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.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: On the QT who wrote (76770)	11/5/1998 5:33:00 PM
From: On the QT	Respond to of 176387

Here is the correct explanation regarding: Institutional Sponsorship Rating:" averages the 3-year performance rating of all mutual funds owning that stock plus the trend in recent quarters of the total number of funds owning the stock (A=best, E=worst)". QT

To: On the QT who wrote (76770)	11/5/1998 5:36:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

QT, perhaps I did not make myself clear in my previous post. The point behind my remarks is that one cannot divine whether a stock is being accumulated by certain investors indirectly. O'Neill is fond of making all kinds of outrageous claims, including this accumulation/distribution metric which is a proprietary method to to discern something that is by nature unverifiable. The fact that it is not in the public domain precludes serious discussion of what, if anything, it measures. All we have is his word for it. I think a healthy amount of skepticism is called for whenever TA statistics are trotted out, and this one is no different. Additionally, the presumption is somehow that institutional ownership is a positive influence on stock prices. I don't know of any study that shows this, but as I recall, there are lots of studies that show that mutual funds taken as a whole tend to underperform the market. TTFN, CTC