Welcome Guest, please sign in to participate in a discussion. Search | Active Topics |

Profile: precession7
About
User Name: precession7
Groups: Gold User, Member, TeleChart
Rank: Registered User
Real Name:
Location
Occupation:
Interests:
Gender: Unsure
Statistics
Joined: Thursday, March 24, 2005
Last Visit: Tuesday, November 4, 2008 2:25:59 PM
Number of Posts: 4
[0.00% of all post / 0.00 posts per day]
Avatar
Last 10 Posts
Topic: Sir 9-day periods selection criteria indecipherable
Posted: Saturday, March 8, 2008 12:29:49 PM

Well by golly I sure thought someone else would have asked the question before I got around to it.  And they already had, by about 2 hours, but it didn't turn up in my text searches.  So I posted the question.  Next time I'll try updating first!

*********    Anyone reading this, just go update Telechart to see Sir 9-Day Periods PCF's   ********

Thanks Diceman  --  mystery solved!

  --  precession7

Topic: Sir 9-day periods selection criteria indecipherable
Posted: Saturday, March 8, 2008 11:04:09 AM
In the Worden Report for 3/7/08 Sir 9-Day Periods describes a system using simple selection criteria, but the stated criteria is nonsense (at least on my screen).  Step 1 includes:

"... stocks which meet the following simple criteria: CC3. That's it...."

CC3 has no meaning in Telechart, and it causes an error message.

In describing the system logic in step 3, the author suggests using a percent true indicator to verify probability thusly:

" ...if using percent true, just put in C>C1 and C1                 "

Again, makes no sense (even though there's no error message in using the statement).

I'm pretty sure there's some missing text in this Worden Report, maybe because of a format translation, or maybe because of my software and machine.  But I can't see the correct PCF functions the author is trying to convey.

Can someone post the correct functions so I can see them?  Or is everyone seeing the same erroneous text?

  --  Precession7
Topic: "sort by" RS radically different than % change sort
Posted: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 12:39:26 PM
Thanks Bruce. I'm sorting by RS visual value. Where you say percent change "does not take into account the range of Prices over the entire period.", does this mean that RS will be evaluated for the entire period I see on my screen? I'm using a daily chart, zoom = 5, so my graph time range is from 5/8/07 to now. Am I understanding correctly, that RS is evaluated over that whole time period since 5/8/07, and if I change the zoom or time frame it will change the RS rank?
Topic: "sort by" RS radically different than % change sort
Posted: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 11:54:21 AM
I'm a Gold subscriber, running Telechart Ver 6.0.0053 on a Win XP platform.

I'm having a great deal of confusion about Relative Strength. My comparison symbol is SP-500. For this discussion I'll use FCX and CL as the example equities (updated to 9/25/07) and RS is relative to the SP-500.

Using the "sort by" right click feature in Telechart, if I sort the Russell 1000 component stocks by RS (daily time frame), highest at the top, FCX ranks 93rd. Alternatively, if I resort the Russell 1000 by Price Percent Change Today, then FCX ranks 923rd from the top. There is a huge difference in the ranking of FCX between it's percentage change and its RS. This is the root of my confusion. I don't see why there should be a difference in sorting by percentage change, or RS if they are both the same time frame (daily). FCX changed -2.32% this day, but has a higher RS ranking than CL (ranked 94th) which changed +1.48%.

How can this possibly be, that a stock that fell has a higher daily Relative Strength than a stock that rose?