glgene
613 posts
msg #95827
- Ignore glgene |
8/25/2010 12:36:22 AM
First time I used this function, thought I was doing okay, until today (8/24/2010).
I don't understand why, with the market down big today, how the relative rankings of the ETFs could go up (compared to the default BIL (1-3 mo. T-bill) ETF. It's my understanding that all my chosen ETFs (Sectors) compare their relative price strength over the past 5 days to baseline BIL. The rankings today (8/24) went > 1. ???
Maybe someone can offer assistance. Here is the script:
|
Kevin_in_GA
4,599 posts
msg #95830
- Ignore Kevin_in_GA |
8/25/2010 6:42:03 AM
I am guessing it has to do with the data feed on ^BIL. If I use SHV instead, it works.
|
glgene
613 posts
msg #95833
- Ignore glgene |
8/25/2010 9:06:27 AM
Kevin,
I tried SHV, and I still get numbers > 1.0 in the RsToday column (for 8/24) --- when 8/24 was a down market day.
Zack
|
Kevin_in_GA
4,599 posts
msg #95834
- Ignore Kevin_in_GA |
8/25/2010 11:15:48 AM
seems to work for me ...
|
glgene
613 posts
msg #95835
- Ignore glgene |
8/25/2010 1:13:50 PM
Kevin,
Well, it seems to work now...with either BIL or SHV. You may be right; might have had some temporary bad data. Or else my computer had the 1-day flu .
I chose BIL (could have been SHV), because I was seeking a baseline that would always = 1.00 (or close). I didn't want to use SPY, for example, as the default. I basically wanted a 0 line (1.00) as the default to compare all the other sectors.
I'm going to change my sort to RsToday, so the highest (relative) ranked ETFs (most current) are at the top. At the moment, that is BIL or SHV, at 1.00. That means it's 'turdsville' for the others (at the moment).
Zack
|
Kevin_in_GA
4,599 posts
msg #95837
- Ignore Kevin_in_GA |
8/25/2010 2:17:24 PM
try this variation (I have been using this set up to manage my 401k for the last few months - it has been more responsive to market changes, and is based on INTRINSIC STRENGTH rather than relative strength).
Just look at this each Friday. Invest in the highest ranked ETF. I would suggest adding several other candidates - AGG, MUB, LQD on the bond side, and VWI, IWM, and SPY on the equities side.
Another way to think about this - buy the highest rated ETF on Friday, and short the lowest rated. You can do this on your list by using inverse ETFs for the market sectors. Since August 6th that would have meant buying TTH and shorting XLF - you would have made close to 9% since then!
|
glgene
613 posts
msg #95842
- Ignore glgene |
8/25/2010 11:00:06 PM
Kevin,
Thank you for pointing me to your True Strength Index (TSI Rank), page 107 in the SF Manual.
I have worked with it tonight, and I am impressed with the results of my mini-testing. I will explore that idea more. I want to read up on it so I can understand it more in depth. How did you find it?
What made you pick 3,9,1 as the weekly TSI setting?
Zack
|
Kevin_in_GA
4,599 posts
msg #95845
- Ignore Kevin_in_GA |
8/26/2010 6:36:27 AM
That happens to be the default parameters on freestockcharts.com - seems to work pretty nicely so I haven't messed with it (yet).
|
glgene
613 posts
msg #95846
- Ignore glgene |
8/26/2010 8:45:13 AM
"That happens to be the default parameters on freestockcharts.com - seems to work pretty nicely so I haven't messed with it (yet).
---------------------------
Kevin, Thanks for your reasoning on your 3,9,1 settings. Have to admit, I haven't used the site, FreeStockCharts.com, so I'll go take a peek there. I did some research last night on "True Strength Index." Interesting, informative. That's where I saw some other default settings. Some (most) of them were daily settings. Whereas, yours are weekly.
Thanks...again!
Zack
|
dangreene
229 posts
msg #153612
- Ignore dangreene |
8/16/2020 5:08:34 PM
POP
|