Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : A.I.M Users Group Bulletin Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aptus who wrote (13056)	10/9/2000 11:47:47 AM
From: labestul	Respond to of 18928

Hi Mark, I just received your personal email requesting that I check some results of your implementation. I will be getting back to you soon via return personal email. I agree that the parameters should be under the control of the user. For example the 15% limit could be set higher or lower with perhaps different levels for up and down, The period of time (e.g. 250) could be changed as well as the number of days (i.e. 131) in the average price calculation. Also should the day be based on the mid-point of the average period or the end-point or some other point? Why not put all of these in the user's control? But if too much user control were allowed the resulting measures might have no relative meaning. Right now the measure has relative (but no absolute) meaning. Thus in comparing two stocks if one has a volatility rating of 400 say ... this does not necessarily mean that it is an AIM candidate. It only means that this stock is more likely to be a suitable AIM candidate than a stock which rates only 300. Of course both might be good candidates or perhaps neither would be a good candidate. If users were allowed to change parameters than this could create a whole set of problems. For example stock A has rating 400 and stock B only 300 but each under a differing set of parameters. Now we don't know for sure which stock is more likely to be the better AIM candidate. We would also need to compare the parameters and if the differences in parameters were too great we might not be able to make sense of them. If the 250 day limit were changed than the final rating would have to be scaled in some way to produce a measure between 0 and 1,000. Otherwise we could have a situation with stock A had a rating of 400 under a 250 day parameter and a rating of 800 under a 500 day parameter but it is the same stock with the same volatility. Anyway these were just some random thoughts. I do think that could be some control of parameters under user control but that any misuse of the ensuing results should be clearly only the user's responsibility. Barry