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: Bruce A. Bowman who wrote (5029)	7/12/1998 9:38:00 PM
From: JZGalt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18928

I assume that all the 7/8/97 numbers are really 7/8/98 (last Wed.). Correct. I prefer the method that plots pairs Nice method. I'll give it a look. find that some are less ideal than you'd like I knew that going in. The portfolio was composed of 5 long term potential winners within the industry and not selected for their suitability to "AIM". In setting up buy/sell resistance (SAFE), I'd suggest not working too hard at setting the buy or the sell to hit the exact low or high. Agreed. I doubt if I will change them now that they have been "optimized" for the data set I used. I've spent many years in the process control industry and are well aware of the tendency to use the data beyond it's normal limitations. I'm clearly pushing the envelope here by assuming what was optimum in the past is the optimum for the future. stocks with lower beta values probably benefit the most from non-standard settings of buy/sell SAFE (resistance). That's good, because if you look at some of these stocks over a very long period of time, the beta is actually below 1.0. Clearly not AIM material as you pointed out. PC has been an elusive parameter in the AIM algorithm. Fresh territory huh? If I have time I'll try to look at some means of working with or around it. <grin> ---- Dave