>>>>From a practical point of view, I've been using Value Line for >>>>>>>over 20 years, and I've found that it consistently beats the >>
>>>>market. VL commissioned some academic people to look into their >
>>>>claims, and the studies confirmed VL's assertion that their #1 >
>>>>timeliness picks significantly out-performed the market. The
>>>>people who performed the studies frankly admitted their surprise >
>>>>at the results, and forced them to ammend their views of the >
>>>>"efficient market hypothesis"
Paul,
I find these things interesting, too. I doubt I have the background in Mathematics to realize these studies myself, however.
Refering to the above, I wonder whether the time element is taken into account thoroughly enough. That is, when it hits some analyst from VL's mind that he will issue a 1 for a particular stock, at what time is the stock value measured to see its effect. I have no doubt that someone knows this VL rating ahead of time, just as in insider trading. By the time the 'masses' get the info it is too late. Value Line is in itself influential enough to move a stock...thus it becomes self fulfilling profecy if the stock moves up. It would be like going up to some analyst and having him tell you that he will issue a buy tomorrow. It is great for the one person who knows ahead of time, but since it is unrealistic to assume we will know then it is hardly useful to take this 'news' into account for a study. The market just absorbs the info too quickly for you and me, but not for the one doing the 'study' -- that is, the one who "knows". I'm not sure I am making myself clear, but perhaps you will get my drift....hey its late.
I have rarely had inside info, but in the couple of times I have, it was unreal how the stock reacted to this "unpublished" news. This, of course, is the argument FOR TA.
Anyway, if CLE doesn't follow through from this 'breakout', will Jason concede anything?
As Spock would say: 'Fascinating'
B. |
