Search results

Respectfully, don't get what?

ChatGPT stepped up right away: Volume is better than net volume for evaluating breakouts because it reflects the total amount of trading activity and interest in a stock. Net volume, which is the difference between positive and negative volume, may not capture the full picture of the market...

Wouldn't it be more useful to evaluate breakouts based on net volume rather than aggregate volume (pos vol + neg vol) as is currently done on Marketsmith and almost all other trading platforms?

Volume is conventionally constructed as positive volume + negative volume (both typically within 20% of one another) and then color coded by the price change for a given interval. Is that really useful for characterizing how a stock moves through a base and reacts at a pivot point? I would have...

It's an interesting question. Obviously the market or stocks have no agency but aggregate trading strategies are often based on exploiting over or under-reaction to price and volume patterns so traders as shrewd as Larry Williams can speak of the market as if it did have agency. More broadly...

My bad. I didn't read 128% return as belonging to his 1994-1999 period. Mark Ritchie recently tweeted an audited 36% annual return over eleven years from 2011 to 2021; Minervini has to be somewhat north of that. Will check my recall of these numbers.

Saw it in the Jack Swagger interview. Saw it many places over time. If I find a link, I'll share it with you.

I'm a year into that journey, have Marketsmith and spend 3-5 hours a day trading, reading, etc and have yet to make a nickel. His trades don't exactly follow the pristine templates of his books though I've followed him during a hard penny trading environment. But what the books leave out is...

He has all the earmarks of a great trader and a great faker. I follow him closely and still can't tell the difference. But the fact that floors me is the claim that he's made a 120% return annually for at least the last twenty years. If he had just $1 mil twenty years ago - and he had $10 mil at...

I'm speaking to what he documents as his investment account.

If Mark Minervini had $1 million in 2000 and doubled it every year, he should have $4.2 trillion by now. I believe he had $10 million in 2000. And he says he did better than 100% a year return every year. Do the terrifying math on that and he should have swept up every penny in the universe by...

Scary is when a stock trades 10,000 shares a day and the price never seems to match the brokerage screen. Or only ten minutes later. 218,00 shares is plenty of room. 700 shares vs 218,000 shares.

Just to follow, what would you consider more advanced risk management concepts? It's interesting that Marketsmith with its 188 selectable variables has nothing other than beta to identify risk for a stock. Risk must be inferred from divergence among the fundamentals or visually from their...

He explicitly documents sell points in his second book Think and Trade like a Champion. Could be a couple days worst case or as long as the cash register is still ringing in a favorable market. O'Neill, always a shadowy presence, recommended letting a clear winner run 8-10 weeks after a...

Reading further into him, he closes out most positions with a 3-5% loss. 8% is an O'Neill-ism.

This is a familiar caveat. I don't dispute it but it does make you wonder why investment books don't lead with money mgmt and position sizing. Not very sexy I suppose, doesn't sell books and probably not that meaningful until you land in a world of shit. Minervini says he could handoff his...

O'Neill has been improved upon by Mark Minervini's How to Trade like a Stock Market Wizard which provides an extensive and logical explanation of CanSlim applied to battlefield conditions. He's a boastful guy and not to everyone's taste but he's a genius and a terrfic writer. Even if you end up...

These are the guys in the graveyard who wished they did spend more time at the office.

Ongoing challenge. I monitor Mark Minervini trades closely and test the names from my Minervini screens.Clearly outperforms any naive portfolio I can create on my own (highest returns with the lowest standard deviation for one month and for five days.) Monitor Minervini closely to see if he's...

1 day to 3 months depending the strength of the breakout. Effectively, five days.