Question about Steve Woods 2400% return

Because Steve Woods has patiently answered questions, and tried his best. My guess is that he's an intelligent author/ordinary trader.

Facts:

1) After hearing the claim of 2400% over and over, we find out there is no audit to accompany these results. And Steve Woods has acknowledged they came at the height of the bull market anyway. Hmm.

2) Steve Woods was caught saying that he made money in BRCD (I believe), but was caught and corrected by a senior member here who reads his newsletter and asserted he never saw BRCD in the newsletter as Steve Woods has said.

From that we got some legal mumbo-jumbo from Steve Woods.

3) Demi actually has followed him, and acknowledge a poor track record of about 65% losing trades over a period of time. And Demi even lamented that it was a waste of time to follow his trades.

The only conclusion, Steve Woods is a marginal trader at best, and a good author. Anyone interested in reading a book about the market that won't help your pocketbook??

Sam
 
Dear Demi,

Thank you for your attempt at analyzing my newsletter's track record. I welcome investigation into the nature of float turnovers and their analysis. I believe however that your research could be improved. Indeed I believe that your accuracy would be enhanced and the practical usefulness of your analysis would be boosted by taking a look at my own research of the trading recommendations in question.

It appears to me that, you're trying to evaluate my work in a 'mechanical system' framework. But it is neither mechanical or a system. It is simply a method of analysis that is new. A method in which I attempt to follow up on my stock picks as circumstances can change which is something you didn't take into account.

In my newsletter, I use the short term (days to weeks) criteria and intermediate (weeks to months) criteria because it helps to clarify approximately how long I think up-coming moves will take. It gives an expectation framework for my readers. Predicting the exact amount of a time a move will take is not possible by me.

That said I find your method of analysis quite arbitrary. You stated "I assumed short term as 4 weeks and medium term as 12 weeks." No wonder you came up with your results. This sounds like a Rip Van Winkle approach to trading. Take a position today, fall asleep for 4 weeks or 12 weeks, wake up and close the position and see how well you did.

I have never operated like that because float turnovers are constantly changing so it is quite possible for circumstances to change and for one's opinion on the direction of the stock to need to change as well. In addition, I have always admitted my bad calls when they have occurred.

Thus I believe your table should read as follows:

Weekending Stock ShortTerm Intermediate Priceonrec. High Low Prediction
27-Apr CHIC Higher 34.12 39.54 10.5 WRONG/Intermediate WRONG
27-Apr COLM Higher 43.2 51 20.71 Right/Med RIGHT
27-Apr PPDI Higer 29.78 38.26 19.4 Right/Med RIGHT
4-May PCLN Higher 6.08 10.47 1.8 WRONG/Short-term Not a pick
22-Jun ATVI Higher 33.95 40.5 41.15 WRONG/Short-term RIGHT
22-Jun EPIQ Lower Lower 26.21 25.5 14.9 Right/Short-term RIGHT
22-Jun PVA Higher Lower 32.7 26.75 WRONG/Short-term RIGHT
29-Jun PENN Lower 18.32 27.88 WRONG/Short-term WRONG
29-Jun SFCC Higher 29.48 34.88 Right/Short-term RIGHT
29-Jun TARO Lower 32.48 40.08 WRONG/Short-term RIGHT
29-Jun ROOM Lower Sideways 46.5 52.98 WRONG/Short-term RIGHT

6-Jul BASI Lower 9.97 14.37 WRONG/Short term RIGHT
6-Jul SHFL Lower 18.93 16.03 Right/Short RIGHT
13-Jul DRMD Higher Lower 16.93 22.93 RIGHT/Short, Wrong/Med. RIGHT
13-Jul EXPE Higher Lower 42.05 51.05 RIGHT/Short, Wrong/Med. RIGHT
13-Jul OPTN Lower Higher 15.46 21 WRONG/Short term WRONG
13-Jul TARO Higher Lower 39.6 48 Right/Short RIGHT
20-Jul STRC Lower Higher 33.3 41.57 WRONG/Short term RIGHT
20-Jul ATVI ?? ??
20-Jul ALLY Lower 16.35 16.47 Wrong/Short-term RIGHT
27-Jul AMHC Higher Higher 37.97 28.08 Wrong/Short-term, Wrong/Med. WRONG
27-Jul KKD Lower Lower 32.46 27.49 Right/Short-term RIGHT
27-Jul THQI Lower 54.01 45.03 Right/Short-term RIGHT
3-Aug SLXP Higher Lower 19.92 12.42 Wrong/Short-term RIGHT
3-Aug MEDC Lower 38.73 27.52 Right/Short-term RIGHT
3-Aug VTSS Higher 22.32 12 Wrong/Short-term Not a pick
10-Aug DKWD Lower Higher 42.2 46.32 Wrong/Short-term,Wrong/Med. WRONG
10-Aug ASCA Lower Lower 14.42 16.56 Wrong/Short-term, Right/Med. RIGHT
10-Aug PRX Lower Lower 35.35 39.39 Wrong/Short-term, Wrong/Med. WRONG
17-Aug SCRI Lower 22.89 26.89 Wrong/Short-term WRONG
17-Aug ALLY Lower 16.29 20.29 9 Right RIGHT
17-Aug EPIQ Lower 20.24 29 Wrong/Short-term WRONG
17-Aug AHMH WRONG
24-Aug DRMD Lower 22.75 17.33 Wrong/Med. RIGHT
24-Aug UOPX Lower Higher 34.58 25.35 Right/Short-term RIGHT
24-Aug STRA Lower Lower 52.9 38 Right/Short-term RIGHT


Total of 33 24 RIGHTS 9 WRONG 73% to the good


To understand this, let's look at the stocks in your list in which you claim I was 'WRONG'. By the way your list is incomplete as you have left out several weeks of the time span you claim to be analyzing. Here's a look at the individual stocks in question. (See Part 2 of 2)
 
Part 2 of 2

Here's a look at the individual stocks in question.

CHIC - I WAS WRONG. A breakout above a single base of support broke down and turned into a float turnover top formation instead.

PCLN. If you take the time to read the newsletter dated May 4th, you would find that in that week I wasn't making a claim about PCLN's future price direction but instead was discussing a trade in which I had bought it a little under $3 and closed the position 19 days later a little over $6. So this one can't even be counted.

ATVI - You record this as a 'WRONG' but your own numbers are at variance with this statement. For the record, on June 22, it stood at $33.95 and I called for it to move higher. In the next six days it was over $40.

PVA - On June 22, I stated that PVA would get up to $37 or $38 and then head lower. This is exactly what it has done.

PENN - I WAS WRONG. It's breakout above a single float turnover base failed after moving slightly higher. It turned into a float turnover at the top formation and is still trading below that final turnover at the top.

TARO - On June 29, it stood at $43.78 and I called for it to go lower because it had made a float turnover extension formation. For the next nine days it steadily dropped to the bottom of its float turnover range at $37.61 In addition, I called TARO's top so accurately that I got the following email: "Re Taro: I happen to know personally the President of the Canadian operation and have followed this stock for a long time.We were amazed at your float analysis calling the top!" Ken Garfinkel

ROOM - On June 29th I called for it to go lower and then sideways. It did just that, having a 5 day correction and then higher and sideways over the next month and a half.

BASI - On July 6th, I called for a bounce to the upside and then said it would roll over to the $8 to $6 level. This is just what it did.

DRMD - This is a good example of how you have to continue to read the updates that I give on stocks that I recommend. As you pointed out, I was correct on the short term. But what you failed to mention was that on August 24th, I called for lower prices saying if it hits new high ground it would reverse to the downside which is exactly what it did.

EXPE - I truly don't understand your work here as EXPE was one of my best calls. I called for lower prices and it dropped like a rock. I sent out an alert (which your research doesn't look at all) on August 9th telling subscribers to go short. On that day it was at $41.32. Twenty three days later it was at $19.

OPTN - I WAS WRONG. It's breakout above a single float turnover base failed after moving slightly higher. A float turnover topping formation occurred and it is now trading below this top.

STRC - On July 20th it stood at $39.28. It had a breakout above a single float turnover base of support and I called for a short term pull back. Seven days later it was $32.25
I WAS WRONG about the longer term direction.

ALLY - I had been a guest on Tom O'Brien's Tiger Financial News Network show on the previous Tuesday. On that day when ALLY was at $18.33, I said it would probably go up and stall around $19 and then drop. That is exactly what happened. In the July 20th newsletter I was only relating that fact to my readers.

AMHC - On July 27th , it touched the lower level of its float turnover and bounced off with a bullish candle. I stated it would probably move higher. It did for the next two weeks. I called the intermediate term higher but the formation by then had changed. I WAS WRONG.

SLXP - Again what you didn't note was that in an email alert that went out before the open on July 30th I told my readers that the SLXP at $17.82 had just dropped below its float turnover and would head lower. Two days later it was at $13.25

VTSS - I stated that I didn't know what direction this stock was headed. I brought it up in reference to an alert that I had sent out a couple of days earlier in which I discussed how a large number of semiconductor stocks had broken above their float turnovers. I followed up in the August 3rd issue by saying I couldn't tell whether their bases were weak or strong.

DKWD - On August 10th this stock stood at $37.30 and I called for it to go higher on a short term basis. It went higher for 6 straight days reaching $46.50 but I WAS WRONG on the intermediate term call as its float turnover changed to a sideways base of support and it broke out above this.

ASCA - This stock broke below a float turnover at the top and was in a normal retracement bounce when I said it would continue higher before heading lower. It retraced exactly to its 50% of the float line which is natural resistance and headed lower. Thus this one too did exactly as I forecast.

PRX - I WAS WRONG in both the short and intermediate term. I jumped the gun and didn't wait for a clear formation to occur.

SCRI - I WAS WRONG. It went higher before the drop occurred.

EPIQ - I WAS WRONG.

AHMH - I WAS WRONG.

DRMD - This is the stock where I called for it to go lower saying if it hit new high ground it would see a lot of selling. On the very next day it hit a high of $23. Three weeks later it was at $17.80

With that said and done, my record of the stocks the you give me credit for being right and for the ones that I have now set the record straight on the final tally is

Out of a total of 33
24 were Right
9 were Wrong
73% Accuracy
Sincerely

Steve Woods
FloatAnalysis.com
 
as I said, it is a waste of --my-- time. your method does nto work for about 99% of traders and pretty much useless for me. i wasted enough time on your method and will not respond to any of these posts anymore.

good luck.
 
demi,

How would you know that Steve's method does not work for "99%" of traders? There is no way you could know this. I suggest you speak (and think) without the sweeping generalizations and fallacies. With clear thinking perhaps you can figure what you're doing wrong. :-)

PS Demi, another thing, it is not a "waste of time" to evaluate trading methods even if you cannot make them work for you. Geeeeez. :-(
 
Since my newsletter and its credibility have been under attack, I thought the results of my last week's stock picks might be of interest to those who are taking a closer look at Float Analysis.

One of the objectives of my newsletter is to minimize 'information overload' so I try to minimize the number of stocks I focus on. Last week I kept it to three stocks which is about average although some weeks I write about less.

The stocks were Emulex Corp. (EMLX), Juniper Corp. (JNPR) and ITT Education Services. (ESI).

EMLX and JNPR both formed a 'Float Turnover at a Bottom' formation. This occurs when a stock's price breaks above its float turnover trading range for the first time after a long down trend. In both cases I put out a buy recommendation.

For the record:

Emlx closed last Friday (October 5th , 2001) at $16.40. This Friday (October 12, 2001) it closed at $20.94.

A 27% gain.

Juniper (JNPR) closed last Friday at $15.08. This Friday it closed at $21.06

A 39% gain.

The last stock I mentioned was ITT Education Services. (ESI). I called for it to stall and head lower.

Last week it closed at $36.78. This week it closed at $36.96.

It has stalled and I still think it will head lower.

I believe that Float Analysis is changing the face of technical analysis. It gives rise to a new type of stock chart which I call a Float Chart.

Float charts are historically important because for the first time they integrate all of the major components of a stock's trading data…price, volume and the number of shares being traded i.e. the float. These three components are all the information that stock traders have to deal with. Candlestick charts and Point and Figure Charts only look at price. Price and volume charts just look at price and volume. Only Float Charts look at all three components in a holistic methodology.

I believe Float Charts and Float Analysis are the wave of the future. More and more technicians are understanding this.

Best regards to all,

Steve Woods
FloatAnalysis.com

P.S. Sam, send me you're email address and I'll give you a free copy of my book…stevewoods@floatanalysis.com
 
While EMLX and JNPR may have formed a 'Float Turnover at a Bottom' and thus climbed, the entire nasdaq also had a fantastic week so any nas100 stock would have done great. What I would really like to see is some real-time calls. Do you enter these trades? if you do, post them in real-time for several weeks. Or at the very least post your picks in real-time, along with your reasoning. That builds real credibility.

Htrader
 
Originally posted by Steve Woods
I believe that Float Analysis is changing the face of technical analysis. It gives rise to a new type of stock chart which I call a Float Chart.

I believe Float Charts and Float Analysis are the wave of the future. More and more technicians are understanding this.
More...

Steve,

with all due respect, for a concept to 'change the face' of another it has to add something which is not there previously. Since you have failed to show us an example where Float Analysis shows a signal where (old boring and 2 dimensional) technical analysis doesn't, I and others fail to see how this is anything 'new'.

If Float Analysis doesn't provide any different signals from technical analysis, I fail to see how it is the 'wave of the future'.

I refer you to my analogy of the Swedish hammer in my previous post regarding this. See page 15 of this thread.

And as the case of AHMH (a stock recommended in your newsletter) shows Float Analysis is just as prone to false positives as technical analysis is. In my view this is because it is nothing new.
 
Today i ask myself:

If i had a mega money making secret, would i share it with the rest of the world? I think not. Doing so is plain stupid. Playing the markets involves taking someelse's money, so why would you give your best secrets away?

This guy is trying to make money by selling subscriptions. If he his making so much MONEY, why would he bother with giving advice to others. again plain stupid. Makes me question his strategy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top