Richard, actually, I prefer not to use Dahl because of the delays. But it will get you onto a trending issue. Compared to Dahl, this little system gets you in and out earlier. As for INTC, as Brookelise brought up, Snce Dec1995 it has about 57% successful trades, trading about once per month. The gain was pretty modest, but it lost it's clout whenever INTC started ranging. Also, Dahl takes a certain length run to pay off decently -- it you stumble into a stock that starts ranging, Dahl will eat you alive...
Hey, this thing isn't perfect; I rely on a little body english from time to time. It's unlikely that I would have used the get-out parameter of 6 for this particular stock. Try 13 and see what happens! But, your advice to "go home with the one you brung" still rings true -- If I chose 13, assuming I had some good reason for choosing it, I wouldn't change it in mid stream without a damn good reason... If I didn't have a good reason, I wouldn't use this little system!
For example, I bumped it up to 50 in and 21 out and got these results:
From March '94 to date...
FM 80% winning trades
WTT 75% winning trades
SABA 100% winning trades
INTC 67% winning trades
I didn't scan to find these, they were just a few I knew had a pretty good trend going somewhere in their three year history.
But, throw it on a ranging stock, such as CGEN and see what happens!! Bad news!!
I guess my overall point is that I personally don't like to throw what I call "preselection" criteria into the formulas I would use to make buy/sell decisions. The formulas get too big and cumbersome and hard to understand, and I'm fairly handy around formulas. I prefer to have the formulas quite simple when I get to the "decision" point so that I can tell exactly what it is that is telling me to buy or sell.
By the way, Dahl fits that description to a "T" and I wouldn't hesitate to use it for an instant, if I thought it was best for the situation.
That's all.
Regards...Bill |
