|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Thanks, David. I may relook at this. At the time I looked at it (June), I
read the TC2000 msg board on the TC2000 sites where they discuss this stuff
with Worden. First they were recomending the S&P, then they changed to the
Nasdaq. I personally find the stocks I trade are 90% NASDAQ, so that is
what I used to compare. So the stocks I was comparing were PMCS, SDLI,
VRTS, SEBL, etc. Didn't work too well. Like I say, if I get around to it,
I'll try again.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "David DeFina" <ddefina@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 12:08 PM
Subject: RE: TC2000 Relative Strength Moving Average
> Tom, using the Nasdaq slows down the response time and gets you out later,
> and in later. Like you say, when the two coincide exactly the moving
> averages converge much slower. So using the Nasdaq appears to give
sup-par
> results vs. the S&P or DJ-30. I don't think TC2000 is pushing one index
> over the other any more, but can't be positive. I would never use this
> indicator by itself, but to me its superior to traditional moving
averages.
> Apparently we can't send pictures over this mail server, but it's amazing
to
> see the side by side comparison of the relative strength averages to
> traditional moving averages; far fewer false alarms but with good
entry/exit
> points.
>
> Dave
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Tom Sprunger
> Sent: Dec 28, 2000 4:00 PM
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: TC2000 Relative Strength Moving Average
>
> David, what would have been the result if you had used the Nasdaq as the
> reference instead of the S&P? At one time Worden was pushing the use of
> the Nasdaq as the reference. Which index is he pushing now?
>
> Tom
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David DeFina" <ddefina@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 4:00 PM
> Subject: RE: TC2000 Relative Strength Moving Average
>
>
> > RE: How does your testing work for the April 2000 Nasdaq drop and the
> > Sept-Nov
> > Nasdaq drop?
> >
> > Tom, I tested from September 1999 to present, and it avoided both the
> March
> > and September plunges almost entirely. I believe since the stocks I
> tested
> > were on the Nasdaq, they quickly under performed the S & P index during
> the
> > plunges, which caused the moving averages to cross soon after the drop
> > began. It was primarily these two events this year that caused me to be
> > impressed by this indicator set-up.
> >
> > This isn't a recent example, but I'm at the office. The top section has
> the
> > traditional moving averages (10 and 30 exponential) based on the stock
> > price. The bottom section uses the same moving averages, but their
based
> on
> > IBM's relative strength to the S&P 500. You can see the primary
> difference
> > in February - April 1999 where the stock whipsaws up and down, causing
bad
> > signals in the conventional moving averages. The bottom window shows
the
> > 10-day moving average coming and barely touching the 30-day moving
> average,
> > eliminating some of the noise.
> >
> > I've always hated moving averages because they lose all the money you
made
> > with them when a stock consolidates. This indicator comes closer to
> solving
> > that problem in my mind. It is also just as good or better at
signaling
> > changes in trends.
> >
> > I'll send current examples tomorrow.
> >
> > ddefina@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> > Behalf Of Tom Sprunger
> > Sent: Dec 28, 2000 10:35 AM
> > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: TC2000 Relative Strength Moving Average
> >
> > I experimented with this and found a serious limitation in my opinion.
> > Since its based upon the stock's price performance relative to an index,
> it
> > fails when the stock and the index are moving in the same direction at
> about
> > the same rate. I.E., if the Nasdaq is in free fall and the stock is
> falling
> > at about the same rate, this approach may show that all is o.k., when in
> > reality you are losing your behind.
> >
> > I think it may work o.k in an exploration, but may fail applied to a
> > specific portfolio that you may already have under conditions like
> described
> > above..
> >
> > How does your testing work for the April 2000 Nasdaq drop and the
> Sept-Nov
> > Nasdaq drop?
> >
> > Tom
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David DeFina" <ddefina@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2000 10:26 AM
> > Subject: TC2000 Relative Strength Moving Average
> >
> >
> > > Anybody tried using TC2000's new moving average based on relative
> strength
> > > in Metastock?
> > >
> > > I developed a good indicator to identify trends in stocks, but
TC2000's
> > idea
> > > of using a 10 and 30 day moving average of relative strength (vs.
SP500,
> > > NASDAQ, etc.), works as well or better than mine. Using moving
> averages
> > > based on the stocks relative strength to a broader market average
> > eliminates
> > > market gyrations from the equation and allows the moving averages to
be
> > > sensitive only to stock performance relative to the index. I
programmed
> > > this into Metastock by plotting a relative strength indicator in white
> > > (making it invisible on white background), and created 2 moving
averages
> > > based on this indicator (10 and 30 exponential). When the 10-day
> crosses
> > > above the 30 day, this is assumed to be bullish, and you look to be
> > bearish
> > > when it crosses back below the 30-day line. Obviously, the two moving
> > > averages can be any number, but these seem to work well.
> > >
> > > I tested this setup on many Nasdaq stocks by programming an expert
with
> my
> > > indicators (not TC2000) and comparing the trend changes to mine
> visually,
> > > and saw that they were very similar. My system is very accurate for
> > finding
> > > trends, and entry points, so I'm assuming this TC2000 setup is as
> > reliable.
> > > I haven't found a way yet to program relative strength into a system
> test,
> > > so if anybody knows how I'd appreciate learning the secret. I used
the
> > > SP-500 as the comparison to Nasdaq stocks because it correlates well
> with
> > > the Nasdaq, but isn't as volatile.
> > >
> > > My trading system only uses the trend as one piece and several other
> > > indicators for entry and exit, but I believe this indicator is as
close
> to
> > > perfect for determining trends as you'll find.
> > >
> > > Dave D.
> > >
> >
>
|