"maybe assign one point for each of the criteria met."
That's a good idea..I thought of that too, but I don't think they should be weighted equally. I'll have to ponder it some and think of a good way to weight the criteria. Each criteria could get xx points out of 100 possible.
Also, there can be different sets criteria...like you could have your own personal rating system that you put up, and stocks can be ran through the different screens. So it could be that XXX scores a 80/100 on john302's screen, and 75/100 on randyskd's screen. I wouldn't be cocky enough to consider myself or my own personal criteria to be "authoritative", but if a stock meets my criteria, yours, and whoever elses also...then chances are its a pretty good deal.
I agree the trading range is very important too, but that will be highly specific to the individual companies, especially when talking microcaps. For example a large multibillion dollar company trading at a multiyear low can mean a much different thing than Peter Piper's Nanotech Ethanol trading at a multiyear low.
