Replies to post #38623 on A.I.M. Users Bulletin Board (AIMUSERS)

[SFSecurity]

Hi Tom and Gang, I do not suggest that volatility be the only metric to use in selecting position. What it is good for, I think, is to weed out those that do not have enough high to low pricing to get AIM to kick into action and have low volatility to boot, i.e, almost never trade. The other use is to find a very low volatility position with a very narrow range of trading that actually makes a bit of money that you can use as a "bank" for your cash reserve.

Now, more on volatility and a good site to look at almost all ETFs.

Let's get the site out of the way first. It's http://www.zacks.com/funds/etfs/etf-categories/. They have the bulk of the 1700 ETFs listed in "...six major groupings; equity sectors, international, fixed income, trading tools, commodities, and alternatives. Look through these groupings and the more granular categories within them in order to find the ETF that is right for you." Happy hunting!

Now back to volatility. I've added a couple of items, highest price, lowest price, and the ratio between the two. This provides one more point to exam to see if it is a good fit for AIM.

In the process I have taken some back 20 years and then chopped off everything prior to January 2010 to see if the volatility was much different. Yes, there is some difference without the 2002-3 and 2007-9 dumps, but not as much as I expected.

The other thing I noticed is that most positions, ETFs and single stocks, have a dip roughly from the middle of September through about the third week of October. Some shorter, some start later, some take longer to claw their way back to where they were, and a few don't really have a dip at all.

Out of it all, so far, I have found that VBR has a high to low ratio of 3.84 but only a yearly volatility of 24.62%. So it would seem like a slow AIM position but given the range, probably a good one to think about fot the future. Right now it is near its peak price so just put it on your wait and see list.

Now if you can stomach the volatility and the fact it is a individual stock in a regional bank, try BLYK. The volatility is 43.18% and the ration high to low is 5 to 1. Again, I would put it on a watch list as it is trading near its high.

If you really like a roller coaster, try WHX, which we have discussed before. The volatility is 56.2%/year and the range top to bottom is 13.58 to 1! This you might consider because it is near its low and just ex-dividend today so it will likely dive a bit more. Given it is a trust they have to disburse the bulk of their earning, I believe, and so their rate of return is great if you buy in near the bottom like I accidentally did. The lowest payout was $0.453/share and the highest $1.547/share. Recent dividends have been a low of $0.468/share and a high of $0.561 in August. The current dividend is $0.509/share. The current price is $2.28/share and the historic low was $1.79 on May 27th this year. I bought it at $2.44 so, if they keep up the current payout rate, dividends alone will pay for my position in a year and a half. That doesn't count and AIM buying and selling, which given its volatility, could be several in that time. We'll see.

Anyway, welcome to the fun house of the investing world. Lots of weird mirrors to look at. ;-)

Best,

Allen

[SFSecurity]

Hi Tom, I'm not sure how to do what you suggest.

You could add another column or so to come up with the cumulative effect of the volatility to see how often the fund achieves the initial trades and subsequent trades. This could also help document how often reversal trades are generated. It could also document if there are more reversal trades than a standard inexpensive index fund tracking the same index.

Any suggestions? Or am I just brain dead and can't see what is in front of me?

Another problem that someone may have a solution to is how to auto insert the last cell of the % calculation of changes into the Excel formula =STDEV(D4:Dlast cell). I've tried several approaches and none seem to work. They either just barf or they tell me there is a circular reference. Clues, anyone?

Thanks,

Allen