Whoa, fellas!
I was talking about two weeks not six hours! I was soliciting the opinions of daytraders because they have worked on short time horizons. As for the live feed, aren't there plenty of services that will give intraday charts twenty minutes delayed? I think that is all I'd need for my purposes. The IQC chart goes back more than a month using the hourly ticks. Daytraders would probably use a live feed and five minute charts, but I was just wondering what indicators and time scales to use for WINS-based CCing with a one month time frame on the calls. Sometimes that means two or even three transactions per play, as in my Edify example. I was thinking that perhaps that is too short a time frame for volume indicators to spot accumulation, but that is why you'd use the daily charts to pick the stock in the first place.
A while ago I asked Herm for some chart interpretation help regarding PAIR. It had run up 20%, there were two weeks left to expiration on the nearest series, and I was thinking of writing at that point. Herm said it would keep going, so I didn't. Well, I didn't think to ask what timeframe Herm was using. If we look at PAIR six weeks later, he was right. But I would have been better off doing the short term CC, as PAIR gave back ground one more time before making its current run. It was this little incident that got me thinking about all this. Oh, it turned out all right. I made 15% or so in couple of months on PAIR, but I thought I could have done better playing weekly swings. I am currently looking at twice that return with three transactions in one month on Edify.
Whatever, I hope the discussion continues for a while. Many of us here use a style somewhat different from Herm's. These styles have their pros and cons depending on what one is trying to do. Dave Wright discussed the merits of the one month time frame, while Herm is more of a long and deep kind of guy (bet you tell that to all the ladies, Herm :~}). I'm more in Dave's camp, and I thought it might be useful to develop a WINS TA system for that approach, is all. I'm thinking the optimal system might be a bit different.
I hope I've made myself clear, now.
More comment hoped for.
Cheers, Tuck |
