Friday, August 16, 2002 7:54:11 PM
The Freep on Extremely Low PC Ratios
To:Paul Shread who wrote (50450)
From: The Freep Friday, Aug 16, 2002 5:00 PM
View Replies (4) / Respond to of 50505
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=17887723
Again, assuming the data at http://www.maoxian.com/memoranda/EQUITPCD.txt is correct. . .
Today's .384 equity only reading is the lowest I see since 8/31/2000. So it may be meaningless, but it's worthy of note. (There have been a couple other .38x readings, but marginally higher.) August 31, 2000, as I recall, was on or around the Naz double top. It was NOT an expiry week reading.
Back to back "glue bong" readings, in most recent to older order. I arbitrarily used .44 in this calculation, but that is only arguably gluebongish, imo. Still, with that rule, we had only one such occurance in 2002.
January 23 (.449) and January 24 (.386). As noted yesterday, January 24 marked the Naz high of 2002. Similarities? Second reading lower and under .40 (which seems to make a difference since August 2000, though is could be an anomoly as there's not enough data for conclusions). Differences? Not expiry week. Occured after a much longer uptrend.
In 2001:
Sept 24 (.441) and Sept 25 (.427). Well, these clearly marked a bottom, Differences? No reading under .4. Came after two readings over 1. Came after a huge selloff. Not expiry (though the readings over 1 were). Similarities? Second day lower than first!
May 18 (.405) and May 21 (.389). Market topped out the week of the 21st-25th, though the selloff didn't pick up speed for some time after (though 10% down came quickly enough). The Naz was nearly 30% off the April 2001 bottom at the time. Still, we have not exceeded May 2001 levels yet. Similarites? Second reading under .4. One day in expiry week. Differences? Only one day in expiry week. Naz had had a much sharper rally.
A triple reading in April 2001: the 18th, 19th, and 20th (.397, .397, and .406). Market had had an exceedingly sharp rally into this time period off the earlier April low. The naz sold off almost 10% from the high of this week during the next week. But the following week it set a new high and rallied futiley to the May high of the year. Similarities? Expiry week. A reading under .4 (two, really). After a sharp rally, but sharper and faster than our current one. Differences? Three readings. After sharper rally.
Jan 19 (.428) and Jan 22nd (.426). The yearly high was set in the week of Jan 22-26. The following week gave us close to a double top, and we have yet to see these Naz levels since. Similarities? One reading in expiry week. Came after a sharp rally after a lonnnng decline. Differences? No readings under .4 and only one in expiry.
Now, before 2001, it gets harder to deal with. There were double readings in November and October of 2000. The week in August that marked the double top contained three readings under .4. And back in the bull days, readings under .4 were meaningless, other than that a lot of people made money <g>
Our last two readings under .4 came January 24 (top on that day) and June 28th of 2001 (the naz top came the following week, one point higher). Then came the two in April, during expiry week (though not expiry day) that had muted impact. Then there were four in August of 2000, the final one on August 31. Again, that's the last reading this low or lower.
I have no conclusions from this. Clearly, the low reading is very unusual since the bear really came to stay. But back in the bull days, this reading wouldn't raise an eyebrow. The fact that it's expiry week makes it a little suspect. However, even in April 2001 there was a selloff of near 10% from week to week after a similar reading. (It was quickly recovered.) If we are in a secular bull within a cyclical bear (or just a bull), clearly different rules apply. That said, my best guess is that this likely gives us lower prices at some point next week and COULD mark a more important top. To draw that latter conclusion, though, one would have to look at a lot more TA things (including a fair number of breakouts today on weekly charts, for instance), and I'm not gonna take on that project.
the freep
To:Paul Shread who wrote (50450)
From: The Freep Friday, Aug 16, 2002 5:00 PM
View Replies (4) / Respond to of 50505
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=17887723
Again, assuming the data at http://www.maoxian.com/memoranda/EQUITPCD.txt is correct. . .
Today's .384 equity only reading is the lowest I see since 8/31/2000. So it may be meaningless, but it's worthy of note. (There have been a couple other .38x readings, but marginally higher.) August 31, 2000, as I recall, was on or around the Naz double top. It was NOT an expiry week reading.
Back to back "glue bong" readings, in most recent to older order. I arbitrarily used .44 in this calculation, but that is only arguably gluebongish, imo. Still, with that rule, we had only one such occurance in 2002.
January 23 (.449) and January 24 (.386). As noted yesterday, January 24 marked the Naz high of 2002. Similarities? Second reading lower and under .40 (which seems to make a difference since August 2000, though is could be an anomoly as there's not enough data for conclusions). Differences? Not expiry week. Occured after a much longer uptrend.
In 2001:
Sept 24 (.441) and Sept 25 (.427). Well, these clearly marked a bottom, Differences? No reading under .4. Came after two readings over 1. Came after a huge selloff. Not expiry (though the readings over 1 were). Similarities? Second day lower than first!
May 18 (.405) and May 21 (.389). Market topped out the week of the 21st-25th, though the selloff didn't pick up speed for some time after (though 10% down came quickly enough). The Naz was nearly 30% off the April 2001 bottom at the time. Still, we have not exceeded May 2001 levels yet. Similarites? Second reading under .4. One day in expiry week. Differences? Only one day in expiry week. Naz had had a much sharper rally.
A triple reading in April 2001: the 18th, 19th, and 20th (.397, .397, and .406). Market had had an exceedingly sharp rally into this time period off the earlier April low. The naz sold off almost 10% from the high of this week during the next week. But the following week it set a new high and rallied futiley to the May high of the year. Similarities? Expiry week. A reading under .4 (two, really). After a sharp rally, but sharper and faster than our current one. Differences? Three readings. After sharper rally.
Jan 19 (.428) and Jan 22nd (.426). The yearly high was set in the week of Jan 22-26. The following week gave us close to a double top, and we have yet to see these Naz levels since. Similarities? One reading in expiry week. Came after a sharp rally after a lonnnng decline. Differences? No readings under .4 and only one in expiry.
Now, before 2001, it gets harder to deal with. There were double readings in November and October of 2000. The week in August that marked the double top contained three readings under .4. And back in the bull days, readings under .4 were meaningless, other than that a lot of people made money <g>
Our last two readings under .4 came January 24 (top on that day) and June 28th of 2001 (the naz top came the following week, one point higher). Then came the two in April, during expiry week (though not expiry day) that had muted impact. Then there were four in August of 2000, the final one on August 31. Again, that's the last reading this low or lower.
I have no conclusions from this. Clearly, the low reading is very unusual since the bear really came to stay. But back in the bull days, this reading wouldn't raise an eyebrow. The fact that it's expiry week makes it a little suspect. However, even in April 2001 there was a selloff of near 10% from week to week after a similar reading. (It was quickly recovered.) If we are in a secular bull within a cyclical bear (or just a bull), clearly different rules apply. That said, my best guess is that this likely gives us lower prices at some point next week and COULD mark a more important top. To draw that latter conclusion, though, one would have to look at a lot more TA things (including a fair number of breakouts today on weekly charts, for instance), and I'm not gonna take on that project.
the freep
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
