Registered User
Joined: 8/23/2005
Posts: 7
|
Hello everyone. Im new to trading and TA. Recently (prior to obtaining TC) I purchased 3 stocks. This is the one that I " regretted" getting into. Now Im not so sure. After watching some of the Worden videos, I noticed they looked in multi day formats ( something I never knew was possible) to view possible new breakouts. I also had never heard of TSV ( Im impressed and plan on using it alot).
Anyhow .... this 1 day chart looks pretty stagnant. Something I should have waited on for some type of commitment in either direction. However, after seeing the Wordens view in several multi day settings I decided I would take a peek .....
In the 3 day view, the TSV Divergence looks great. Am I interpreting this correctly? Also I noticed with BOP that since the beginning of August its been on a pretty consistent rise.
To be quite honest I was gonna dump this thing tomorrow morning until I saw some of these things in the 3 day perspective. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Not sure if Im seeing things correctly. Incidently for the trading style Im considering following is short term. I don't wanna daytrade by any means.
TIA
John
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/30/2005
Posts: 7
|
Hi,
I'm not an expert by any means; but I go equally with support and resistance levels and chart formations, in addition to the indicators. Both charts look similar to me. Regarding ARBA - To me, The overall trend is down, and currently there is a consolidation taking place. The stock has tried to get past 6.11 and is having a hard time; it looks to me like the daily range is narrowing. The only thing to be sure is that the price is going to go one way or the other. It looks to me like it's more likely to continue the overall trend and break down, but since you are already in you can hold and wait - but it's got to break 6.92 before it's a genuine long play. Your stop should be below that low point of the consolidation (i can't read the price). Regarding the indicators, it's true you have a favorable TSV and BOP, but MS is negative, and if you look closely, the last peak of TSV is lower than the next to last and it may be crossing back below it's 10 period MA. of all 3 indicators, I think the MS is more important.
Good Luck ... Now, you can return the favor and tell me what will CAT do today???
 Happy Trading!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
John,
Peter Worden frequently uses 67 as a parameter for TSV. Please look at TSV67 Simple on the three day chart (before any further updating) and tell what you think.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/23/2005
Posts: 7
|
First off .... my apologies for these oversized charts /sigh. They appeared to fit nicely in the preview window.
Thanx for the replies.
Joelfour ... actually when I purchased this thing it was simply something I wanted to watch. I made a note that a target price on it should be at 6.90. (Thanx for sharing the info on a possible long purchase @ 6.92 .... gives me a little confidence that I wasnt too far off the mark from what a seasoned trader might see.)
Wasnt much else happening that day and all of a sudden I noticed it hit 6.90. I have trouble "pulling the trigger" so figured I should get over it and go with my initial instinct ( which I'm still questioning).
Bustermu ... ouch. That looked rather ugly. Actually the chart template above is a Warden Template I saw several times in the Worden notes. I wasnt ( and still arent) sure what settings I should use for the shorter term investment. I "assumed" that the 18TSV in 3 day would in theory be an indication of the momentum over the last couple months? Hehe ... now Im confusing myself. Is this correct .... ave of 3 days = 1 period?
Unfortunately Buster I already updated this evening /sigh. However, using the 67TSV in 3 day mode is still horrific. On the daily 67TSV I would guess is tolerable, showing positive divergence from mid May thru the latter part of August. Using the 67TSV in 2 day appears to be heading north with strong positive divergence.
Im confused again 8). Guess Ill go try and do some more research on the subject. Am I correct in assuming that the 67TSV 3 day is still majorly reflecting the big downfall Jan/Feb.
What Im trying to figure out is what the appropriate period settings would be to get a feel what the consensus is from say ... April and thru this consolidation period.
Thanx again for the replies and please ... feel free to set me straight 8).
John
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
John,
The sole purpose of my post was to show that you are possibly being misled by TSV18 Simple. It is not TSV that is the culprit; it is the Simple Moving Average (SMA).
You asked:
"Am I correct in assuming that the 67TSV 3 day is still majorly reflecting the big downfall Jan/Feb?" (sic)
What is causing the recent fall in TSV67 Simple is the rise during Oct/Nov. In particular, for the 3 Day chart, the large drop in TSV67 Simple on 08/18/05 is caused by the large rise in Price and Volume on 11/01/04. Be sure your 3 Day chart is set so that these dates are closing dates.
Again, the problem illustrated is not one with TSV, it is a problem with SMA's.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 18,819
|
John,
You will notice that Peter and Don Worden often use different settings for their TSV. The period setting of the TSV determines how many bars/days will be averaged. A TSV18 averages less days than a TSV67. This makes the TSV18 more "short term" and more volatile.
I recomend playing around with several different TSV settings. You can have unlimited chart templates saved to your system... use them!
Over time you will find TSV settings that fit your style of analysis and your trading personality.
Never be afraid to change the TSV setting to "fit" the chart. Find the setting that seemed to work best for that stock. If the setting did a good job in the past with that particular stock would you have more faith in it working today?
Does this help?
- Craig
Here to Help!
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 4,308
|
John:
Here is a link that may interest you. In it, Peter Worden talks about TSV settings:
Peter Worden's TSV
- Doug
Teaching Online!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/18/2004
Posts: 180
|
Here's another tip that may be helpful. You're TSV18 is below the zero line. Anytime a moving average of TSV is below zero, it means theoretically that net distribution has occurred during that time frame, regardless of the effects of past data on the indicator.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
Craig,
You stated:
"You will notice that Peter and Don Worden often use different settings for their TSV."
Don Worden used TSV8 Simple in conjuction with TSV18 Simple on 05/12/05 and 05/13/05. I think he may have duplicated a TSV setting of Peter Worden's at one time. In any case, he uses TSV18 Simple almost exclusively and does not adjust TSV settings to "fit" the chart.
Peter Warden varies his TSV settings selecting different Periods between 10 and 67 and uses both Simple and Exponential. He speaks for himself on this topic at:
Peter Worden's TSV
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Worden Trainer
Joined: 10/1/2004
Posts: 18,819
|
I am not sure the purpose of your post, bustermu.
Both Don and Peter have used different settings in their notes. Truth be told, we have no idea what they use in their own personal analysis. We only know what we see in the notes.
I do not claim they "fit", I state to not be afraid to "fit".
You then link to a post by Peter that Doug already linked to above in this thread.
What is the goal of your post?
- Craig
Here to Help!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
Craig,
I stand corrected. Your statement:
"You will notice that Peter and Don Worden often use different settings for their TSV."
may very well be correct for those that know what settings the Wordens use in their personal analysis. I only know that Don Worden uses TSV18 Simple almost exclusively in his notes attached to charts.
My observation seemed at variance with your statement in the case of Don Worden. That was the sole purpose of my post. I felt it important that users know because they seem to garner his analyses.
My observation does agree with your statement in the case of Peter Worden.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/23/2005
Posts: 7
|
Thanx for the input everyone. Appreciate the help.
John
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
QUOTE (Stmjd74) Here's another tip that may be helpful. You're TSV18 is below the zero line. Anytime a moving average of TSV is below zero, it means theoretically that net distribution has occurred during that time frame, regardless of the effects of past data on the indicator.
The truth of your statement depends on what you mean by "time frame". We will just examine the facts and see how your statement fits them.
Theorem: A TSV Simple of period P can determine net Share Accumulation or Distribution over an interval of bars whose length is L if and only if L is divisible by P.
This result is a property of Simple Moving Averages (SMA) and has nothing to do with TSV per se. It is a consequence of the properties of SMA's given in:
A Property of Simple Moving Averages
Let's see what this means. For example, a TSV18 Simple can determine net Share Accumulation or Distribution over any interval of bars of length 18, 36, 54, etc. In particular, there is net Share Accumulation (or Distribution) over an interval of bars of length 18 if and only if TSV18 Simple is positive (or negative) at the most recent bar of the interval. TSV18 Simple cannot determine net Share Accumulation over any interval of bars of length 1,2,3,...,17,_,19,20,...,all positive integers not divisible by 18.
There are 20 bars present when on Zoom 9. A TSV Simple of period P>20 cannot determine net Share Accumulation or Distribution over any interval of bars in view because all such intervals of bars are of length strictly less than P.
We now see that your "time frame" must refer to an interval of bars whose length is the period of the TSV Simple.
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/18/2004
Posts: 180
|
Thank you, Jim. I was referring to the net of the number of days used to calculate the average. Sorry for any confusion.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/1/2005
Posts: 2,645
|
Stmid74,
Thanks for your comments and response. In case you did not know that your statement has an important partial comverse, you do now (that is the "only if" part of the Theorem).
Thanks,
Jim Murphy
|
|
|
Guest-1 |