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 : Ultra OTC Fund - UOPIX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Todd Reichardt who wrote (797)	11/4/2000 10:32:03 AM
From: bob wallace	Respond to of 2063

absoluely right I just used data that I happen to have had availabe - also data for UOPIX prior to March '99 is a bit shakey (lots of weird splits, some of which seem to be accounted for, some not) anyway, I was testing the plan on QQQ and unfortunately QQQ just doesnt have the juice to come up with the return - dont catch those super one day moves... to make up for the loss of UOPIX data I will simulated by taking a base price ($50 or whatever, and then subjecting it to 2x the daily NDX moves) - of particular importance to me is how the system would have performed during the remarkable run from fall '99 to March '00.... also, the idea of "stranded" buys worries me, for example, purchases made right at the March '00 peak would still be on the books - "dead money" Bob

To: Todd Reichardt who wrote (797)	11/5/2000 12:49:56 PM
From: bob wallace	Respond to of 2063

ok Todd I have tested 10/20/99 to 5/1/00 which day was the last gasp of the attempt to go back up.... during that time there were 35k in trading profits,on 5/1 the account was up 31% (which of course started to decline the next day) there were 406 shares at an average price of $113.43 that I would call stranded shares (ie the market did nor rise enough to sell them), so the next step is to see if there is enough activity generated to reduce the average cost enough to allow the shares to be sold at a 5% profit there were two periods (one including most of the month of N0vemeber) in which there were no trades because the NDX did not go down at least 1% on any one day and thus there were no shares to sell - there are a number of ways to combat this, one of which is to simply allow purchases on days when there is a decline of any size, this would have resulted in many more trades -ALSO, during this period very little capital was employed, which might have resulted in larger trades being taken if one was watching the merket the rise in the NDX from 10/20 to 5/01 was 51% -- at its max the NDX was up 86% Bob

To: Todd Reichardt who wrote (797)	11/5/2000 2:16:44 PM
From: bob wallace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2063

ok now I followed up from 5/1 when the market started to decline in earnst, and instead of taking cash profits in the following trades, each sell was for the same amount as the buy, thus taking profits in shares and not cash... end result was that by 6/9 I had 750 shares at an average price of 82.50, compared to 406 shares at an average price of 133 on 5/1 - at that point the account was up 35%, meaning that the account had a 4% gain during the period that the UOPIX declined from 91 to 82.50 what to do with the now cheaper shares is up for grabs, a person scared by the big decline might be inclined to sell at a modest profit and start again... of course the optimist would keep the shares for the next big parabolic rise Bob Bob