[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Historical Intraday Data



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links


	By definition if you have a trending market/security "RSI" or Stoch" 
or any type of oscillator based indicator is NOT supposed to work. This is from 
TA bible. Beleive me it is correct, I can speak from experience. One of the 
toughest analysis in doing TA analysis is to determine which type of indicator 
to use in trending market or non-trending market.


Regards,

M.Ayalew

 
> Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 14:28:02 -0600
> To: metastock-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: APEX again
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Resent-Message-ID: <"V-y9c3.0.GE.I3p1q"@mail.equis.com>
> Resent-From: metastock-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> X-Mailing-List: <metastock-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> archive/latest/4137
> X-Loop: metastock-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Resent-Sender: metastock-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> On Fri, 29 Aug 1997 13:23:06 -0400, you wrote:
> >I don't like to use RSI and Stochastics when a stock is clearly
> >in a trend. It never seems to work. The fundamentals of APEX
> >are very good. Check IBD for ranking. It has an EPS rank of
> >99 and a price performance rating of 99. It is currently being
> >accumulated and is in a very strong group. Do you think the lower
> >price to buy will beat the thirty I recommended?
> 
> Not at all.  I think 30 is a great price for this stock.  The trouble
> is, if you buy today you will pay 40.  I think that if you wait you
> might get it for 33-35.
> 
> As for RSI and Stoch not working on stocks that are clearly in a
> trend, I beg to differ.  Take a look at my chart of IOM
> http://www.white-crane.com/iom.htm.  Notice how the Stoch(9) has given
> a buy signal at the end of every single month since March.  And every
> one of them was a good time to buy.
> 
> I do have a problem with RSI.  When a stock is on an uptrend, the
> usual rule about 80/20 lines does not work at all, since the RSI will
> rarely fall below 20.
> 
>