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 : TA-Quotes Plus -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Howard R. Hansen who wrote (4974)	6/27/1998 4:04:00 AM
From: gonzongo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11149

Dear Howard: First of all I agree with you- Ta is best for periods less than 6 months- Or rather- I have not identified indicators which assist for longer periods. FA is more helpful for longer periods. My problem is that I have not been able to identify FA formulae which significantly improve over TA formulae for any period of time. Price to Sales Ratio is a well documented exception to that- but alas QP does not seem to be able to calculate it for prior periods enough to do comparative testing. I am not trying to be funny- I have spent hundreds of hours due to my background as a CPA trying to sucessfully scan based on fundamentals to improve trading results. It did not happen- thus I recycled those scans. I am not trying to argue with you just trying to find what works. PS- Bruce Brotnov has some very good fundamental criteria which have worked well for him. g

To: Howard R. Hansen who wrote (4974)	6/27/1998 4:31:00 AM
From: Richard Estes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11149

I am sure that Brooke and Gonz was very serious. Drawdowns reflect how low you equity would have gone during year. Even buy and holders would want to set thru a 50% drop. I am glad we have funnymentals in QP2. If we ever find a correlation to price from any of them; I would use it.

To: Howard R. Hansen who wrote (4974)	6/27/1998 5:40:00 AM
From: gonzongo	Respond to of 11149

Howard_ ithink I have a pseudo Price to sales scan. I used my stochastic example and then sorted based on my prtosales ratio. Errors may be within the results- hopefully someone can check it. scan: output="prtosales.lst"; float pctgain, prtosales; pctgain:=((close(-121)/close(-374))-1)100; set stochastic = 89,34,3; if sharesout>0 then prtosales:=close(-374)/((qtrrev(-6)4/1000)/(sharesout+.00001)+.000001); if close(-374)>1 and StochasticPctK(-374) > 15 and stochasticPctK(-374) stochasticPctK(-379) then println symbol,",",close(-374):6:3,",",close(-121):6:3,",",pctgain:5:3,",",(qtrrev(-6)*4/1000):7:2,",",sharesout:7:2,",",prtosales:7:2; endif;endif; I then dumped results in a spread sheet Price to sales ratio # of hits pct gain over a year zero value 40 20.96 0 to .26 19 7.79 .27 to .50 30 20.54 .51 to .75 51 25.15 .76 to 1.00 40 25.60 1.01 to 1.50 39 19.43 1.51 to 2.00 20 28.61 2.01 to 3.00 32 40.00 3.00 to 5.00 20 30.12 over 5 27 20.40 entire group 318 24.13 The test would imply that price to sales ratios above 1.5 and less than 3.00 would give better results- I am not sure that this correlates with your study. g

To: Howard R. Hansen who wrote (4974)	6/27/1998 3:13:00 PM
From: TechTrader42	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11149

I wasn't being funny, Howard. Quite honestly, I just haven't found a fundamental scan that consistently helps me make more money than the plain ole technical scans -- at least not yet. For the most part, I look for stocks in strong uptrends that are breaking through resistance, and I don't care what color the ink is in the ledgers at the home office -- black, red, or in the case of Sunbeam, perhaps, disappearing. Internet stocks have soared despite the fact that all the earnings are "expected." One of the reasons I use Quotes Plus 2 is that it provides fundamental data and makes it possible to do fundamental scans. I have used some of Bob Sage's EPS/Relative Strength scans. Lately, though, during the Internet frenzy, I've been relying more on technical indicators and scans. So that's the whole truth, with all its doubts and contradictions. I'd be pleased to see any ideas you have on fundamental scans. We really haven't deserted the cause. We're just going with what seems to work right now. On Monday, that could change. I still run Canslim scans from time to time, still add QRS to some scans, still sometimes fall back on the best of the fundamental scans I've seen -- those by Bob Sage. Brooke