That's an interesting question that I too have been thinking about. Look at the tables at osxstocks.com
I feel that for the most part, the stocks that took the biggest hit in a downcycle will have the greatest potential for appreciation in an upcycle.
If you look at the 26 stocks that got hit hardest (fell 75% or more) in the "Great Decline" from October 1997 to August 1998, they had an average gain of 50% in the first up cycle. The average gain for those 15 stocks that fell less than 75% was only 35%.
During the second upcycle (which we are in now) since the "great decline" those 26 stocks that fell more than 75% originally have gained an average of 29% -vs- 24% for the good performers.
Now lets look at the worst performers of the first downcylce after the first upcycle after the "great decline". The stocks that fell 33% or more during this downcycle have gone up an average of 30% so far. The others have gone up 25% so far.
Of course most of this can probably be explained because of the increased volatility of the worst performers. Notable exceptions to this rule are HMAR, MIND, UTI, ATW, FGII, and TBI. All these are volatile stocks and have taken the worst poundings during the "great decline" and the most recent downcycle. And yet they are less than 20% above their recent lows. Of course this up cycle is not yet over and maybe (if your theory is right) they will do the best in the next few days. It will be interesting to see. I have a big stake in FGII so I hope you are right.
Just for the record, the laggards in this upcycle so far are:
HMAR (up 7%), MIND (9%), GMRK (11%), UTI (15%), ATW (16%), FGII (17%), TBI (17%), SLB (19%), RIG (20%), JRM (20%), PDS (20%), SESI (20%), ESV (21%), and PKD (21%).
osxstocks.com |
