Cacher
121 posts
msg #102145
- Ignore Cacher
modified |
8/9/2011 9:54:48 PM
If a $1.00 stock trades 50,000,000 shares, then it should interest you. Unfortunately it is often overlooked as you want a stock that trades over $5.00 .... but why ?
The same holds true for volume ... so you don't want to trade a stock under 100,000 shares .... but you will consider a $5.00 stock that has just over 100,000 shares traded (which is a minimum of $500,000 invested) .... but a stock that trades at $3.50 and 1,000,000 shares ($3,500,000 invested) would be overlooked ... and a huge mistake. (You think $500,000 invested in a stock looks interesting ... but won't consider a stock that trades $3,500,000 .... think about what you are overlooking. (These levels are just to make a point ... not the actual level I would recommend)
The more beneficial way is to simply combine price and volume..... and use THIS value within your screens....like this:
set{moneyflow, price * volume}
moneyflow is greater than 10101010
Simple and Effective !
... unfortunately we do need to use some random value, as I did here $10,101,010 (... hey I am a digital guy ... and like the 1010 1010 pattern (AA hex) .....
Your thoughts?
|
dwiggains
441 posts
msg #102148
- Ignore dwiggains |
8/10/2011 8:49:13 AM
I agree
Money flow is what I have watched for years.
See ya
David
|
Kevin_in_GA
4,599 posts
msg #102149
- Ignore Kevin_in_GA |
8/10/2011 9:23:44 AM
I think a slightly more robust way to look at this is to use the average volume over a defined period.
And if you are looking for volume breakouts you can simply add that in as another filter criterion:
|
TheRumpledOne
6,407 posts
msg #102156
- Ignore TheRumpledOne |
8/10/2011 2:42:02 PM
Why not find the stocks that best fit your method?
Then you don't have to keep looking for which stocks to trade.
Instead, you spend your time trading.
|
four
5,087 posts
msg #102172
- Ignore four |
8/10/2011 8:54:08 PM
TRO
You remind me of this advice given by Bruce Lee (Be water)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO3sBulXpVw
|