen confirms it as a potential buy. I > > waited yesterday > > because I was still bleeding from FLEX and because I > wanted > > to see if the > > market was going to continue down today. I reasoned that > Mr. > > Greenspan would > > have an impact if he had acted against the common belief > > that he would do > > nothing. He cooperated and did nothing. Worked for me > > because I got in > > within 5% of the BO the other day because it had to pick > up > > yesterdays loss. > > Got my stop set at 8%. Now of course as soon as the market > > king whoever he > > is sees that I put some money there the company will be in > > bankruptcy > > reorganization. > > Charlie > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > - > > > > - > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 07:18:18 -0600 (CST) From: mckeen@ix.netcom.com Subject: [CANSLIM] FLEX Dan, Watching quotes in your case does have an adverse effect. I can understand your statement now. For me, keeping track of my stocks three to four times a day has helped me retain some profit, especially in this volatile market. Your point about making decisions when you can stand back a bit is well taken. My main goal at this time is to trade well to make a gain, even if small, so that my confidence is restored and my learning doesn't entail having to stop investing because of lack of funds. Regards, Mary - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 06:30:21 -0700 From: "Dan Sutton" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] FLEX I understand and appreciate your reasoning. If it works for you that is outstanding, for me it normally doesn't. I can typically grasp defeat from the jaws of victory, so I have to be very careful and stick to decisions I have already made. I guess that is the reason we have a buyer and a seller in any transaction, each person has a different view of the current situation. - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 06:00:43 -0800 (PST) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] frustration + PLXS <> This is part of the function of CS. If you're having trouble finding the proper stocks, that may be a warning of impending problems in the market. - --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 06:03:36 -0800 (PST) From: dbphoenix Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT <> I'm sure it would be helpful to others if you would explain how this screen helped you choose your entry point into this stock. - --Db == "Lessons are repeated until they are learned." http://home.talkcity.com//MoneySt/dbphoenix/ _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 14:36:57 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Online Brokerage Firms Next Mania On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 01:35:13 +1300, you wrote: :Anyone got any ideals/opinions or following any stocks in particular, = in :this sector. : It looks like a hot sector to me. Has anyone got this on their radar :scope? : I'm trying to get a reading! :) Yesterday a handful of relatively obscure online brokerage houses had stock moves that were eye popping! I'm talking >50%! I used to follow E*Trade (EGRP), but that got washed out in the summer bear, during which time they reached a low of $5 and change, now in the 50s. Dan - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 09:38:34 -0500 From: "Robert Miller" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT (DGO funds/bank %) I have also been having problems reconciling the difference between fund ownership at DGO and other sources. I am a member of a student managed investment fund and I have had to start using other sources (not DGO) for funds % to make the others happy. Some of them have access to institutional data (ie. Bloomberg terminal, etc.), and this data mostly agrees with that found at other sites on the web. DGO data for funds + banks is always lower. Like Tom said, you would think it would be higher, since it is measured from the float, but I have not found this to be the case. The data discrepancy for ADCT, where DGO is much lower, seems to be the norm. Another example, a portfolio manager from a local investment firm, met with our class to discuss research methods, and handed out DGO charts. He said to disregard the DGO info on funds since it is always too low. I tried to ask him why after class, but he disappeared too fast. I'm paying for a service that my classmates now believe is unreliable. I emailed DGO several times on this issue, but have yet to receive a reasonable answer. They simply quote their method, which doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Although DGO has not said this, maybe they do not count insurance companies, pensions, investment firms, etc., where other sources do. Of course, this would not make since, but who knows. Rob - -----Original Message----- From: Tom Worley To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Date: Thursday, February 04, 1999 6:07 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT >Hi Charlie, > >I'm not familiar with Quotes Plus, but can tell you how DGO >"counts the beans". > >The total nr of shares (DGO shows 134.8 mil) should be >pretty much the same at all sites. The float should >likewise be at least similiar (DGO shows 133.4 mil). >However, the percentage owned by funds, banks, management, >etc can vary widely depending on how it is counted. Daily >Graphs shows management percentage ownership as a percent of >the total issue, while the percentage for funds and banks is >shown as a percentage of the float, thust the percentages >can't be added together. When management still owns a large >percent of the issue, the percentage owned by funds may seem >larger at DG as the float is then smaller. > >Funds ownership data comes from the quarterly reports made >by the funds; nr of shares issued comes from the individual >companies in their SEC reports and can be checked by going >to the SEC site and reviewing the latest report. This can >also give you data on "fully diluted" vs "issued", which can >sometimes alter the data reported at different sites. >Management ownership comes from company reports, typically >annually, adjusted by any buying or selling reported thru >SEC filings. > >On earnings estimates, bear in mind that individual >analyst's estiimates can vary widely. DGO only shows an >estimate if there are at least three analysts following the >company, and then shows the average. Other sites may break >this down in more detail, including what kind of >recommendation each analyst is making on the company. As for >the specifics on this one, the forecast at DGO for $1.30 for >the current year and $1.60 the next year looks consist with >their annual growth, as well as with the past several >quarters. Note also that they have an easy comparison on the >first quarter that just ended, due to the fact that in FY98 >they had zero earnings growth in Q1 on a 12% increase in >sales. Could have been good reasons for this, you would have >to research it. > >Tom W >stkguru@netside.net >ICQ # 5568838 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Charles Cangialosi >To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >Date: Thursday, February 04, 1999 4:16 AM >Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] ADCT > > >Tom, >You raise a couple of good points. I did not check >management's interest. I >have some different figures on float, 113 and Inst % at 67. >I wonder why the >difference. I will look at some other sites later today and >see what they >have to say. I got my info from QP2. I was considering the >breakout day as >2/1 the vol was 3.9 million. So far I have been unable to >get the earnings >estimates down. Every time I look at them they seem low. Any >suggestions on >how to do this? >Thanks, I will check further on the info you provided. It >makes me >concerned when I see such discrepancies and dont know the >reason why. Could >be the two organizations count the beans differently but >that seem a pretty >far spread. >Thanks again >Charlie > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com >> [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom >Worley >> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 11:12 PM >> To: canslim@lists.xmission.com >> Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] ADCT >> >> >> Charlie, >> >> Here's some further CANSLIM data on this one from DGO: >> >> Management - 1% >> Funds - 16% >> Personally, I like management to be a co-investor with me, >> not just sucking down a salary. A 1% stake doesn't impress >> me at all. >> >> ROE - 18%, acceptable >> >> Earnings growth - 32%, but the earnings estimate for the >> next two years is 20% and 23%. >> >> Chart - sloppy base around 40, todays volume only 2.4 mil >vs >> ADV of 1.75 mil, so not even 150% of ADV. >> >> Size and Institutional holdings - funds already have 16% >of >> the 133 mil share float, still some room for them to add, >> but not tremendously. And a big cap, needless to say. >> >> Most of the basic CANSLIM (RS, EPS, up/down ratio, A/D, >> Timeliness) look strong to excellent. While not in the top >> five of its group, the GRS is 88, and it's not that far >out >> of the top five. >> >> Tom W >> stkguru@netside.net >> ICQ # 5568838 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Charles Cangialosi >> To: canslim >> Date: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 7:04 PM >> Subject: [CANSLIM] ADCT >> >> >> For those who like contrary indicators, here is my newest >> future fiasco. >> ADCT. >> This time I am hoping that my system is correct, at least >in >> concept. >> IBD's ranking 94 94 AAA, so the fundies check out. It >broke >> out on heavy >> volume the day before yesterday. Not a spectacular break >out >> but a new 52 >> week high and out of what my perception of a base is. The >> ADV was almost >> 200%. The triple screen confirms it as a potential buy. I >> waited yesterday >> because I was still bleeding from FLEX and because I >wanted >> to see if the >> market was going to continue down today. I reasoned that >Mr. >> Greenspan would >> have an impact if he had acted against the common belief >> that he would do >> nothing. He cooperated and did nothing. Worked for me >> because I got in >> within 5% of the BO the other day because it had to pick >up >> yesterdays loss. >> Got my stop set at 8%. Now of course as soon as the market >> king whoever he >> is sees that I put some money there the company will be in >> bankruptcy >> reorganization. >> Charlie >> >> >> - >> >> >> >> - >> >> > > >- > > > >- > > - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 14:40:48 GMT From: musicant@autobahn.org (Dan Musicant) Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Go figure! On Tue, 2 Feb 1999 18:55:53 -0500, you wrote: :Leave it to a small cap, and the Motley Fool, to have an :under $2.00 stock averaging 3,000 shares a day jump to 9.375 :on 5.3 million shares. The "new" part of this stock (NTFY) :is that it allows users to check their email inbox for new :mail without having to turn on the computer. Can we get any :lazier? Pray tell, how is this done? Do they send a little birdie to perch on your shoulder? No, no, I suppose your beeper beeps 3 times, or some such thing. Or maybe we can get a little science fiction in here, and your electronic shades show a little "You've Got Mail" box checkmarked over on the side! :) Dan : :Course, if I had discovered this one on Friday or Monday, :maybe I wouldn't be so cynical. But then, lacking earnings :and with such a low price, I would have ignored it anyway. : :Tom W :stkguru@netside.net :ICQ # 5568838 : : : : :- : - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 10:21:54 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] How do we know we are "winning?" Johan, Glad that you decided to start posting on the list. I'll answer your question here: John wrote: >=93What method are people using >to measure their success in investing?=94 I think the primary measure is beating the major avarages like the Dow, NASDAQ and S&P500. Personally, considering the AMOUNT of time I put in CURRENTLY I've set a target of 100% or more and will be happy with anything down to 50%. If I can consistently make 50% or more I will put more money into mutual funds and spend less time doing all of this myself. I'm prepared to invest as much time as I currently do for the next 5 year= s or so. If I can make at least 50% a year, then I will have enough capital to live comfortably even if I decide to put it all in a money market fund or similar "small to no risk account" account. BTW, I'm also fully aware that it is very possible that I can't make 50% = a year, and certainly not every year. I'm mentally prepared for this. ;^) Just as I'm not limiting my goal to 100%. If it is 300%, so be it. B^) It is however important for me to set a minimal target. I've noticed in many areas of my life that if I don't set targets I don't reach them. If = I do set them, visualize them, and truely work towards them, I've nearly always reached them. Still have much to learn about the markets and trading. But I welcome tha= t. If I knew it all already (no one can IMHO) I'd be bored and would most probably search for some other challenge. Just the way I organise things. FWIW. Keep posting. - -- Johan Van Houtven - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 10:40:34 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] Trading Addiction (was: FLEX) Patrick wrote: >I keep thinking of that term - Regression to the Mean. I wonder >how long the S&P can continue to put in such stellar gains. Statistically speaking it must at some point regress to the mean. No one knows when it will happen. And, for me, it is not important to know when it will happen, as I don't have a SP500 mimicing mutual fund. :) Watching 'M' as CS demands, is enough. And so group stuff, and your on your way to detecting major shifts in trends reasonably fast. Fast enough to keep you out of trouble anyway. >At >some point you would think there would be a few years of poor >returns to return the S&P to more historically normal returns. In >that case, I would think the individual stock picking will bring a >superior performance. Or maybe the small caps will make a run then? No matter what happens, one will have to adapt. For me investing/trading up till now, has been about adapting. Trading internet stocks for example took some serious adapting for me. (We are talking non-CS stuff here, now.) >I think investing does have some entertainment value (for lack of a >better word), I must agree 100%. >at least for me it does, so taking that into account I >am happy if I can approximate the returns of a mutual fund. > >The WSJ this week had an article about the addictive nature of on- >line trading, for some people anyway, and that some of them are >starting to try to get counseling. Doesn't surprise me one bit. In a way the markets are kind of a on line LAS VEGAS for many people out there. They have addicted gamblers, so there are bound to be addicted online "traders/investors". I'd be even more surprised if there weren't any self-help groups a la AA for addicted online traders out there yet. - -- Johan Van Houtven - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 12:10:40 +0100 From: Johan Van Houtven Subject: [CANSLIM] Why not watch RT quotes? Terrific post. I ver clearly remember going through similar thoughts and sometimes still do. You illustrate that a big part of all of this is a "mind game", controlling ones emotions. As Harlan says: "We are our own worst enemy." There is technology out there that will help you control your emotions. It's called NLP. Helped me enormeously (and not only in my trading). Dan wrote: >I found that if I just check the quotes one time and the price is up, then I >need to check 15 minutes later (and prices are up or down), then I need to >check 10 minutes later and I see a huge block trade, so I check every 5 >minutes, then I get frustrated because I don't have real-time quotes, then I >decide that the price is low and headed lower or high and headed higher, so >I worry about whether to buy or sell, and if I do buy or sell the daytraders >are faster and smarter than me . The decisions I make in the heat of the >battle are almost always wrong. And all this is happening when I am supposed >to be concentrating on work. I have found that checking quotes during the >day tends to be a huge distraction, and it tempts me to make decisions that >need to wait until I can sit back and think about them. - -- Johan Van Houtven - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 10:05:51 -0500 From: Connie Mack Rea Subject: [CANSLIM] Divergences [Technical stuff. Connie Mack.] As you know, I use Negative Divergence in the MF/OBV as a primary filter. The use of ND can be used on other indicators. Below is an excerpt from a trader who uses Tick Volume. He calls ND "contrary movement." ND of any kind is always a result not to be ignored. There is no rational reason to go against an ND unless you intend to short. I use Tick Volume while day trading. I also apply SloSto and MACD on an intraday chart. I do not ignore either PD or ND on any of the three indicators (SloSto/MACD/Tick Volume). Connie Mack First, I'd like you to check out the stock sheet for Oracle Corp. (ORCL). You can see that on 1/11 ORCL's prices moved up, but the TVI was declining. I call this type of action contrary movement. Whenever you see contrary movement, it is warning of a possible short-term price reversal in the stock. The best way to take advantage of this market phenomenon is to position yourself in the direction of the tick volume indicator (or TVI). Since the TVI was moving down on 1/11, you would use a break of that day's low to position yourself on the short side of this stock. The low price on 1/11 was 46.75, so you could short Oracle at 46.6875. For your price objective, take the difference between the day's high price and your entry price (48.0625-46.6875= 1.375). Now, subtract the result from your entry price (46.6875-1.375= 45.3125). This gives you a price objective of 45.3125. You would have shorted ORCL on 1/12, and made your price objective on the same day. I know this is a new concept, so I'll be giving you several examples of how to take advantage of contrary movement. Stay with the Oracle stock sheet for now. On 1/14 Oracle's prices moved down for the day, but the tick volume indicator (or TVI) moved up. This contrary movement was warning you of a possible short-term reversal in the price of the stock. Since the TVI was moving up on 1/14, you'd only be looking to buy the stock. The high price for ORCL on 1/14 was 46.125. Therefore, you want to buy this stock at 46.1875. The low price for ORCL on 1/14 was 43.75. The difference between your "buy" price and the low was 2.4375 points. When you add that to 46.1875, you get an upside price target of 48.625. You could have bought ORCL on 1/15 (at 46.1875), and exited at the open on 1/19 (when prices gapped up to 50.375). You'll notice that in both cases for Oracle, there was a one day turnaround of the contrary movement. This is the strongest type of market action for this phenomenon, and you'd be well advised to take these trades! However, you can extend the time frame to as long as three trading days. If you stay with the Oracle stock sheet, I'll show you an example of this type of market action. On 1/21 Oracle's prices moved lower, but the tick volume indicator (TVI) went up. This contrary movement was warning you of a possible short-term reversal in the stock's price. Since the TVI was moving up on 1/21, you'd only be looking to buy the stock. The high price on 1/21 was 52.0625. Therefore, you want to buy this stock at 52.125. The low price on 1/21 was 48.125. The difference between the "buy" price and the low was 4 points. When you add that to 52.125, you get an upside price objective of 56.125. However, it wasn't until 1/26 that you could have bought the stock. Note that this was the third trading day from the date of the contrary movement. On 1/29 your price objective was hit. Tomorrow, I'll show you additional examples in some different types of stocks. - ------ - - ------------------------------ End of canslim-digest V2 #521 ***************************** 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.