Registered User
Joined: 4/28/2006
Posts: 21
|
Hi,
is it possible to create a relaitve strength PCF that compares a symbol to the SPY and that can be used in the watchlist (and therefore with sorts/easyscans)?
I am looking for something like: XYZ closed up 5%, the Spiders 1%. The PCF should then return 5/1=5.
Thanks for your help.
Regards,
DC
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 4/28/2006
Posts: 21
|
Sorry forgot something. Correction:
QUOTE (dclauss)
Hi,
is it possible to create a relative strength PCF that compares a symbol to the SPY and that can be used in the watchlist (and therefore with sorts/easyscans)?
I am looking for something like: XYZ closed rose 5% in the last 5 days, the Spiders only 1% in the same period of time. The PCF should then return 5/1=5.
Thanks for your help.
Regards,
DC
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/28/2005
Posts: 6,049
|
You can put SPY in your watchlist.
Sort the watchlist by any % change you
want to create.
(or a custom date sort)
The stocks that are above will be the
stronger stocks.
(if you are set up to sort strongest
to weakest)
Thanks
diceman
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 4/28/2006
Posts: 21
|
Thanks for your answer, Diceman.
Unfortunately this doesnt solve my problem. To be more specifc:
I would like to do a relative strength scan for the last five days between the S&P500 and all Hemscott Sub-Industry indices. Based on this scan I want to produce 3 different scan outputs: group 1 contains the top 20 indices, group 2 the 20 worst performing indices and group 3 the rest of the indices. If there isn´t a way to automate this, I will have to do it by hand which is sort of annoying....
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 18,819
|
We cannot reference a specific ticker in the PCF language.
If you are looking for the best or worst performing industries, just sort the WatchList by a price performance condition.
The ones with the highest price performance also have the highest relative strength to the SPY or anything else.
Check this out: Uncover the stocks driving the strongest industry groups
*note Hemscott is the new Media General
- Craig
Here to Help!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 4/28/2006
Posts: 21
|
Thanks Craig, will check that out!
DC
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 18,819
|
My pleasure
- Craig
Here to Help!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
QUOTE (Craig_S) The ones with the highest price performance also have the highest relative strength to the SPY or anything else.
Craig,
What measure of "Price Performance" and what definition of "Relative Strength" do you intend in the above statement?
For example:
1) If a) Price Performance is price percent change and b) Relative Strength is the ratio of closing prices of the item to the index, then the statement is false.
2) If a) Price Performance is price percent change and b) Relative Strength is the ratio of price percent change of the item to price percent change of the index, then the statement is false. (This is the Relative Strength suggested by dclauss and should never be formed.)
3) If a) Price Performance is price percent change and b) Relative Strength is the difference of price percent change of the item and price percent change of the index, then the statement is true.
4) If a) Price Performance is LRSlope of price and b) Relative Strength is the LRSlope of the ratio of price of the item to price of the index, then the statement is false.
5) If a) Price Performance is LRSlope of the logarithm of price and b) Relative Strength is the LRSlope of the logarithm of the ratio price of the item to price of the index, then the statement is true.
I am sure that I did not just happen upon your intended meaning of Price Performance and Relative Strength in 3) or 5); hence, the reason for the question.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/24/2006
Posts: 131
|
Craig, mention the MoCS Pane in the Blocks Player. Very Helpful for me.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/24/2006
Posts: 131
|
That would be rather redundant, I guess, huh?
If anyone's interested:
Stocks, Futures, and Options Magazine November 2006
"Developing an Idea into an Indicator" By Christopher P. Hendrix
Especially if you're not sure you understand the concepts of relative and comparative strength...yet.
This method makes it very easy to analyze the comparative strength of any combination of two:
indices, stocks, ETFs, Industries, etc.
I've got:
Symbol vs IND, Symbol vs GROUP, GROUP vs IND, GROUP vs Indices (S&P 500, COMPQ, DJIA, etc), IND vs Indices, Symbol vs ETFs: Small-cap, Large-cap, Value, Growth, Sector...
However much time you're willing to spend on it, I guess.
Craig built one and posted it. (A search of MoCS in Ask a Trainer should bring it up). I find it very helpful when faced with toss-up questions. This quote from the author sums the article up best IMHO:
"[MoCS replaces the question]: 'What will be an outperforming stock?' [with] 'What stocks are getting better and better in their performance versus the broad market?'"
Just a suggestion,
Kevin
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/24/2006
Posts: 131
|
Used in tandem with the previous link Craig posted above, some hard work could reveal some very strong sectors on which to focus your studies.
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 18,819
|
bustermu,
We've covered these ideas of relative strength before together. I think you can guess my meaning now.
- Craig
Here to Help!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
QUOTE (Craig_S) We've covered these ideas of relative strength before together. I think you can guess my meaning now.
Craig,
Since this is an open forum for the benefit of all users, I don't see why any guess by me as to what you mean by "Price Performance" and "Relative Strength" is relevent. I believe you more capable of explaining your meaning than I.
I supplied two combinations of meanings for "Price Performance" and "Relative Strength" which would make your statement true and three combinations which would make it false, but I have no idea what you actually meant by the two terms.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 18,819
|
#3
- Craig
Here to Help!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
Craig,
Thanks for your response.
For the general user:
1) The usual definition of the Relative Strength Indicator is:
The ratio of closing prices of the item to the index.
2) For this thread, Craig is defining Relative Strength to be:
The difference of price percent change of the item and price percent change of the index.
It should be noted that today's value for 2) cannot be obtained from the history of the values of the Indicator 1).
It should also be noted that if a WatchList is ordered by the percent change of the Indicator in 1) and then by 2), the orderings will be identical.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 18,819
|
For my own curiosity; when someone asks to scan for the stocks with the highest relative strength to the SP-500 what do you think they are asking for?
- Craig
Here to Help!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
QUOTE (Craig_S) For my own curiosity; when someone asks to scan for the stocks with the highest relative strength to the SP-500 what do you think they are asking for?
Craig,
I would think they probably made a mistake and would ask them what they meant by relative strength just as I did you.
You have provided an interesting topic. What measures of "Price Performance" when applied to Stocks puts them in the same order as when applied to the Relative Strength Indicator of the Stocks.
Price percent change satisfies the condition. Any linear filter applied to the logarithm of price satisfies the condition.
Let C be the stock closing price sequence and let X be the index closing price sequence. Let C/X be the sequence of Relative Strength Indicator values. Let the real function G on positive sequences be so that G( C ) is the measure of Price Performance. It can be shown that the above examples satisfy:
G( C ) = A( X )*G( C/X ) + B( X )
for some real functions A and B on positive sequences with A strictly positive.
That is as far as I have gone with the problem.
Craig, Thanks again for the interesting topic.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
|
Guest-1 |