From: owner-canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com (canslim-digest) To: canslim-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: canslim-digest V2 #1458 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 Friday, June 8 2001 Volume 02 : Number 1458 In this issue: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Re: [CANSLIM] 7-8% stops Re: [CANSLIM] upward wedging hangle.......was DGX Re: [CANSLIM] knsy,hdl,easi Re: [CANSLIM] real-time RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 08:09:18 -0500 From: "David Squires" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C0EFF2.51130920 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 6:14 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Seems this is even more complicated than I realized. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley It's really not. WON explains it clearly. Down on higher volume...dist. Very little price change on higher volume...dist. 4-5 days dist. in 3 weeks....be careful BTW...no mention of ADV in WON's comments. DSquires ************************************************ From Norm's email....... ----- What exactly is a distribution day in a market index? Is a = distribution day any day the market closes down on more volume than the = day before? Is it always a bad sign? =20 - Submitted from Los Angeles, Calif. =20 Distribution in the stock market refers to the selling of stock = by large institutions. Distribution is indicated by one or more of the = major market indexes closing down on increased volume from the previous = day. Churning in the market indexes is also a sign of distribution. This = occurs when a day's attempted advance stalls (shows very little change = in price) on greater volume than the day before. Our studies have shown = that four or five days of distribution over a two- to three-week period = are often enough to turn a previously advancing market into decline. = Therefore, once you notice these signs of distribution, it is best to = hold off on any further stock purchases, and perhaps even cut back on = some of your positions, especially if you are on margin.=20 =20 Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 6:14 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Seems this is even more complicated than I realized. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ian=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 1:03 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days 5/22 was mentioned as a distribution day in one of the 'Big Picture' = summaries within IBD last week (Thursday May 31 issue I think). I = suspect it is because the index actually closed from from its gap open = on higher volume. I.e., the volume brought prices down - it didn't push = them up. Ian ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tom Worley=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 7:35 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Doug, Both you and David see 5/22 as distributional, which is confusing = me. How can it be distributional, when the index not only closed up, but = on slightly greater volume? Or is the data at DGO wrong? Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Doug Shannon=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:25 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days I agree. 5/22 was basically flat for the day on very fast = trade. Vol. was higher than the day before and above average. =20 I see 2 distribution days on above average trade on the Nasdaq = in the last 3 weeks: 5/22 and 5/30. Doug -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of David Squires Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:10 AM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days NASDAQ had an important dist. day on 5-22. Dsquires ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Doug Shannon=20 To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:48 AM Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days =20 I am probably over simplifying the issue, but trying to = understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking for = some educating and advice from those that understand the topic better. If I essentially ignore completely down days where the = volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April 1: NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - yesterday clearly = by any definition is not distributional as volume failed to beat the = prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too old to be = meaningful NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear = distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter volume DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 distributional S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30 distributional The questions I have: Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply ignore down = days where volume is less than ADV? No, your analysis is quite good. = I, too would ignore down days on lighter volume. Those days are clearly = not distributional.=20 Is this summary essentially accurate? yes=20 How far back in time to you have to consider? What = restarts the counting from zero? I don't think in terms of ever = re-starting the count. I just look for at least 4+ days of distribution = in any 2-3 week period, The only time I would consider a distribution = day where vol. was less than ADV is if the price action is wide and = loose. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C0EFF2.51130920 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Original Message -----=20 From: Tom = Worley=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 6:14 = AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

Seems this is even more complicated than I=20 realized.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
 
 
 
It's really not. WON explains it = clearly.
 
Down on higher volume...dist.
 
Very little price change on higher = volume...dist.
 
4-5 days dist. in 3 weeks....be careful
 
BTW...no mention of ADV in WON's = comments.
 
 
DSquires
 
************************************************
From Norm's email.......
 
 
-----=20
What = exactly is a=20 distribution day in a market index? Is a distribution day any = day the=20 market closes down on more volume than the day before? Is it = always a=20 bad sign?    
- Submitted from
Los=20 Angeles, Calif. 		 

Distribution in the stock market refers to the selling = of stock=20 by large institutions. Distribution is indicated by one or more = of the=20 major market indexes closing down on increased volume from the = previous=20 day. Churning in the market indexes is also a sign of = distribution. This=20 occurs when a day's attempted advance stalls (shows very little = change=20 in price) on greater volume than the day before. Our studies = have shown=20 that four or five days of distribution over a two- to three-week = period=20 are often enough to turn a previously advancing market into = decline.=20 Therefore, once you notice these signs of distribution, it is = best to=20 hold off on any further stock purchases, and perhaps even cut = back on=20 some of your positions, especially if you are on margin.
 
 
Origi= nal=20 Message -----
From:=20 Tom = Worley=20
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com=
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 = 6:14 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

Seems this is even more complicated than I=20 realized.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Ian =
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 = 1:03=20 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

5/22 was mentioned as a distribution day in = one of=20 the 'Big Picture' summaries within IBD last week (Thursday May 31 = issue I=20 think). I suspect it is because the index actually closed from from = its gap=20 open on higher volume. I.e., the volume brought prices down - it = didn't push=20 them up.
 
 
Ian
 
 
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Tom=20 Worley
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Thursday, June 07, = 2001 7:35=20 AM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

Doug,
 
Both you and David see 5/22 as distributional, = which is=20 confusing me. How can it be distributional, when the index not = only closed=20 up, but on slightly greater volume?
 
Or is the data at DGO wrong?
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Doug Shannon
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Thursday, June 07, = 2001 10:25=20 AM
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

I agree.  5/22 was basically flat for the day on = very fast=20 trade.  Vol. was higher than the day before and above=20 average. 
 
I see 2 distribution days on above average trade on the = Nasdaq in=20 the last 3 weeks: 5/22 and 5/30.
 
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmis= sion.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lis= ts.xmission.com]On=20 Behalf Of David Squires
Sent: Thursday, June 07, = 2001=20 10:10 AM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject:=20 Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days

NASDAQ had an important dist. day on=20 5-22.
 
Dsquires
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Doug Shannon =
To: canslim@lists.xmission.com= =20
Sent: Thursday, June = 07, 2001=20 8:48 AM
Subject: RE: = [CANSLIM]=20 Distribution Days

 


 
I am probably over simplifying the = issue, but=20 trying to understand it better, and pay a little more = attention.=20 So looking for some educating and advice from those that=20 understand the topic better.
 
If I essentially ignore completely = down days=20 where the volume was less than ADV, then I find the = following=20 since April 1:
 
NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 = - -=20 yesterday clearly by any definition is not distributional = as=20 volume failed to beat the prior day, which was up. And = 4/3, and=20 possibly 4/26, seem too old to be meaningful
 
NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 = appear=20 distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter=20 volume
 
DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 = distributional
 
Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30=20 distributional
 
S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, = 5/30=20 distributional
 
The questions I have:
 
Is this approach too simplistic? Can I = simply=20 ignore down days where volume is less than ADV?  No,=20 your analysis is quite good.  I, too would = ignore down=20 days on lighter volume.  Those days are clearly not=20 distributional. 
 
Is this summary essentially = accurate? =20 yes 
 
How far back in time to you have to = consider?=20 What restarts the counting from zero?  I don't think in terms of ever = re-starting the count. I just look for at least = 4+ days=20 of distribution in any 2-3 week period,  The = only time I=20 would consider a distribution day where vol. was less than = ADV is=20 if the price action is wide and = loose.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 = TexWorley
- ------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C0EFF2.51130920-- - - - -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 Jun 2001 09:15:09 -0400 From: "Tom Worley" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 7-8% stops I wouldn't count on it increasing your probability of being right to over .300, since presumably WON was buying at the pivot, and that was his success rate. I do agree that if you are unable to buy at the pivot point, you may have to increase the size of your stop loss if you are to place it correctly. I have said that before. Personally, I don't like increasing it, which is why I prefer to increase my risk by buying in the base, then chancing that it doesn't break out, or breaks down. That at least gives me the chance to bail out while still in the base if it begins to look like it will never b/o. It's not something that I recommend for most, as it violates quite a few rules. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ----- Original Message ----- From: Tracie Oken To: Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 8:51 AM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] 7-8% stops The 7-8% rule came about because they found that great stocks rarely dropped 7-8% "below the pivot". (Not because they think 7-8% is a reasonable amount to risk.) Therefore, you could buy a stock at 5% above its pivot and get stopped out at 2% below but that would still be considered a normal pullback (and if you were lucky enough to buy right at the pivot you would not be stopped out). The problem is (as has been mentioned here before) that it is almost impossible for the average investor to buy a stock right at the pivot. It makes the case that you should set your stop at 7-8% below the pivot even though your buy point may create a larger loss then 7-8%. If you still keep to the rule of not buying beyond 5% on the upside this should give you a maximum loss of approximately 12%. Yes, Tom, this will increase your dollar losses on each stock but it should also increase your percentage of winning picks to greater than .300. - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Cameron" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 8:51 PM Subject: [CANSLIM] 7-8% stops > A few people have mentioned the hard 7-8% stop as insurance against > taking a big loss. > > You know, I never use it. Its not that I don't set a stop - but I > do it based on the chart - not on a percentage. As an example, > suppose a stock has been basing between 25 and 30 for several months, > then breaks out to 33 on high volume. If I bought at 33 (which is > higher than WON says to buy - but for those of us who can't trade > real-time...) my stop point would be 29.90 (I can't get used to > decimals yet). Because this would put it back in the base. All > right, its a 10% stop - but its common for a stock like this to drop > 8-9% to say, 30.25 and then bounce back up. Of course, if I were > fortunate enough to buy the same stock at 30.5, I'd still have a stop > at 29.90, and then have a 1-2% stop. The percentage isn't relevant > - the placement relative to the chart action is. > > Anyone else have any thoughts? > > > ===== > Dave Cameron > dfcameron@yahoo.com > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > - > -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 Jun 2001 08:16:38 -0500 From: "David Squires" Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] upward wedging hangle.......was DGX Dan, I already did. This is not the best example but it does show what an upward wedging handle looks like. Here's the link again. ftp://ftp.xmission.com/pub/users/m/mcjathan/canslim/expd.gif DSquires - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan" To: Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 9:46 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] upward wedging hangle.......was DGX > Can someone post a picture of one? A thousand words is worth a picture! > > Norman wrote: > > > Here's what WON wrote about the wedging handle (HTMMIS, p. 164). > > > > "Additionally, handles that consistently drift upwards along their price > > lows have a higher probability of failing when they break out into new > > highs. This wedging-upward characteristic along low points in the handle > > does not allow the stock to undergo the needed correction or shakeout after > > having advanced from the low of the base into the upper half of the pattern. > > This high-risk characteristic tends to occur in either third- or > > fourth-stage bases, laggard stock bases, or very active market leaders that > > become too widely followed and obvious." > > > > DGX sure looks like a breakout that has pulled back and would have almost an > > triggered the 8% s/l (assuming a purchase at 62.88) on 5/30/01. I wouldn't > > call it failed, yet. I don't see the "wedging-upward" handle. > > > > Norm > > > - > -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 Jun 2001 09:23:07 EDT From: BIKEAR@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] knsy,hdl,easi - --part1_d4.77b0351.28522bbb_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit thanks, I had not looked at those things..jan - --part1_d4.77b0351.28522bbb_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit thanks, I had not looked at those things..jan - --part1_d4.77b0351.28522bbb_boundary-- - - - -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 Jun 2001 09:55:24 EDT From: BIKEAR@aol.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] real-time - --part1_8c.7ce94e5.2852334c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit besides datek where can I find free real time jan - --part1_8c.7ce94e5.2852334c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit besides datek where can I find free real time jan - --part1_8c.7ce94e5.2852334c_boundary-- - - - -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 Jun 2001 10:06:15 -0400 From: "Doug Shannon" Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C0F002.A773D140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The 1% follow thru day has been changed by WON to 2%. Doug -----Original Message----- From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom Worley Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:17 PM To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Interesting that Los Angeles is the home of IBD and DG/DGO. But I am sure they are not monitoring this group :)) Since we use a rule of up 1% or more on "higher" volume to define a follow thru day, why don't we have to have a similar rule (e.g. down 1% or more on "higher" volume) to define a distribution day?? I have a problem counting it as distribution if the close is only a few tenths of a percent different. Likewise, "higher" volume to me doesn't mean a few hundred thousand shares on an index trading a billion or more shares. A single order by a mutual fund or institutional holder could be that much easily. "Higher" is just too vague. Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley ----- Original Message ----- From: Norman To: canslim@lists.xmission.com Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 7:58 PM Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days Tom, et al, Here is the Ask Bill O'Neil question today from investors.com. What exactly is a distribution day in a market index? Is a distribution day any day the market closes down on more volume than the day before? Is it always a bad sign? - Submitted from Los Angeles, Calif. Distribution in the stock market refers to the selling of stock by large institutions. Distribution is indicated by one or more of the major market indexes closing down on increased volume from the previous day. Churning in the market indexes is also a sign of distribution. This occurs when a day's attempted advance stalls (shows very little change in price) on greater volume than the day before. Our studies have shown that four or five days of distribution over a two- to three-week period are often enough to turn a previously advancing market into decline. Therefore, once you notice these signs of distribution, it is best to hold off on any further stock purchases, and perhaps even cut back on some of your positions, especially if you are on margin. norm ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Worley To: CANSLIM Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 6:15 AM Subject: [CANSLIM] Distribution Days I am probably over simplifying the issue, but trying to understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking for some educating and advice from those that understand the topic better. If I essentially ignore completely down days where the volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April 1: NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - yesterday clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed to beat the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too old to be meaningful NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter volume DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 distributional S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30 distributional The questions I have: Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply ignore down days where volume is less than ADV? Is this summary essentially accurate? How far back in time to you have to consider? What restarts the counting from zero? Tom Worley stkguru@netside.net AIM: TexWorley - ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C0F002.A773D140 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The 1%=20 follow thru day has been changed by WON to 2%.
 
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Tom=20 Worley
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 10:17 PM
To:=20 canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

Interesting that Los Angeles is the home of IBD = and DG/DGO.=20 But I am sure they are not monitoring this group :))
 
Since we use a rule of up 1% or more on "higher" = volume to=20 define a follow thru day, why don't we have to have a similar rule = (e.g. down=20 1% or more on "higher" volume) to define a distribution day?? I have a = problem=20 counting it as distribution if the close is only a few tenths of a = percent=20 different. Likewise, "higher" volume to me doesn't mean a few hundred = thousand=20 shares on an index trading a billion or more shares.  A single = order by a=20 mutual fund or institutional holder could be that much easily. = "Higher" is=20 just too vague.
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 TexWorley
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Norman
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 = 7:58=20 PM
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

Tom, et al,
 
Here is the Ask Bill O'Neil question today from = investors.com.
 
What exactly is a=20 distribution day in a market index? Is a distribution day any = day the=20 market closes down on more volume than the day before? Is it = always a=20 bad sign?    
- Submitted from
Los=20 Angeles, Calif. 		 

Distribution in the = stock market=20 refers to the selling of stock by large institutions. = Distribution is=20 indicated by one or more of the major market indexes closing = down on=20 increased volume from the previous day. Churning in the market = indexes=20 is also a sign of distribution. This occurs when a day's = attempted=20 advance stalls (shows very little change in price) on greater = volume=20 than the day before. Our studies have shown that four or five = days of=20 distribution over a two- to three-week period are often enough = to turn=20 a previously advancing market into decline. Therefore, once = you notice=20 these signs of distribution, it is best to hold off on any = further=20 stock purchases, and perhaps even cut back on some of your = positions,=20 especially if you are on margin.
 
 
 
norm
----- Original Message ----- =
From:=20 Tom=20 Worley
To: CANSLIM
Sent: Thursday, June 07, = 2001 6:15=20 AM
Subject: [CANSLIM] = Distribution=20 Days

I am probably over simplifying the issue, but = trying to=20 understand it better, and pay a little more attention. So looking = for some=20 educating and advice from those that understand the topic=20 better.
 
If I essentially ignore completely down days = where the=20 volume was less than ADV, then I find the following since April=20 1:
 
NASDAQ - distribution 4/3, 4/26, 5/30 - = yesterday=20 clearly by any definition is not distributional as volume failed = to beat=20 the prior day, which was up. And 4/3, and possibly 4/26, seem too = old to=20 be meaningful
 
NYSE Composite - 4/24, 4/30, 5/2, 5/22 appear=20 distributional. Again yesterday was not due lighter = volume
 
DOW 30 - 4/11, 6/6 distributional
 
Russell 2000 - 4/3, 5/30 = distributional
 
S&P 500 - 4/3, 4/4, 4/30, 5/22, 5/30=20 distributional
 
The questions I have:
 
Is this approach too simplistic? Can I simply = ignore=20 down days where volume is less than ADV?
 
Is this summary essentially = accurate?
 
How far back in time to you have to consider? = What=20 restarts the counting from zero?
 
Tom Worley
stkguru@netside.net
AIM:=20 = TexWorley
<= /HTML> - ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01C0F002.A773D140-- - - - -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 #1458 ****************************** 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.