todddunning
31 posts
msg #27088
- Ignore todddunning |
6/26/2003 1:08:58 PM
Acervapsych - Boing is testing well. Today was a good day in the markets anyway, but my one-day test so far on Boing is up 2.2% midday.
I test-played all 5 retrieved picks and entered before mkt open at the previous close price. I guess you could do what shelshel does and place a market order the night before.
I run several test portfolios all day on variations of Muddy, shelshel and now yours. The others were red.
What you are doing with Boing is solving a problem I have had with the Muddy filter; one knows that a bottom has been reached, but you're never quite sure if you're about to bounce, go sideways, or even continue the drop. Because Muddy gives you such an early signal, I am often having to wait a few days before the bounce occurs, and I often stop out beforehand.
With Boing you are sacrificing the gain of the first day's bounce, but at least you are in the bounce for sure, and to me that is a safer play at least at this early stage.
Muddy, forgive me, but my timing and forecasting skills will have to develop before I can go earlier in the cycle and play your Method better, for higher returns.
|
acervapsych
39 posts
msg #27141
- Ignore acervapsych |
7/1/2003 8:05:31 PM
Thx for the feedback and I appreciate the tweaking suggestions. People, particularly nubies tend to look for a Guru who knows all. They are looking for the Holy Grail (no offense HG!). They're hoping they can just plug in a filter, quit their jobs, and retire in Bora Bora. Call it Fortune Cookie Finance. 50 heads are better than one so if my BOINGIES are working well let's play with them and see what we see. This may be a bit redundant but I created a Yahoo Group for a friend and myself. Anyone interested can join:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stockpimp/
|
jim_c_hill
61 posts
msg #27142
- Ignore jim_c_hill |
7/1/2003 8:37:41 PM
Boing is definitely a great filter. I tried it on my test date of May 3, 2003, and it gives positive results in first weeks, which very few filters can do. I looked at other down periods and it seems to work fairly well, or at least keeping loss minimal.
Great job.
Jim Hill
|
jim_c_hill
61 posts
msg #27143
- Ignore jim_c_hill |
7/1/2003 9:08:47 PM
Correction: Date of check is May 3, 2002.
JH
|
acervapsych
39 posts
msg #27145
- Ignore acervapsych |
7/1/2003 9:39:30 PM
Now in regards to the methodology of BOING Trading...
I'd like to hear thoughts and maybe we can do some backtesting on which of these two strategies has the best risk/reward profile:
1) After viewing the charts for the day's BOING hits, trade the one or two that you think look best...
vs
2) Divy up your dinero and buy equal positions in ALL the stocks generated by the filter.
Assuming the filter is consitently fetching more winners than losers and assuming the winners are on average up by a larger percent than the losers are down perhaps it's best to go this route...take the guess work out of it as opposed to encountering a scenario where your 2 favorite picks happen to be the only two that go down...
Thoughts??
|
acervapsych
39 posts
msg #27146
- Ignore acervapsych |
7/1/2003 9:48:27 PM
Ah yes, and another thought....it would be interested to analyse the biggest winners being generated by the filter and look for common denominators....(e.g. do higher volume stocks consitently outperform?). Another fruitful exercise might be to run the hits through TradeTrek's 5-Day Neural Net prognisticator to get another perspective. Here's the link...substitute the ticker your interested in for QQQ.
http://www.tradetrek.com/NN/default.asp?symbol=QQQ
And actually that gives me yet another thought. How about comparing performance of BOING stocks during periods when the QQQs and/or DIA are oversold and look ripe for a bounce of thier own?? Blah, Blah, Blah....carry on!
|
gscott66
7 posts
msg #31281
- Ignore gscott66 |
3/4/2004 10:12:09 PM
Test
|
cegis
235 posts
msg #31288
- Ignore cegis |
3/5/2004 8:42:38 AM
Hey, xplorer, (or Tom,)
I've tried to use Fetcher[] in the past, but it didn't come up as a link in the post. Is there some syntax restrictions to make this work? It's been a while since I've tried, but two possibilities that I might have mussed up on are (a) I put each phrase on a different line for readability, and (b) I don't think I made the Fetcher[] it's own paragraph. Are either of these (all one line & it's own paragraph) required? Anything else necessary?
I'm sure I'm not the only one with this problem, as I've seen other posts with an "unlinked" Fetcher[] phrase in them. Thanks for the help!
X
|
xplorer
257 posts
msg #31296
- Ignore xplorer |
3/5/2004 6:08:49 PM
There is a bug when using the
to display a screen ... it won't be "clikable" if you use the "<" or ">" ... you have to spell it out (even though the filter will work otherwise in your "My Filters").
here is the NON "clikable" syntax:
Fetcher[volume > 100000]
... and the same to make it work:
... hope this helps.
|
cegis
235 posts
msg #31300
- Ignore cegis |
3/5/2004 7:58:52 PM
xplorer,
Thanks for the info. To be honest, it was a while ago that I tried, so I don't know if I used > or <. I'll keep that in mind, though...
C
|