nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #40461
- Ignore nikoschopen |
1/19/2006 1:49:14 PM
pkm22,
Technically speaking, a 100% jump in price would be considered 2 times its original price. Hence, mathematically, it would be calculated as 200%.
|
pkm22
6 posts
msg #40485
- Ignore pkm22 |
1/19/2006 5:23:40 PM
nikoschopen,
If the 2 month low is $3 and the 2 month high is $6, 6/3 = 2. Therefore to determine the price increase in terms of percentage (6-3)/(3)*100 = (3)/(3) * 100 = 100%. I'm not sure how mathematically you can get a different result. My problem is not mathematics, it is syntax. At any rate thank you for your help.
pkm22
|
alf44
2,025 posts
msg #40487
- Ignore alf44 |
1/19/2006 5:35:16 PM
pkm22,
like this...
6/3 = 2 ---> 2-1 = 1 ---> 1 * 100% = 100% increase in Price !!!
the "(6-3)" portion of YOUR example...is the same as the (2-1) portion of MY example ! fwiw
I don't want to speak for niko...but, I think that's what he was talking about with his comment ! imo
Regards,
alf44
|
nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #40488
- Ignore nikoschopen |
1/19/2006 6:24:29 PM
pkm,
Ure correct to point out that "(6-3)/(3)*100 = (3)/(3) * 100 = 100%" But, in the context of my filter, I'm merely dividing the high by the low of ure chosen period (namely, 3wk / 3 mo), as you can see from...
set{3mo, close 65 days ago}
set{3wk, high 50 day high 15 days ago}
set{adv, 3wk / 3mo}
set{%adv, adv * 100}
%adv above 199
Ure approach utilizes a ratio aspect of the difference between the high and the low, and then dividing the result of the two by the low ((H - L) / L). Had I used that formula instead, it would look like this and, yes, it would be 100% rather than 200%:
set{3mo, close 65 days ago}
set{3wk, high 50 day high 15 days ago}
set{diff,3wk - 3 mo}
set{%diff,diff / 3mo}
set{diff%,%diff * 100}
%diff above 99
In no uncertain terms am I invalidating ure approach. All things considered, I believe we're looking at the same vista -- only with different lenses [sic].
|
nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #40489
- Ignore nikoschopen |
1/19/2006 6:31:33 PM
Mired in typos, I redact (as how the second filter should look):
set{3mo, close 65 days ago}
set{3wk, high 50 day high 15 days ago}
set{diff,3wk - 3 mo}
set{%diff,diff / 3mo}
set{%adv,%diff * 100}
%adv above 99
|
markcrisp
187 posts
msg #40709
- Ignore markcrisp |
1/26/2006 5:04:57 AM
you guys actually trade or make filters all the time?
|
dkatz
64 posts
msg #40716
- Ignore dkatz |
1/26/2006 2:45:11 PM
This is courtesy of the mighty riggs, a filter he wrote a while back, VERY effecitve for finding flags. It's good as is but if you change the accel band to (13) you'll notice that, when the price drops below the ma(13) line (middle of the acceleration bands) there's very often a nice bounce ... just something I've been looking at for possible entry strategy. Good luck:
Show stocks where close crossed above upper acceleration band(20)within the last 3 days and average volume(90)is above 50000 and draw IFT(5,9)draw ema(10)draw EMA(50)and close is below 5
|
cdvllc
15 posts
msg #47852
- Ignore cdvllc |
11/6/2006 8:53:34 PM
Here is a Hight Tight Flag search that I've been using with some luck...
close 6 days ago is 90% above close 50 days ago
and close 60 days ago > 1
set{hi6, High 6 days ago}
and set{lo6, Low 6 days ago}
and hi6 is above Open last 5 days
and hi6 is above Close last 5 days
price between 5 and 100
draw resistance slope(6,6)
draw support slope (6)
draw price line at close 60 days ago
draw price line at high
|