Thankyou for the post, although I am a tad confused as to your point. I did not mean to state, or even imply, that the markets are random. Quite the contrary! As far as the timeline for understanding variation I tend to agree, though would like to expediate the process. P.S. To Jack Hershey: I am doing some research on the Lissajoux curves mentioned in volume.doc and will have a reply shortly.
Jack Hershey, I have searched and read many of your previous posts with great interest. Your suggestion of employing a method by which to measure the nature of market movements is also fascinating. Unfortunately, I am a relative new-comer to the world of stocks and so by my own fault I have failed to interpret some of the linguistics you have utilized. DU I now know is "Dry-Up," but do not know how it is derived. SOP I have found in many prior posts but I have yet to determine its meaning. MFAC also escapes me. That said, here is what I have been able to come up with, please correct me as I err. (1) By plotting a 4-pane Jokeri window of P (Inc/Dec) and V (Inc/Dec) we have a framework by which to interpret the P:V relationship. (2) Moving from pane to pane (Quadrants 4 - 1 - 3 - 2) we have a sequenced the buying process (3) By tracking the changes in P/V of an issue through this framework certain patterns arise, which are somehow related to Lissajous patterns. Lissajous patterns from what I understand were originally derived from a sine wave (eg radio waves) with known characteristics and a sine wave with unknown characteristics for the purpose of determining otherwise indiscernable characteristics of the latter sine wave. (4) The patterns derived, if interpreted correctly, will signal the formation of a trend. You have in another forum already discussed this matter in relation to MAs and how one may utilize their movements by pre-empting their signals. ?The examples you have provided were not tradable. I believe this is because of a lack of movement in the aforementioned sequence. However, you noted that NSIT did, but not early enough? Is the timing of the signal dependent upon these being day-long trades? I may be way off base in my interpretations here, my head is swimming and so I will be sleeping on these thoughts and hoping for some clarity in the morning. P.S. You have mentioned the A/D as third to P & V in importance and although I cannot prove my position, agree with this proposal.
The "hot List" log was part of an email set of lists. For years I mailed four emails per day to people where everyone had a common universe of stocks for trading. The emails were sent before open, within 30 mins of open, and two more before 11:15AM EST. These four comprised a modus for EOD analysis and real time trading. I used all markets and in the preopen would explain the cash index performance coming up for the day. It was detailedto the extent that I would describe, if appropriate, if the indexes would be "mixed" and which way each would be going. Key to the operation was the universe, the "natural cycle", the P,V relationship, it's corollary to make it complete, scoring, a stop system, monitoring and the four daily email reports which had a colmn for "Wait", "buy", "Hold", and "sell". The emails were "forwarded" on at least four handoff levels as best I know. Okay I sent you the "hot list" which was for potential buys for the date of 8 DEC 1997. All the stock symbols are on the bottom. MFAC was the one that ws bought between the second and third email on that day. I described the status of the others. there were several other lists, one labelled channels for beginners and another called the "owned" list. The lists were continually changing as to content. If a stock were "owned" several times, I noted the # of shares increase per lap of ownership. sequences were like 300, 400, 700; this showed how that thread of capital was increasing. In between, other stocks had cycles as you can see. It is a way to record progress of capital appreciation like using grain as a standard. You missed my point of using MFAC as an example. But you readily see how the P,V relation works and how A/D is a third factor. The V frequency is twice the P and the A/D is twice the frequency of V. This in maths is an elegant occurance. The scoring which is a count down thing is equally elegant. Binarily speaking, the scoring dynamic is perfectly symmetric maths wise. It is difficult in any field to create stuff like that. Your quest is either going to follow a path of synthesis or analysis; like either integral or differential calculus. People either assemble pieces or tkae the whole apart. To succeeed you have to work carefully. I start with the variables of the market and their relationship. Then I culled a small universe of market performers which were delineated by their performance excellence and repeatability. From that point on making money was just a routine use of properly fashioned tools that were of equal quality. A triad of tools apply. Scoring to answer three questions: Where are we? What is next? and how fast is it changing? To focus I rotate streams of money, where the focus is on a minimum of performers per day. To do this I need to know the hold period and thus the compound interest formula variables. The formula dictates the relative importance of the variables; in order they are: time, profit and initial capital. these things being true, I have a monitoring approach to be effective and efficient. This is where the "hot list" log comes in. You can see how the P, V relationship is put to work. By now also you see that prediction is not a tool and you see that people who do not use market variables are utterly screwed in making money and especially in competing with others who do. As you get closer to the market potential you come up against regulatory monitoring. It is easier to make money outside the regulatory constraints or to test them for their flexibility. The most effective external support for making money is to have the maket push your trades. you can see from the hot list log that it is oriented to entries just after the most important market of the market vaiables comes into operation, and before price begins to move. By doing this, and trading money levels that are visible, you run into the regulatory detection system. If you are an amateur this heightens the situation I am told. Today in this arena, it is a regulatory requirement to periodically prove that you are an amateur. NB: You can weed out participants in forums according to their short comings vis a vis knowledge base. My weeding short list goes like this: 1. absence of volume in "system" 2. being "stuck" in a place that precludes consideration of "new" info. 3. absence of use of time to determine priorities in strategy. 4. absence of skills. Monitoring, analysis, decision making, scope of interest) 5. absence of success using the compound interest formula to make money. (no knowing time over rides profits per cycle in particular) 6. absence of forward testing program. 7. absence of mechanism to remove capital from system. 8. absence of sequence in transferring capital from one market to another because of market limitations. 9. a focus on non essential and non market related stuff. 10. an orientation to criticism instead of critiquing. So you can see that you are a quality person here who is in a "seeking" orientation from an organized point of view. SOP means Standard Operating Procedure. I am sorry I used an unfamiliar short hand. My electrical engineering and physics background also screws up my comments to the layman type person or people who are unfamiliar with money in quantity. Good luck in your travels.
These are "hold" and recycle (buy again) stocks. The MSFT was our reference indicator stock. You can see it is saying making money is easy. these three data logs round outthe daily monitoring for 8 DEC 97. From this you can get a picture of how the universe worked. It was set up in TC2000 ver3. At that time I sorted the universe with seven equeations that yielded stocks ready to BO (called 0's from scoring); stocks BOing (called 7's) and stocks that were running just behind the 0's ( called 1's). The seven equations are in the public domain at this point. In 97 the mutual fund tradingwas messing up people's equations becasue of block trading. I set up one of the equations to eliminate the block trading in the normal data flow. It is what is called in computer hardware a "gating" function. I did a software maths equivalent on TC2000 ver3. Version 3 is no longer supported since y2k but the equations are useful on any software.
Mr. Hershey, I want to thank you now, as I will be spending the next week working out the miriad of information and ideas you have provided me. I feel a bit foolish for not having known "SOP," but I suppose this is the price I pay for being young. Luckily my father, an engineer, has begun aiding me in my efforts. I have noted your list well and could not agree more, can't say this is a positive sign for the race, but it does seem to be a human constant. Hawking wrote of his ordeal with the Catholic church who, after inviting him and his fellows to explain their new ideas on the limitations of the big bang singularity and how it may be circumnavigated, proceeded to instruct him not to disrupt what was so perfect an explanation of the origins of the universe. I believe a key misunderstanding most have is that the beauty of simplicity is the great effort expended in making the complex simple. In the future I will have much better questions to ask and only hope you will continue to have the time and inclination to reply. Thanks again, Richard
Jack Hershey, Over the past couple weeks I have periodically reviewed your posts in this thread. My misunderstanding of MFAC was that I hadn't realized it was a stock - I thought it was and indicator because it didn't come up when I entered the ticker on the WSJ site. Your second round of posts made me realize my error and I did some research on the issue around the dates in question. I still cannot figure how DU is determined, the best I could come up with was that it is related to a moving average of the issue's volume but that appears to be incorrect. I understand the concept, I think, but can't come close on the calculation. In any case, I see where you are going but need to get some things in order before I can give it a real effort. Right now I am organizing my charting software and learning a bit better how to program with its language. I am doing a quasi-comprehensive research of the indicators that have been developed over the years and testing some ideas. Also, I have been integrating intraday data into my analysis which has thus far only consisted of daily data. I am a 'parts to synthesis' type of fellow and because I am just getting started don't feel comfortable with the number of parts I have at my disposal. I am working on it though, and look forward to being able to converse with you further. Regard, RLB