Thean, You're right, IRQ stochastic charts and the numerical printouts from "Second Opinion" give different indications. I've tried to generate these with Telechart 2000 to get some idea what settings are used, can more or less reproduce things for IRQ, but haven't come close for S.O. Using short term settings for the moving averages (3 and 5 days) gives curves intermediate between the two, around 70% for the frontrunners down to 30% for laggards. Telechart requires one enter a "period" in addition to the two M.A.'s. which can change things a bit, but a value reproducing S.O. still eludes me.
Anyway, here are some numbers; first IRQ's approx. level, then the slow and fast numbers from S.O. In the past, IRQ has worked better, the exception being the last peak.
CDG IRQ (30) S.O. (76, 98)
DO IRQ (33) S.O. (80, 83)
ESV IRQ (30) S.O. (86, 93)
FLC IRQ (45) S.O. (86, 88)
GW IRQ (20) S.O. (74, 77)
KEG IRQ (22) S.O. (89, 92)
MDCO IRQ (30) S.O. (79, 83)
NE IRQ (38) S.O. (93, 95)
PTEN IRQ (30) S.O. (82, 86)
RIG IRQ (40) S.O. (91, 93)
UTI IRQ (27) S.O. (94, 94)
I noticed that of the stocks P.Eng dissed (g), PTEN, (despite its' prominent day on Tues.) is really in the middle of the pack as far as stochastics. GW seems relatively low and CDG is mixed. The problem I have with P.Eng. is that he is known for his FA analysis, but throws in TA without distinguishing which is being discussed. Is GW "ahead" on the basis of TA or PE. Why CDG at a PE of 11? Oh well, maybe some criticism will bring him onto the board.
Good luck,
Jeff
|
