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 : Waiting for the big Kahuna -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: James F. Hopkins who wrote (21845)	7/19/1998 5:14:00 PM
From: Monty Lenard	Respond to of 94695

Jim I am finding some of the divergences you speak of and will be posting some results shortly. Soon as I can figure out how to format the info for SI.<g> Monty

To: James F. Hopkins who wrote (21845)	7/19/1998 5:42:00 PM
From: Monty Lenard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 94695

Jim, Having a hard time making this format correctly for SI. I have run scans on the S&P 600 using every MA I can think of and have decided that all they do is mirror the volatility of this market. I then decided to look at New Highs vs New Lows (talk about re-inventing the wheel<g>) on the S&P 600. The 1st set of scans were for 3/30/98 thru 04/07/98 during which time the S&P 600 set a new inter day high on 04/03/98 but failed to close at the New High. Notice that on 4/2/98 and 4/3/98, the Adv Issues less the Dec Issues were going negative(one of your divergences)! While writing this I am thinking "What am I doing here" because I feel sure many who read this will say .... "Why is this dumba telling me something I already know". I look at a lot of this daily but fail to catch the "Small" changes that I have seen you refer to. Only by running these scans and studying the results as I wait for more scans to run have I "really" seen the "small" divergences you speak off! Also, reducing this to writing has forced me to really SEE what happened; therefore, I do not consider it a waste of time (at least for me).When you look at 4/2/98 and see that the A-D difference was only -29, it seems unimportant or not enough to matter. But, when you look at the day before when the A-D was +223 and the fact that on 4/2/98 the S&P 600 set a new closing high with a negative A-D....bells & whistles need to start going off in your head. Also, 4/3/98 is very important in that the negative A-D increased over the day before and the S&P 600 tried to set a new high but FAILED! My next observation is that on 4/21/98 and 4/22/98 the warning was more suttle. On 4/21/98 the A-D was a +191 and on 4/22/98 it went to a -75. This is a pretty big swing IMHO yet on 4/22/98 we had only a small down day (-.41). Notice that on 4/23/98 the negative A-D really gained momentum as it did on 4/3/98 & 4/6/98. Now, on 4/28/98 we start back up confirmed by the A-D but on 5/1/98 the A-D momentum slows and on 5/4/98 the A-D goes negative while the S&P 600 sets a new Intermediate High (look out below)! Then, on 5/5/98 we fail to follow through and make another Intermediate High and our A-D negative momentum really picks up! On 5/13/98 we got a turn to the positive on the A-D of the S&P 600 (notice the small swing) but the NYSE A-D did not confirm and sure enough 5/14/98 the S&P 600 A-D goes negative and again we continue down. Notice that the NYSE A-D for the same periods confirmed my scans of the S&P 600. Now I may be reading too much into this but one thing I DO KNOW is that the warnings are very suttle (as you have said before) and difficult to see unless you look at your indicators VERY CLOSELY. I have convinced myself (by reinventing the wheel) that the A-D, etc.(internals) are probably MY best indicator of pending trouble! I am going to continue testing using a comparison of the A-D's and NH-NL's for all the major indices to see if I can find divergences between them unless you point me in a different direction. I will also do some scans on the OEX. Monty S&P600 NYSE Adv Dec Date A-D A-D Issues Issues 3/30/98 -491 -72 237 309 3/31/98 888 262 414 152 4/1/98 515 223 393 170 4/2/98 558 -29 268 297 4/3/98 87 -57 241 298 4/6/98 -409 -164 197 361 4/7/98 -1200 -338 112 450 4/8/98 -411 -38 259 297 4/9/98 761 365 467 102 4/13/98 -458 -138 206 344 4/14/98 789 197 372 175 4/15/98 143 47 297 250 4/16/98 -986 -173 193 366 4/17/98 593 88 317 229 4/20/98 -175 33 286 253 4/21/98 190 191 370 179 4/22/98 -125 -75 230 305 4/23/98 -1301 -292 126 418 4/24/98 -1191 -229 156 385 4/27/98 -2547 -440 65 505 4/28/98 675 144 343 199 4/29/98 845 197 370 173 4/30/98 1588 247 404 157 5/1/98 700 113 332 219 5/4/98 113 -40 258 298 5/5/98 -669 -201 170 371 5/6/98 -697 -112 217 329 5/7/98 -905 -177 185 362 5/8/98 684 152 348 196 5/11/98 -374 -103 223 326 5/12/98 -177 -48 243 291 5/13/98 -112 52 300 248 5/14/98 -462 -213 167 380 5/15/98 -599 -186 179 365 5/18/98 -1118 -244 148 392 5/19/98 419 204 374 170 5/20/98 24 -165 193 358 5/21/98 -235 92 321 229 5/22/98 -740 -190 185 375 5/26/98 -1365 -401 85 486 5/27/98 -1321 -310 123 433 5/28/98 877 271 415 144 5/29/98 474 36 287 251 6/1/98 -632 -224 164 388 6/2/98 -41 -108 220 328 6/3/98 -171 -15 263 278 6/4/98 387 183 360 177 6/5/98 888 39 282 243 6/8/98 372 79 310 231 6/9/98 -364 -96 220 316 6/10/98 -1044 -300 126 426 6/11/98 -1666 -281 133 414 6/12/98 -808 -168 193 361 6/15/98 -1650 -396 85 481 6/16/98 680 215 374 159 6/17/98 1282 203 377 174 6/18/98 -848 -256 146 402 6/19/98 -612 -124 204 328 6/22/98 110 140 338 198 6/23/98 639 156 349 193 6/24/98 470 137 336 199 6/25/98 -389 27 287 260 6/26/98 146 82 310 228 6/29/98 637 75 314 239 6/30/98 418 89 320 231 7/1/98 1162 88 324 236 7/2/98 113 -28 254 282 7/6/98 459 22 288 266 7/7/98 54 -79 225 304 7/8/98 491 7 274 267 7/9/98 -454 9 268 259 7/10/98 -327 -102 218 320 7/13/98 -442 4 267 263 7/14/98 573 8 267 259 7/15/98 -130 67 301 234 7/16/98 484 -19 259 278 7/17/98 -136 -43 243 286 Well, at least the table came out OK even if the text is a Cluster----