Ok, for the sake of organization = here is a link to my filter: http://= moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/finder/finderx.asp?Query=3DSV1QF153Z= 04L70ZF131Z04L24ZF3Z00F233Z05L25000000ZF307Z04L80ZF5Z04L1%2e5F116MZF116Z0= 0F102Z04L10Z&Name=3Do%27neal&Tickers=3D25

As I mentioned earlier I am using the EXACT = recommendations from O’Neil’s book but I am getting NO query results. Why is this? Are WON’s standards too = high? What fundamentals should I be = using? I assume we all can agree on = the CANSLIM methods but I guess there is disagreement in the specific numbers to be = used.

-----Original = Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Katherine Malm
Sent: = Wednesday, August 06, = 2003 2:46 PM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] = filter

Hi = Gene,

Please see my follow up clarification post on the comment on "the prior 52 = weeks."

I did not state nor intend = to imply that MSN screeners weren't effective, but that they would not produce = the same results as those you would get when using DGO/IBD RSRanks. It's worth = noting for those that are unaware that the RS values at free screening sites = such as MSN are *not* the same as those from IBD/DGO. The same is true of = industry ranks, etc., as the methdologies are quite = different.

It does leave a particular question, however, as to why you would find it necessary to use free MSN screeners when you use several different subscription services (HGSI and Vectorvest) and also use Metastock for screening (though I realize you = probably use the QP2 data from the HGSI feed). HGSI, in particular, closely = mirrors the IBD/DGO RSranks and includes EPS ranks as well. They also have a = particularly comprehensive set of tools for performing analysis of a stock's = technicals and fundamentals. Why use so many different tools? =

Katherine

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Gene Ricci
Sent: Wednesday, August = 06, 2003 2:31 PM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = filter

Hi Katherine, I'm = pretty sure that the RS ranks are not based over the prior 52 = weeks.

And, I have found = the MSN screener to be very effective.

Gene

----- Original Message = - -----

From: Katherine Malm

To:<= /font> canslim@lists.xmission.com

Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 2:21 PM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter

Hi Jeff,

I might add a note of caution on using the = MSN screener. That is, their RS ranks are based on a flat change in price = over the prior 52 weeks. This is significantly different than IBD's RS ranks, = which are weighted so that the price action in the most recent quarter carries = more weight (40%), while previous quarter's each carry 20% weight. The other difference in RS ranks is that the database over which they are = determined is very different. RS ranks for the IBD are based on a universe of stocks = which includes *only* common stocks on the major US (NASDAQ, = NYSE, AMEX) and Canadian exchanges, plus closed end bond and equity funds. From what I remember, MSN RS ranks are calculated across all equities in the US = markets, including warrants and preferreds. While the RS ranks at MSN are indeed = useful, you would not be emulating the IBD rankings for purposes of filtering = your stocks.

Katherine

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of DMC197807
Sent: Wednesday, August = 06, 2003 2:08 PM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = filter

Jeff,

If you're using a free = scanner, why don't you use the one Gene posted a couple of days ago (I'll repost his = post) and play with the criteria there. If I adjust relative strength to = 80 or above it spits out 15 names.

As for CANSLIM criteria, = after M one supposes they are all important, and my descending order is no better = (could be a lot worse) than anyone else's. However, you are asking a = question that I answered 2 days ago, at least from my perspective. This is from = my note on 8/4 to Yien:

<<Good, that's a bunch of information = that you can't use. Now, for some you
can. There are only 3 numbers which matter, when all the dust is = settled.
They are NOT p/e, d/e, current ratio, PEG, profit margin or = inventory
turnover.

THEY ARE: Price paid for shares, Price received for shares, Time = held.

Now, MILSCAN (Canslim to some of you) is a very interesting approach, = and
can possibly, with strong position and money management systems, help = you to
buy low and sell high in a timely timeframe.

Here's how I think of these factors, in descending order of = importance:

<<M is for the market and the market trend. We are at an = inflection point
here, so it's lookout below, or perhaps lookout above.

N is for new highs in the stock, breaking out above the pivot point

L is for an relative strength rating of 70 or better

A is for annual earnings growth (this is for additional comfort)

C is for current quarterly earnings (this is for additional comfort)

I is for institutional sponsorship (this is a timing issue--I = think I trust
the chart over this, for some reason)

S is for supply of stock (looking for a relatively low no. of = shares--here I
want to exclude the over-issued monsters like CSCO and INTC where it = will
take a ton of momentum to move the billions of shares outstanding).

In closing, using TA and FA together is a good idea, but when in = conflict,
trust the TA. Remember, out of 7000 stocks we are looking for 1 or = 2 names
a week on which to carefully place our = hopes. >>

DMC=

----- Original Message = - -----

From: Jeff = Henderson

To:<= /font> canslim@lists.xmission.com

Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:40 AM

Subject: RE: [CANSLIM] filter

Sorry about the misunderstanding I was using the CANSLIM acronym. I’ll explain my filter = again. First off I use MSN as my = filter source. Here is my filter that I use: = current earnings per share (the same quarter a year ago)>=3D70%, annual = earnings per share over the past 5 years, >=3D 24% compounded, shares outstanding<25,000,000, relative strength> = 80%.

=

-----Original = Message-----
From: = owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-canslim@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of DMC197807
Sent: = Wednesday, August 06, = 2003 11:23 AM
To: = canslim@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [CANSLIM] = filter

Jeff,

I don't understand which = filter/scan you are using, or what all your variables mean. If you're using a = public scan or stockcharts, maybe you can put in a link = here?

If C =3D capitalization and = you are using only the top 30% of stocks you've filtered out way too many stocks already. In capitalization I only filter out the very top stocks, = but that's just me. I don't know what your S is. For relative = strength I use the top 40% of the market, that is, stocks outperforming = 60%.

I'm willing to let some = other names in because after this scan gives me names, I'm happy to look through = charts to find appropriate patterns.

DMC=

----- Original Message ----- =

From: Jeff Henderson =

To:<= /font> Canslim

Sent: Wednesday, August 06, = 2003 9:02 AM

Subject: [CANSLIM] filter

After reading = O’Neil’s book I decided to use the filter C>=3D70, A>=3D5, S<25,000,000, = relative strength>80 and last volume 1.5 average quarterly volume. To my dismay, no stocks popped = up. How would you alter this = filter?