|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Michel,
I agree completely! Equis is going down the wrong road. If they want to
keep me as a customer, then they MUST do a better job at keeping the
EOD program ahead of rest of the field. Otherwise, Equis will find
themselves as an "also ran....."
Bob
>From: "Michel Amelinckx" <Michel.Amelinckx@xxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: Comparative Strength
>Date sent: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 21:31:04 +0200
>Send reply to: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> you see, what I told you. But I think they are betting on the wrong
> horse. If I would buy an RT program I would buy the best OT which is I
> believe is much flexible than MS Pro. Same thing if your looking for an
> EOD program, the best AT THE MOMENT is MS (TASC Magazine). But if Equis
> continues like this, this will quickly change and Supercharts will take
> over and then MS EOD will be just like Equis treads us now. On second
> place or even worse !
>
> Mickey
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Ron Stockstill
> > Sent: donderdag 27 april 2000 19:43
> > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: Comparative Strength
> >
> >
> > Martin,
> >
> > That is correct; I complained to Equis 3 months ago about
> > this decision to
> > omit the Security() function from the EOD version. I was
> > told by Equis support
> > that this was a marketing decision to help justify the higher
> > price of MS Pro.
> > Indeed, EOD traders are being treated as second-class citizens as the
> > developer's kit apparently can only access data from the base security
> > and can not be extended to write a custom version of the Security()
> > function. Perhaps someone who has the kit can verify that the above
> > statement; this is what Equis support sent me in a note. The
> > Security() function is very useful to the EOD trader; so the
> > distinguishing factor between the PRO and EOD versions will not be just
> > real-time support and we can expect this trend to be continued in future
> > releases. This is why I wrote in an earlier note that add-in modules be
> > available for purchase from Equis so we do not have to waste our money
> > on capabilities we do not need or want.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ron Stockstill
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Martin Haesler
> > Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 5:08 AM
> > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: Comparative Strength
> >
> >
> > Relative Strength Comparative is there (on different pages)
> > and seems to be
> > an indicator only,
> > not a function you can call and build into indicators and
> > explorations.
> >
> > The Security Data function is nowhere to be found and as I
> > said if you try
> > to use it you get the diagnostic that
> > tells you it is in the professional version only.
> >
> > Regards ... Martin
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "HHP" <hhp@xxxxxxxx>
> > To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 5:35 PM
> > Subject: Re: Comparative Strength
> >
> >
> > > Martin,
> > >
> > > Now that is really surprising. Relative Strength comparative was in
> > > ver.6.5 EOD, so that at least should be in ver.7 EOD. I'm
> > sure you've
> > > already checked the index at the back of the manual? Can't
> > imagine why
> > > Equis would put the Security Data Function in the Pro
> > version and not in
> > > EOD.
> > >
> > > HHP
> > > ==========================
> > >
> > > Martin Haesler wrote:
> > > >
> > > > HHP
> > > >
> > > > Thank you very much for your response.
> > > >
> > > > I thought I was going bonkers when I found that page 241
> > in my manual
> > > > (metastock ver. 7) mentions nothing about the Security
> > Data Function.
> > > > Similarly pages 191 and 514 do not discuss Relative Strength
> > Comparitive.
> > > >
> > > > Figured I had been sent an old book even though it show
> > ver. 7 on the
> > first
> > > > page.
> > > >
> > > > However, decided to attempt to use the Security function
> > and when saving
> > it
> > > > received the diagnostic that this function is available
> > in the Metastock
> > > > Professional version only. I am of course using the MS
> > ver7 end of day
> > > > program.
> > > >
> > > > So the convention of describing essentially two different
> > programs by
> > the
> > > > same name and version has struck again.
> > > >
> > > > At least now I know ... and thank you again for your assistance.
> > > >
> > > > Regards ... Martin
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "HHP" <hhp@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2000 6:34 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: Comparative Strength
> > > >
> > > > > Martin,
> > > > >
> > > > > In the MStk ver.7 manual, Security Data Function p.241; Relative
> > > > > Strength Comparative p.191 & p.514. The Security Data
> > Function is new
> > > > > with ver.7. Relative Strength Comparative is continued
> > from ver.6.5.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here's the current version of my home-grown Comp Strength-ROC
> > indicator
> > > > > ('Comp' referring to both comparative and composite).
> > In place of
> > {Data
> > > > > Path} enter the Drive:\Folder\File address of your
> > index such as the
> > > > > S&P500.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ndx:= Security("{Data Path}",C);
> > > > > CS10:= ROC(C,10,%) - ROC(Ndx,10,%);
> > > > > CS20:= ROC(C,20,%) - ROC(Ndx,20,%);
> > > > > CS30:= ROC(C,30,%) - ROC(Ndx,30,%);
> > > > > CS:= LinearReg((CS10 + CS20 + CS30)/3, 3);
> > > > > CS; 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > If you run this in the Explorer with a Col. for CS you
> > can rank your
> > > > > database on a percentage scale from those heading north to those
> > heading
> > > > > south. Around the middle (0) you can find some basing
> > candidates if
> > you
> > > > > like bottom-fishing.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is all for an EOD local database. Has anyone using
> > Data-on-Demand
> > > > > tried anything similar?
> > > > >
> > > > > HHP
> > > > > =========================
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin Haesler wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > HHP
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have been unable to find the Security Data Function
> > you refer to
> > ???
> > > > Could
> > > > > > you enlighten me please as to what this function is called.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I also note the Relative Strength Comparative can be
> > used as an
> > > > indicator
> > > > > > but is not available in the indicator builder nor in the
> > explorations.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am I missing something ?? Any assistance much appreciated.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards ... Martin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "HHP" <hhp@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 7:29 AM
> > > > > > Subject: Comparative Strength
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > How do people compute comparative strength in
> > MetaStock so as to
> > be
> > > > able
> > > > > > > to sort the issues by comparative strength?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My method is to calculate an Issue Ratio by
> > dividing today's close
> > by
> > > > > > > the 20-day previous close; obtain an Index Ratio
> > the same way;
> > then
> > > > > > > divide the Issue Ratio by the Index Ratio. (MStk
> > ver.7's Security
> > > > Data
> > > > > > > Function makes this easy).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does anyone find other time periods better -
> > shorter, longer,
> > > > > > > composite? Has anyone a better calculation? A way to give
> > preference
> > > > > > > to a smooth comparative strength curve might be an
> > advantage.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > HHP
> > > > > > > ==========================
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dan Harels wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Nicholas,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Although Metastock can screen 3000 securities, I
> > haven't found
> > much
> > > > > > point in
> > > > > > > > it. I have found it more productive to use
> > Metastock's powerful
> > > > > > screening
> > > > > > > > capabilities on a much smaller population. I am what is
> > frequently
> > > > > > > > classified as a momentum investor because I focus
> > my attention
> > > > strongest
> > > > > > 10
> > > > > > > > percent of the market and essentially ignore the other 90
> > percent.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To find the strongest 10 percent, I perform an
> > initial screen of
> > all
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > securities in Quote Plus database using relative
> > strength. I
> > look
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > securities that have out performed 90 percent of
> > the market on
> > the
> > > > > > premise
> > > > > > > > that stocks that have outperformed will continue
> > to outperform.
> > I
> > > > also
> > > > > > add
> > > > > > > > a screen that eliminates anything that trades less than an
> > average
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > 100,000 shares per day. I use 100,000 because it keeps my
> > database
> > > > > > small,
> > > > > > > > the spread between bid and ask doesn't eat you
> > alive and you
> > don't
> > > > have
> > > > > > > > charts that are full of gaps due to lack of activity.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Back in late October when I thought that the
> > market was nearing
> > a
> > > > > > bottom, I
> > > > > > > > ran that scan on Quotes plus and came up with a
> > population of
> > about
> > > > 120
> > > > > > > > stocks. I used that population through November
> > and did not
> > update
> > > > it
> > > > > > again
> > > > > > > > until mid-December. Many of the stocks in that
> > population went
> > up
> > > > > > several
> > > > > > > > hundreds of percent between the first of November
> > and the first
> > of
> > > > > > January.
> > > > > > > > The period between the first of Novemeber and the first of
> > January
> > > > was
> > > > > > > > extrordinary and I did not have the skills needed to make
> > several
> > > > > > hundreds
> > > > > > > > of percent on my capital, however, the
> > opportunities were there
> > in a
> > > > > > small
> > > > > > > > cross-section of the market.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you are looking for stocks that are going to
> > outperform the
> > > > market,
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > would do well to focus your attention on the
> > stocks whose price
> > > > > > performance
> > > > > > > > has been better than the rest of the market. On
> > average, their
> > price
> > > > > > > > performance is likely to continue to be better
> > than the rest of
> > the
> > > > > > market.
> > > > > > > > I use relative strength as my first cut and volume as a
> > secondary
> > > > > > criterion.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hope this helps,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Dan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >From: "Nicholas Kormanik" <nkormanik@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > >Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > >To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > >Subject: RE: Volume Moving Average Study
> > > > > > > > >Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 20:58:11 -0600
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Ian writes, "I mainly use two other folders
> > which have about
> > 200
> > > > > > securities
> > > > > > > > >in each."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Did those approximately 400 stocks in 'topstocks' and
> > 'watchlist'
> > > > have
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >clear a volume hurdle?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >What makes them all that different from the other 3,000
> > securities?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Thanks,
> > > > > > > > >Nicholas
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> > > > > > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > > http://www.hotmail.com
> >
> >
> >
>
>
|