Joe F.
Growth Stock Investor &
Market Strategist
Joe F. Growth Stock Indicators Updated 8-8-04
Growth Stock Timeliness - Monday - Timely
but Risky
(Strength during "much" of Monday's
session is a
"hit!.")
- Very Short Term (2-3 Days) - Untimely (NDX/QQQ
are
on short term cycle sell signals but should bounce early this week.)
- Short Term (1-3 Weeks) - Untimely (NDX
experienced an
intermediate
term cycle sell signal on 7-6 when it broke below it's rising troughs
trendline and is vulnerable due to negative money flow.)
Brief Cycles Summary
(Analysis/Commentary follows)
NASDAQ
100 Very Long Term Downcycle/Secular Bear Market = Down Since
March 24, 2000 Bull Market peak/very long term cycle high at 4816.35.
NASDAQ 100 Long Term Cycle
(began at 795.25 on 10-08-02) = Down since Bull Market peak/long term
cycle high at 1559.47 on 1-20-04.
S & P 500
Very Long Term Downcycle/Secular Bear Market = Down Since September 1, 2000 Bull Market
peak/very long term cycle high at 1530.09.
S & P 500 Long Term Cycle = Down since likely 3-5-04 Bull Market peak/long term cycle high at 1163.23.
XAU (Philadelphia
Gold/Silver Index) Very Long Term Upcycle/Secular
Bull Market = Began October 25, 2000 at 41.61 Bear Market/very
long term cycle low.
XAU (Philadelphia
Gold/Silver Index) Long Term Cycle (heading down) = Began July
26, 2002 at 54.67 long term cycle low. Long term cycle high occurred at
113.41 on 1-6-04. Long term cycle low target range is 67-72 and should
occur this year.
HUI (AMEX Gold Bugs Index) Very Long Term Upcycle/Secular Bull Market = Began on November 15, 2000 at 35.31 Bear Market/very long term cycle low.
HUI
(AMEX Gold Bugs Index) Long Term Cycle (heading down)
= Began July 26, 2002 at 92.82 long term cycle low. Long term cycle
high occurred at 258.60 on 12-2-03. Long term cycle low target range is
145-155 and should occur this year.
Please see Cycles Summary for the details of the
cycles that are the basis for my market timing system.
For those of you who entered this page directly and haven't discovered the vast resources on the home page yet please check out Joe F. Rocks! Growth Stock Investor & Market Strategist, don't forget to bookmark it and please tell your colleagues and friends.
Analysis/Commentary
-
The NASDAQ Composite (COMPX)
opened significantly lower on Friday 8-6, and, thanks to a much weaker than expected
July employment report,
COMPX trended
down the entire session,
spending the entire session
in negative territory, and closed sharply lower
at 1776.89, -44.74
(-2.46%).
The NASDAQ 100 (NDX) made a
double bottom with a higher low in May than the low in March (see the
NDX charts below) which was very surprising given negative
money flow in 36 of the past 42 weeks and with rate hikes from the Fed
looming. But, NDX hit an intermediate term cycle sell
signal on 7-6 (was confirmed shortly thereafter by sufficient follow
through). The collapse of VXN recently (and negative money flow), as
shown in the chart below, correctly suggested that weakness was likely.
The chart below is the latest "wall of
worry" chart. Keep in
mind the
relativistic nature of the wall of worry with VXN (NDX (NASDAQ
100) wall of worry)
and VIX (SPX (S & P 500) wall of worry) rising
faster in %
terms than NDX and SPX fall portending strength and
vice versa. The collapse of the wall of worry for both NDX and SPX from
late March until late April correctly
portended weakness. The
dramatic rise of the wall of worry for both NDX and SPX from late
April until mid May correctly portended strength in those
indices. The collapse of the wall of worry for both NDX and SPX
since mid May correctly
portended
a collapse in those indices. The process of rising fear/wall of
worry as NDX
and
SPX decline has begun. The collapse of the wall of
worry for both NDX and SPX the week before last correctly portended
weakness last week. The substantial rise in fear last week for
both NDX and SPX points to a bounce at some point (probably
early) this week.
The current "cyclical" short
Bull Market has ended
(NASDAQ 100 at least) after lasting more than a year. "Eerie
Nikkei-SPX
Parallels" (At Zeal) shows the high degree of
correlation between the S & P 500's and NASDAQ's post bubble
behavior and that of the
Japanese stock market that experienced a bubble in 1989 and remains at much lower levels 15
years later. The NASDAQ appeared to be
near an important top based upon the high degree of
correlation with the Nikkei's post bubble behavior and a long term
cycle high for NDX occurred at 1559.47 on 1-20-04.
As one can see
in the NDX
(NASDAQ 100) charts below a long term (1 to 3 years) cycle high
occurred on
1-20-04. The collapse of the wall of worry
from late November until late January and the dramatic trend change in NASDAQ
Institutional Money
Flow 42 weeks ago to negative/outflows correctly portended a
trend change. Given last week's positive NASDAQ
Institutional Money
Flow, some
strength is likely this week.
The short "cyclical" Bull Market (NDX
long term upcycle with a long term cycle being about 1 to 3 years in
duration for the long term up and down cycles combined) began with
10-8-02's long
term cycle low at 795.25 and ended with a long term cycle high
at 1559.47 on 1-20-04. The very long term downcycle (3-10+
years in duration) which began in March 2000 probably has about 14 years to go. Paper
assets (and hard assets in reverse fashion) tend to have very
long term cycles that last about 35
years with about 17.5 years up (1982-2000) and 17.5 years down
(2000-2018ish). There were very long term cycle highs (paper
asset bubbles) in 1897, 1929, 1965ish, and in 2000 (about 35 years
apart on average).
Confirmation of the NDX long term
cycle high/Bull Market peak occurred when the straight long term cycle
trendline broke down (see chart dated 2-27-04) which confirmed the
parabolic trendline sell
signal that occurred shortly after the long term
cycle high.
NASDAQ Institutional Money
Flow (block trading data) portends
(this may not be
a good
one week look ahead indicator except when there's a well established
multiweek trend) some
strength this week ending 8-13 with 3.22% (724) more uptick blocks last
week ending 8-6. This
primary
fundamental indicator has reliably predicted the NASDAQ's direction,
having turned positive in March 2003 after being negative for about
three years following the March 2000 bubble peak/very long term cycle
high. NASDAQ
Institutional Money
Flow
turned negative again 42 weeks ago however and has
generally been
substantially negative which has already
resulted in a sharp
decline.
On a positive note there has been very strong NYSE Institutional
Money Flow for well over two years which explains why the Dow (value
stock
oriented) held up
much better than the NASDAQ (growth stock oriented) prior to NDX's
10-8-02
long
term cycle low. Value stocks
should hold up much better than growth stocks once the current echo
bubble breaks (long term cycle trendline fails as has already occurred
for NDX, the NASDAQ 100) in the near future.
However, one should wait for a long term cycle low in the next
3-6 months or so before buying a value stock or mutual fund. There's
likely to be a dramatic decline in the US major averages (especially
the NASDAQ/growth stocks) for three to nine months
in 2004 after the long term cycle turns down in the near future
(NDX turned down on 1-20-04 after hitting a long term cycle high
at 1559.47).
This is because once a long term cycle high occurs one
MUST WAIT for a long term cycle low (probably will occur as a result of
a dramatic short term plunge) before the long term downcycle
will
end.
Breadth, a primary fundamental indicator, was very negative
on Friday 8-6 with NASDAQ A/D at nearly 4:1
in favor of declining
issues and NASDAQ Up/Down Volume was in favor of down volume by
nearly 9:1.
The NASDAQ wall of worry (VXN
(NASDAQ 100 Volatility Index) and QQV
(QQQ Volatility Index)) grew substantially on Friday
8-6
with
VXN
revealing that a significant
rise in fear
occurred for
NDX
(NASDAQ 100) and QQV
revealed that a very sharp
rise in fear
occurred for
QQQ
(NASDAQ 100 Tracking Stock). The NASDAQ
is deemed Timely but Risky
on Monday. A short term downcycle was in
place
at Friday 8-6's close which points to weakness on Monday
if it remains in place, and, a sharply declining intermediate
term downcycle is in place (see the first NDX chart above). Worse
than expected economic
data
may result in weakness.
Williams %R for NDX is in extremely oversold territory
(below
-80 (near the bottom) on my chart
is
the (look to) "buy" area and above -20 is the look to "sell"
area) at -99.66 on 8-6-04. An
intermediate term
(1 to 12 months)
cycle trendline sell signal
occurred on 7-6-04 for NDX and was confirmed
by sufficient downside shortly thereafter. MACD
is on a sell
signal.
RSI and Stochastics
flashed buy signals the week before last that broke
down last week.
A significant rise in fear occurred for the NASDAQ 100 on Friday with VXN (NASDAQ 100 Volatility Index) rising +1.26 (+4.81%) to 27.45 while NDX (NASDAQ 100) fell -38.14 (-2.82%) to 1315.30 which reveals that a significant (0.50-1.99%) rise in fear occurred for NDX because VXN rose very sharply in percentage terms while NDX fell sharply (NDX wall of worry grew) which portends strength in NDX on Monday but a short term downcycle was in place at session's end on Friday 8-6.
A very sharp (3-6%, -2.62% decline in QQQ + +6.09% rise in QQV = +3.47% which is a 3.47% rise in fear) rise in fear occurred for QQQ (NASDAQ 100 Tracking Stock, -0.88 (-2.62%) to 32.72) on Friday since QQQ fell sharply while QQV rose dramatically (QQQ Volatility Index, +1.45 (+6.09%) to 25.26) (QQQ wall of worry grew substantially) which portends strength in QQQ on Monday but a short term downcycle was in place at session's end on Friday 8-6.
On Friday
VIX
(which is
now calculated using the implied volatility of SPX
(S & P 500) options instead of OEX (S & P 100) options) rose +1.02
(+5.57%) to 19.34 versus a decline in SPX
of -16.73 (-1.55%) to 1063.97 which was a very sharp
(3-6%)
rise in fear
for the S & P 500/value stocks (SPX
is about 75% value stocks) since the wall of worry (VIX)
rose much more in percentage
terms than SPX
fell (S & P 500) which portends strength
in SPX
on Monday but
a short
term downcycle was in place at session's end on Friday 8-6.
The S & P 500 is deemed Timely but Risky on Monday. Worse than expected economic data may result in weakness. An intermediate term cycle (1 to 12 months) trendline sell signal occurred on 7-1-04. MACD is on a sell signal (below it's moving average). Stochastics and RSI flashed buy signals the week before last that broke down last week. Williams %R for SPX is in very oversold territory (below -80 (near the bottom) on my chart is the (look to) "buy" area and above -20 is the look to "sell" area) at -96.25 on 8-6-04.
The CBOE Put/Call Ratio at an extremely high (at or above 1.05) level of 1.38 at Friday's close suggests there will be potentially substantial weakness early on Monday (the Index Put/Call Ratio at an extremely high 1.65 points to weakness) possibly followed by a sharp rebound because it's a reliable non-contrarian indicator of the next session's early action except at extremely high (at or above 1.05) or extremely low levels (at or below 0.50) where it sometimes is also a contrarian indicator (sometimes portends early substantial strength (below 0.50) or a sharp rally following early potentially severe weakness (at or above 1.05), judgement is involved).
The NASDAQ
TRIN closed at a very oversold level of 2.29
(much
more
activity in declining issues) trending higher on Friday
which is positive
technically, but the uptrend during most of the session is a
negative because breadth was deteriorating.
A
level
between 0.35 and 0.80 is a bullish
range
for the NASDAQ TRIN because it indicates much more activity in rising
issues.
A NASDAQ TRIN above 1.00 indicates more activity in declining issues. A
NASDAQ TRIN between 1.20 and 1.50 is a clearly bearish "red zone" range
because it indicates much more activity in declining issues but not a
very
oversold condition. If the NASDAQ TRIN rises above 1.50 you can
begin
to look for a rally and if it rises above 2.00 that tends to be a
reliable
short term buy signal (very oversold condition).
Looking at NASDAQ 100 (NDX) Chicago Mercantile Exchange Commitments of Traders in all Futures Combined and Indicated Futures (Reportable Positions as of August 3, 2004), the speculators (hedge funds and other speculators/traders) added 472 long contracts and covered an unusually large (>10% of their total short contracts) 5658 short contracts which portends strength this week (contrarian indicator, but the unusually large degree of short covering indicates that strength is likely), whereas the commercial traders sold 271 long contracts and added 928 short contracts which portends weakness this week (non contrarian indicator), but a rebound is likely early in the week. NDX COT (do an edit "find nasdaq" in Internet Explorer or Netscape to find it because it's near the bottom)
American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) % Bullish
(AAII has been a useful non-contrarian sentiment indicator at
extremely
low levels below 40% bullish and extremely high levels above 60%
bullish.)
@ 31.0% bullish from 34.0% the prior week
is a negative
factor for the prospects of stocks during
the week ending 8-13-04 because it's at a low level of
bullishness. However, it's
near an extremely low level of bullishness (0-30% bullish)
shortly after which a substantial rally is likely to occur. The
change in or delta AAII % bullish may also be
a
useful
short term/weekly look ahead indicator in addition to the absolute
value of AAII % bullish. The sharp decline last
week
is a negative factor for the prospects of
stocks during
the week ending 8-13-04 because it's a sharp rise
in fear for
this useful non-contrarian sentiment indicator
contrarian. For now I'm using delta AAII % Bullish as a non contrarian
indicator and I haven't determined exactly what significant changes are
versus sharp or very sharp, etc. Since it appears to be strictly non
contrarian (so far), I don't have to determine what an unusually large
change is where the indicator becomes contrarian. The absolute value
does become contrarian at extremely low (0-30% bullish) or extremely
high (70-100% bullish) values, at least from an intermediate term cycle
standpoint (weeks/months).
Gold & Silver Stocks
- Gold/Silver Stocks Hit a Short Term Cycle High on Tuesday
August 3 and the Metals Play Catch Up
The XAU's long term cycle low target
range has been finetuned to 67-72 from 70-75.
====================== End of Update
==============================
The following
analysis/commentary didn't change from 4-25's update -
There's some debate about wether the gold stock Bull has ended
and deflation will
occur or if inflation will increase substantially. Take a look at
commodities, housing, healthcare costs, education costs, etc. and what
do you see? It's not deflation. The US Dollar (USD) is merely having a
countertrend rally and gold a countertrend decline that has a
ways to go. The USD is in a very long term downcycle that began in mid
2001 which is INFLATIONARY. Case closed. Basically the US has a crappy
economy and high inflation a la the 1970s which is great for precious
metals just as it was in the 1970s.
The post bubble economic cycle has deflationary effects (such as
in the stock market and the economy) that are being fought with massive
stimulus and an extremely easy monetary policy at least as far as rock
bottom short term rates are concerned.
The cycle based system I use has stood a great test
and the long term downcycle remains in effect despite trendline "buy
signals" suggesting otherwise (if one didn't use/understand cycles).
The
long term upcycle trendlines for HUI
and the XAU that began in October 2002 for HUI and in July 2002 for the
XAU broke down in January of this year and those indices are now
heading (I strongly believe, similar to what occurred after the prior
two long term upcycles broke down as shown in the chart below) for
their very long term upcycle/Bull Market trendlines in the
next few months. The
XAU should bottom in the 70-75 area as the
chart below reveals.
As one can see in the chart below from 2-6-04 the XAU's long
term downcycle remained in effect two long term cycles ago in 2001
despite the long term downcycle becoming less steep as has
recently occurred in this long term downcycle. In the previous long
term downcycle in 2002 the downcycle's trend was very steep/parabolic
and a long term cycle low occurred less than two months after the long
term cycle high.
The surprising recent gold stock strength, similar to what occurred during 2001's long term downcycle, makes sense given that gold stocks are in a very long term upcycle/secular Bull Market that began in late 2000. So, the recent surprising gold stock strength also occurred in 2001's long term downcycle and probably confirms that gold stocks remain in a Bull Market and that the very long term upcycle trendlines will hold, so, 70-75 is about as low as the XAU should fall in the next few months, which is of course a dramatic decline from here, but should be a fantastic buying opportunity because the recent surprising gold stock strength probably confirms that a Bull Market is still in effect (very long term upcycle that began in late 2000).
The XAU Put/Call Ratio collapsed (fell by > 6%) on both
Thursday 3-25 and Friday 3-26, correctly portending strength each day
because it was an unusually large rise in complacency that portends
strength. However, the collapse of the XAU Put/Call Ratio to
0.58064 on 4-8 for the April expiration from levels well above 1.00 a
few months ago correctly portended weakness because
the
gold stock market became very complacent.
I originally thought that HUI (AMEX Gold Bugs Index) was
the most important index because it isn't affected nearly as much as
the XAU (Philadelphia
Gold/Silver Index) is by mining firms that hedge (they've
underperformed in this Bull market). Then I began to emphasize the XAU
more because it had a higher correlation to reliable lead indicator
Newmont Mining (NEM). About 25-30% of the XAU is determined by NEM
because it's a market cap weighted index and NEM, with a market cap of
nearly $20 Billion, is much larger than even the second largest firm in
the
XAU, Barrick (ABX), at nearly a $12 Billion market cap. Durban
Roodeport Deep (DROOY) has a market cap below $1 Billion as of 3-19.
The problem with relying heavily on NEM and the XAU as I was
doing is that a stock or a market cap weighted
index with relatively few components like the XAU is much more likely
than a non market cap weighted index like HUI of exhibiting
anomalous/unusual behavior as NEM and the XAU have recently. Their long
term downcycle trendlines were broken to the upside a few times, but a
lack of sustained substantial followthrough meant those buy signals
weren't confirmed.
Both NEM
and the XAU's long term downcycle trendlines have become less
parabolic/sharply declining in recent months with both long term and intermediate
buy signals appearing to have occurred yet
meaningful followthrough failed to occur and those major buy signals
were NOT confirmed, which
vindicated my assumption that a long term buy
signal (break above the long term downcycle trendline and substantial
followthrough) won't occur until after the XAU falls to it's Bull
Market/very long term upcycle trendline in the 70-75 area in the next
few months.
NEM's anomalous/unusual behavior caused the XAU to
exhibit similar behavior because of the huge influence NEM has
on the market cap weighted XAU, but such behavior did NOT occur
with HUI.
HUI's long term
downcycle trendline has not been pushed up like the XAU and NEM's have
been (see their charts below) because it's not a market cap weighted
index. Hence, it's very important to watch HUI as closely as the
XAU and NEM. That's a major lesson I learned.
Understanding cycles is
by far the most important part of my system. The fact that the
long term cycle has turned down is extremely important as is the fact
that the intermediate term cycle turned down also. The long term
cycle's downtrend will become more steep and the intermediate
term cycle's downtrend will become more steep.
If the long term, intermediate term, and short term
cycles are all heading down one should expect much less strength when
the XAU Put/Call Ratio portends strength than if those cycles
were all heading up. The XAU Put/Call Ratio jumped 5.44%
on Friday 2-27 (1.17251 to 1.23624 for the March expiration), yet, from
the intraday/very short term (hours/days) cycle low in negative
territory to the short term cycle high the XAU rallied less than 1.50%.
If the long term and intermediate term cycles had been heading
up instead of down the XAU probably would have risen at least twice as
much as it did on Friday 2-27.
One also must consider where gold stocks are in their cycles. The
long term downcycle's weakness has increased significantly since
beginning on 1-6-04 for the XAU and on 12-2-03 for HUI BUT it will get
weaker.
The primary consideration in assessing gold stock timeliness (or
any market's timeliness), even on a one session basis, is what the
cycles are doing. Long term, intermediate term, and short term
cycles MUST be considered and very short term (hours/days) cycles
can occasionally be important. It can be difficult to differentiate
between short term (days/weeks) and very short term (hours/days) cycles
much of the time. You might not know until after the fact that a cycle
was short term or very short term.
Until a long term cycle low occurs in the next 1 to 6 months
investors should wait and traders should short more aggressively and
trade long less aggressively. A long term cycle low is likely
in the first half of
2004.
Targets for the long term cycle lows are 30-35 for NEM and 70-75
for the XAU. The longer
the long term downcycle takes the more likely
the high end of the target ranges will be the lows.
More good news is that one can still trade intermediate term
cycles long, albeit with much more risk.
The parabolic intermediate
term cycle trendline sell signals that occurred on 2-12 were
confirmed by the substantial declines.
It's a
good idea to confirm any sell signal (see if an index or stock is
acting like it's on a sell signal) wether one is using the "cutting
edge" parabolic trendlines that my system/work employs or wether
one is using classical technical analysis with indicators such
as MACD, RSI, and stochastics.
I use classical technical indicators also and find that
Williams % R is a very useful tool. MACD, RSI, and stochastics
are highly useful also but I find that Williams % R is more
useful for timing important cycle highs and lows.
Newmont Mining (NEM) hit an intermediate term
cycle high two days before the XAU and three days before HUI in
this intermediate term
cycle. NEM hit an intermediate term
cycle high one day (on 1-5-04) before HUI/XAU in the previous intermediate
term
cycle. Watch NEM!
What happened was that NEM, HUI and the XAU all
put additional points on the flat/roundish topping area of their
intermediate term cycle parabolic shaped trendlines prior to rolling
over and declining
substantially/entering the steep part of their intermediate
term cycle downtrends which
is typical cyclic behavior.
After the previous two long term cycle highs in 2001 and 2002
there were one or two false/failed intermediate term
cycles as occurred with the false intermediate term
cycle low on 1-15. Holding
long positions overnight
remains very risky.
More evidence that Newmont Mining (NEM) is a reliable lead
indicator is the fact that NEM hit an intermediate term cycle high
at/near the open on 2-12 at 45.75 prior to CDE, HL, and PAAS doing so.
Keep in mind the fact that the long
term cycle highs are in for NEM, the XAU, and HUI, so have
tight stops and keep in mind that holding long positions overnight can
be very risky
in long term downcycles.
The XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) which "didn't
work" (but really did in a sense) or didn't work well in a number of
sessions recently (when it portended strength during the intermediate term downcycle from 1-6-04 to
1-15-04) provides insight into
where gold stocks are in their cycles (short, intermediate, and long
term). By not working or not working well (it normally works well about
90%
of the time when properly used in concert with cycles/trendlines)
during 3 or 4 recent sessions it was a major warning that the intermediate term cycle and also
the long
term cycle had turned down. I'm going to try to get better at
observing this in the future.
The XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) is a very accurate
and useful indicator when properly used in concert with cycle (very long term
(3-10+ years), long term (about 1-3 years), intermediate
term (months), short term (days/weeks), very short term
(hours/days)) trendlines.
An important thing to note is that
some silver stocks (CDE, HL,
PAAS,
SIL, SSRI, etc.) may not have
experienced long term cycle highs since silver/silver stocks tend to lag gold/gold
stocks. Silver experienced a very long term cycle low in late 2001
about 6 months after gold did for example. CDE and HL hit a long term
cycle
low in March 2003 versus the XAU, HUI, and NEM doing so in late July
2002.
However, PAAS hit a long term
cycle low on 10-10-02. CDE hit
a long term cycle high about a month after HUI and the XAU in 2002 and
PAAS hit a long term cycle
high about a month after HUI and the XAU in 2001. I didn't check SSRI
and SIL.
Recently I've been trading (and
had the most success last year and so far this year with) CDE, HL,
and PAAS but I've traded and may trade many gold/silver stocks
including AU, BGO, CBJ, DROOY, GG,
GSS, MNG, NEM, SSRI, and WHT. I
don't own any as investments at this time.
The dramatic plunges/volatility spikes for both HUI/XAU
during the week ending 1-30-04
correctly portended substantial
strength for a few weeks.
Cycles follow parabolic patterns
that begin fairly flat and become increasingly parabolic/sharply rising over time as one
can see in some of the charts below. So, it's common to get a test of
the intermediate
term cycle low or to at least get
a point or two on the early flat part of the rising troughs (bottoms) intermediate
term parabolic uptrend line.
The parabolic shaped intermediate term uptrends of HUI,
the XAU,
and NEM broke down and flashed an (old) intermediate term sell signal on December 3
even though the traditional straight intermediate term channels
had yet to break down which highlights the clear superiority of using and
understanding the parabolic nature of cycles for whatever timeframe one
trades.
Even a reasonable approximation of the parabolic uptrendline
(or downtrendline) is clearly "superior" (but is more deceptive and
difficult to master) to traditional straight intermediate
term channels. Even so, it makes sense to use both types of
trendlines. Straight intermediate
term channels/trendlines should be used to confirm parabolic trendline sell signals.
Keep in mind that this is relatively new research (my original work)
and my understanding of cycles and trendlines is likely to
improve.
HUI, NEM, and the XAU
as
of 5-14-04
HUI, NEM, and the XAU
as
of 5-7-04
HUI, NEM, and the XAU as of 4-30-04
HUI, NEM, and the XAU
as
of 4-23-04
HUI, NEM, and the XAU
as
of 4-16-04
NEM (most important) and the
XAU's Very Long Term Cycle
as of 1-16-04
The date in the annotation below
should be 10-10-02 (10-8-02 for NDX) not 11-10-02:
NEM, the XAU, and HUI as of 1-16-04
Silver stocks like CDE, HL, and PAAS may present good long opportunities since silver is more volatile than gold BUT since NEM, the XAU, and HUI are in long term downcycles risk has greatly increased. SSRI and SIL tend to be too thinly traded which is why I don't recommend trading them. PAAS can be too thinly traded also but recently PAAS has tended to have daily volume above one million shares. CDE is the most liquid and probably the best silver stock to trade because it usually has at least 2-3 million shares/day. One tends to get better and much faster executions for market orders (also limit orders may not get filled at the price you want and you may have to cancel and re enter an order with illiquid stocks) with a liquid stock than an illiquid stock.
Something very important to keep in mind is that gold stocks/gold
have an inverse relationship/negative correlation with the US Dollar
much more so than with the US major averages (though in the very long
term the negative correlation may be about the same).
Both HUI, the XAU, and the US major averages have enjoyed a huge run
since mid March 2003. Obviously they haven't had a negative
correlation since mid March 2003. However, the US Dollar
(December 2003 contract) has fallen from nearly 100 in early September
2003 to nearly 89 on 12-5-03 for nearly an 11% decline for example.
Also, as I've discussed previously, NEM (Newmont Mining) is in
the S & P 500 (SPX) so index mutual funds buy or sell NEM when SPX
rises or falls, which accounts for the high correlation much of the
time between gold stocks and the major averages (especially SPX of
course).
The theory is that when the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) appears to fail it
tells you something that's extremely important. It probably indicates
that an intermediate term
cycle high or low is
imminent, that it will probably occur during that session or in the
very near future. The intermediate term cycle is near or at it's
maximum strength or
weakness and is overriding the normally very reliable XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration).
Also, as one can see in the next
chart the XAU (as of 11-28-03) was very near the top of it's long term
cycle rising peaks
trendline, so the long term cycle was near or at it's maximum
strength which tended to override the normally very reliable XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration).
The point is when the XAU is
overbought (RSI > 70) near an
intermediate
term cycle high or oversold
(RSI < 30 but the ascending
triangle formation limited the downside and RSI hasn't been
falling below 30 at recent intermediate
term cycle lows) near an intermediate
term cycle low and the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) appears to fail it
probably indicates that an intermediate
term cycle high or low is imminent, which is obviously a very important
piece of information.
The XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) may be an even
better indicator than I thought (which makes an amazingly accurate
indicator even more so). If interpreted properly it may bat 1000 (100%)
or very close to it. This is just a theory right now, but I believe
it's a
correct one until proven otherwise (because the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) is being overriden
by the intermediate
term cycle (and possibly also long term cycle in this case) being near
or at it's maximum strength (or maximum weakness when it failed on 11-6
the day before 11-7's intermediate
term cycle low)).
The XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) must be used in
concert with cycles (from very short term (hours/days) to very long
term (3-10+ years)) to be properly interpreted, so when cycles are
bottoming or peaking they can make the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) "fail" but I think
they are overriding it and that "failure" really is a very important indication
that a cycle is bottoming or
peaking. In fact, HUI and the
XAU experienced intermediate term (months) cycle highs on Tuesday 12-2
at 258.60 and
112.75
respectively.
Assuming
that gold began a
very long term
(3 to 10+ years) Bull Market in mid 2001 (about 7-8 months after the
gold
stocks), it was logical to assume that the prior eight year cycle high
at
about $418/ounce (in late 1995) would be exceeded as has already
occurred.
The chart below (as of 11-28-03)
shows the very long
term (3 to 10+ years) cycle for the XAU which began in late October 2000. The very long term uptrendline implies that
a long term cycle low will occur in the 70-75 range during the next few
months. The annotation regarding the long term cycle high is old.
Keep in mind that the
stocks usually lead the
metal and that NEM (Newmont Mining) usually leads the stocks, so NEM is
(appears to be)
an extremely important indicator. Note that I do NO TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
ON THE METAL HERE. I may decide it's necessary
in the future of course (never stop learning and conditions may
change).
More evidence that NEM is an excellent lead indicator for gold
stocks:
Since Newmont Mining (NEM) influences the XAU to a much greater
extent than it influences HUI because the XAU is market cap
weighted, I've come to appreciate the XAU more recently since NEM seems to be a very good
leading
indicator
(see the charts below and the one above) for gold stocks (and
usually silver
stocks), but more research is required. NEM's chart can be watched and
used as a leading
indicator (it appears). The second chart dated October 9 shows that NEM
outperforming the XAU prior to the October 3 (a few
cycles ago)
intermediate
term cycle low correctly portended strength.
I need to update how I'm using the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration).
The comparison method with the percentage change in the XAU discussed
below is ONLY used when the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration)
doesn't change the next day. In recent months it's been changing nearly
every
day.
I simply calculate (Simply
divide the total put open
interest by the total call open
interest to arrive at the XAU Put/Call
Ratio.) the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration)
just before the session begins and calculate the percentage change from
the prior day (a rise to 1.05 from 1.00 for example is a very sharp
(3-6%) 5% rise in fear that portends dramatic strength) to determine
wether fear or complacency has crept in to the XAU.
I don't compare it to the change in the XAU until the end of the day in case it doesn't change the next day. If the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest expiration) rises 2% and the XAU falls by 1% that's a delta of +1% which is a significant rise in fear. A delta of -1% is a significant rise in complacency. This comparison method is only used when the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest expiration) remains unchanged the next session.
Also, there may be/probably is more
merit in comparing the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) to the XAU's % change at the open when it
doesn't change as opposed to comparing it to the prior day's change.
Since in recent months it's changed nearly every day I don't have
nearly enough data to know which method works better, but it makes more
sense I think to compare an unchanged XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) to the open (or
the early tone in case there is very brief weakness followed by
strength or vice versa) rather than the prior session's change.
As discussed below an unusually
large rise (> 6%)
portends weakness (a
relatively rare non contrarian case for this
typically contrarian indicator) and an unusually large decline (> 6%) portends
strength (a relatively rare
non contrarian case for this
typically contrarian indicator). Unusually large moves in contrarian indicators usually makes them non contrarian because usually "something's
up" which causes the unusually
large move in the indicator.
One must keep in mind that the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) MUST BE USED in
concert with very short term and intermediate term cycles/trendlines.
If one doesn't have the proper trendlines (with price targets based on
them and sell signals acted on when uptrendlines break down or buy
signals acted on when a trend change to an uptrend occurs) then the
XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) may appear to have
failed when in fact it worked.
One should check the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration)
very early in
the session to see if it's changed significantly and determine wether
fear or complacency has crept into the XAU. Simply
divide the total put open
interest by the total call open
interest to arrive at the XAU Put/Call
Ratio. A % rise up to and including 6% (rise in fear) portends strength
because the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) is usually a
contrarian indicator. A % rise > 6% is an unusually large rise
in fear that portends weakness (non contrarian case for this usually contrarian indicator). A
% decline up to and including
6% is a rise in
complacency that portends weakness. A % decline > 6% is an unusually large rise in complacency that portends strength (non contrarian case for this usually contrarian indicator). The larger the % changes are the more the
XAU tends to move that day.
The XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) which "didn't
work" (but really did in a sense) or didn't work well in a number of
sessions recently (when it portended strength during the intermediate term downcycle from 1-6-04 to
1-15-04) provides insight into
where gold stocks are in their cycles (short, intermediate, and long
term). By not working or not working well (it normally works well about
90%
of the time when properly used in concert with cycles/trendlines)
during 3 or 4 recent sessions it was a major warning that the intermediate term cycle and possibly also
the long
term cycle had turned down. I'm going to try to get better at
observing this in the future.
I've come up with a potential new
"region"
(interpretation) for the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration). Conceptually I
think most people will agree/grasp that there's a point at which fear
(bearishness) becomes so extreme that there's no place for a market to
go but up and conversely there's
a point at which complacency (bullishness) becomes so extreme that
there's no place for a market to go but down. Also, there's almost
certainly a point at which a sentiment change/delta (rise in fear or complacency) becomes so extreme that the
same phenomenon occurs.
On Tuesday 1-20 the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) rose nearly 25%
which normally would portend weakness (non contrarian case being that
an unusually large (>
6%) rise in fear occurred (the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) is normally a
contrarian
indicator when it changes up to 6% with a rise in fear portending
strength and a rise in complacency (decline in the indicator) portending weakness). However, there was
substantial strength that day. Likewise, on Wednesday 1-21 the XAU Put/Call Ratio (for the nearest
expiration) fell more than 35%
and there was significant early weakness.
One must remember that
some precious metals stocks such as Newmont Mining (NEM) are dragged
down at times by Index selling ("baskets" of stocks in an index
are sold)
on a weak day (up on a strong day) for the major averages such as
Tuesday August 5. NEM is in the S & P 500. This probably accounts
for NEM's weakness on Tuesday August 5 (down 1.49%) after early
strength (up
significantly early when the S & P 500 was modestly lower).
The
late session NEM weakness on Tuesday August 5 was a good buying
opportunity
created by basket selling of index stocks. NEM's ownership is
77% institutional.
Interestingly, gold has fairly reliable eight year cycles with cycle highs in late 1979, late 1987 and late 1995. This means that an eight year cycle high was due in about December 2003. If one assumes gold is in a long term Bull Market (a safe assumption given the major averages are in a long term Bear Market despite the current "cyclical" short Bull Market which has formed the right shoulder of a bearish long term head and shoulders pattern for the major averages) then the eight year cycle high should and did exceed the previous eight year cycle high of $418ish with a high at $430ish.
The XAU Put/Call Ratio is usually a contrarian indicator BUT an unusual rise in fear with a contrarian indicator usually portends weakness (non contrarian case for contrarian indicators) and an unusual rise in complacency portends strength though I don't do anything mechanically in my work/system. One should always use all relevant indicators, tools, info, technical condition, channels/trends, wether the intermediate term cycle is heading up or down, fundamental factors such as expected weak economic data, etc. At times "keen analytical judgement" is involved.
The dramatic +6.60% rise in the XAU Put/Call Ratio for the August 15 expiration to 0.905 early on Tuesday August 5 was an unusually large rise in fear that correctly portended weakness on Tuesday August 5.
The XAU Put/Call Ratio
for the August 15
expiration remained steady at 0.835 on
Wednesday July 23 despite a 5.35% rise in the XAU which correctly
portended
further strength on Thursday July 24. It's
9.35% rise to 0.936 early on Monday July 28 was an unusually large rise in fear
that
correctly portended the very sharp selloff after early strength (trendline
sell
signal occurred). It's
close at 0.936 on Monday July 28 correctly portended
weakness on Tuesday July 29.
Keep in mind that the metal lags the gold stocks on a
long
term (and apparently usually on an intermediate term basis with an
intermediate
term cycle high in early February 2003 versus the stocks peaking in
January
2003 and an intermediate term cycle low on April 7, 2003 nearly a month
after the
stocks hit an intermediate term cycle low on March 13, 2003)
basis.
With the
channels/trends approach I use really just one of the two target ranges
needs to "hit" in
order for the system to flash a warning/sell signal. A "miss" for only
one of the index target ranges isn't a miss for the system. Two indices
are required for this system precisely
because their correlation isn't 100%.
When one of the target ranges is
reached it's time to look for a trend change and either sell when the
trend change occurs (rising troughs trendline breaks down), or, if one
has very high confidence in the targets, sell some or all holdings
prior to the
indices flashing a sell/warning signal. Of course, one sells when a trendline breaks
down for one or more of your holdings.
HUI and the XAU trendline sell signals occurred early on Monday July 28. My short term cycle low targets were 156-158 for HUI and 78-79 for the XAU with the actuals being 160.89 for HUI and 80.14 for the XAU which came within 1.83% and 1.44% of the target ranges respectively which are "hits." Greater than 2% is/may be considered a "miss" BUT the following paragraphs provide the detailed explanation of what's considered a "miss."
Targets for short term downcycles are somewhat problematic in an intermediate term uptrend but one either buys very near the targets OR buys when the very short term channel/downtrendline is broken (safer). So, one always knows when to buy with this approach.
If the channel/downtrendline is broken well before reaching the lower parabolic shaped intermediate term uptrend line AND the subsequent upcycle reachs the upper parabolic shaped intermediate term uptrend line targets then I won't consider the downcycle targets a miss because the approach worked and declines have a tendency to reverse course in an intermediate term uptrend.
Thus, a "miss" is only given when the approach doesn't work (bought or sold at the wrong time or didn't buy/sell at the right time depending on how one looks at it) such as overshooting upside or downside targets significantly OR falling well short of the target(s) for downcycles. This isn't about being a psychic but about having a system where one has very accurate upside/downside buy/sell targets OR sells when a uptrending channel/trendline fails in an intermediate term downtrend or buys when a downtrending channel/trendline is broken in an intermediate term uptrend. Since this approach is fairly new I obviously may finetune it over time.
The following is the HUI/XAU targets versus actuals data for an intermediate term downcycle using short term channels/trendlines and the parabolic downtrending HUI/XAU channels/trendlines:
HUI's short term uptrending channel/trendline intersected the upper parabolic intermediate term downtrend line at Monday July 14's high of 153.47 (versus target of 154-155) which was the cycle high for the short term cycle and came within less than 1% of my target range.
XAU's short term uptrending channel/trendline intersected the upper parabolic intermediate term downtrend line at Tuesday July 15's high of 79.18 (versus target of 80) which was the cycle high for the short term cycle and came within 1.03% of my target.
HUI's short term downtrending channel/trendline intersected the lower parabolic intermediate term downtrend line at Thursday July 17's low of 140.68 (versus target of 142-143) which was the cycle low for the short term cycle and came within less than 1% of my target range.
XAU's short term downtrending channel/trendline intersected the lower parabolic intermediate term downtrend line at Wednesday July 16's low of 73.41 (versus target of 74) which was the cycle low for the short term cycle and came within less than 1% of my target.
HUI/XAU
targets versus actuals batting average for an intermediate
term
downcycle
= 4 for 4 = 100%.
HUI/XAU
targets versus actuals batting average for an intermediate
term upcycle
=11 for 14 = 78.57%. Only one of the two target ranges needs
to "hit" in order for the system to "hit" as discussed previously. Two
of the three misses were a result of using the wrong channel/trendline
for one very short term
upcycle. The system is sound.
Since the gold stocks tend to lead the metal on both a long and intermediate term basis they experienced a major breakout (HUI did) months before the metal. Also, gold stocks began their Bull Market in October 2000 about a half year or more ahead of the metal which began a Bull Market mid year 2001.
One should have a chart of both indices and NEM with the
intermediate
term trends/channels drawn. Once an intermediate
term channel/trend is broken decisively to the downside
for
either index a cycle high has probably occurred and it's time to sell.
An intermediate term sell signal occurs when the intermediate
term channel/trend breaks down.
Intermediate term (all cycles)
cycles tend to follow
parabolic
patterns. Both HUI/XAU had parabolic shaped intermediate term downtrends that were broken
which
flashed BUY.
Keep in mind that the metal lags the gold stocks on a long term (and apparently usually on an intermediate term basis with an intermediate term cycle high in early February versus the stocks peaking in January 2003 and an intermediate term cycle low on April 7 nearly a month after the stocks hit an intermediate term cycle low on March 13) basis.
A gold stock Bull Market (The New Bull Market!) began in late 2000. There was a huge rally again last year as occurred in 2001 and 2002. Short covering was a major factor.
Look for gold to trend higher on a very long term basis. $330.00, a major resistance level, was broken on Thursday 12-12-02. The rapid growth in the money supply is a major positive for the precious metals. The Fed is in the unenviable position of having to inflate (decrease the dollar's value) in order to keep the economy afloat.
Thursday 12-12-02's major breakout above $330/ounce confirms a likely long term Bull Market for gold and is a major long term buy signal.
At late May 2003's intermediate term cycle high gold volatility became very high which correctly indicated there would be a major move down. The spike up in volatility accompanied the very sharp rise to the $375 area and correctly identified an intermediate term cycle high in gold. It appears that extremely low volatility marks gold bottoms and extremely high volatility marks important tops which is the opposite of what happens with the major averages where extremely low volatility marks tops and extremely high volatility marks bottoms on both a short and intermediate term basis (The extreme cycle low on 9-21-01 occurred at an extreme of volatility that saw VXN rise above 91. A sell signal occurred in March 2002 when VXN fell below 40 because it indicated that an extreme of low volatility was near. All the major averages (growth and value) began trending lower at that time though the major NASDAQ averages began trending lower in early January because growth stocks hit a cycle high at that time.).
VXN is new as of January 2001 so not enough data exists yet to be a statistically meaningful sample size but identifying major deltas in fear (Delta VIX/VXN) and peaks in VIX/VXN can identify likely cycle highs and lows. The principle of a major rise (delta) in fear or complacency leading to major rallies/declines in the major averages is a sound one as is the degree that fear or complacency creeps into the market as it rallies/declines (how well the wall of worry holds up) portending strength (when fear creeps in) or weakness (when complacency creeps in). This chart of the percentage moves in VIX and VXN versus the S & P 500 (SPX), the Dow (DJIA), and the NASDAQ Composite (COMPX) illustrates that sound principle of market timing.
Two extremes of fear (VIX hit the extreme level of 50+ on 7-24-02 and 10-10-02 and VXN rose to moderately high levels of 69+ and 64+ respectively on those dates) in 2002 led to (triggered) intermediate term cycle lows. When VIX and VXN both exceeded extreme levels (of 50 & 80 respectively) on 9-21-01 (VXN hit 91+) a healthy long intermediate term (6 month+) cycle ensued (an extreme intermediate term cycle low/major bottom occurred).
People who mechanically rely on one indicator such as VIX tend to get into trouble. This is why I look at a variety of primary indicators such as VXN, QQV, VIX, Advance/Decline Ratio, Up/Down Volume, total volume, money flow, Investor's Intelligence survey of advisor bullishness, etc. I would call the July 24, 2002 and the October 10, 2002 Bear Market lows moderate intermediate term cycle lows because VIX reached an extreme level of 50+ but VXN fell well short of an extreme 80+ (it rose to about 70 on 7-24-02 and 64 on 10-10-02. Spiked to 91+ on 9-21-01).
Intermediate term cycles tend to be 3-12 months in duration in recent years. There were two intermediate term cycle lows in 2001 (April and September) with September 21, 2001's being a major bottom (extreme intermediate term cycle low where VIX > 50 and VXN > 91 on 9-21-01).
The more extreme fear becomes the more likely a "V" shaped cycle low occurs as opposed to a "W" shaped retest cycle low occurring probably as a result of a more moderate peak level of fear. VIX (OEX/value stock implied volatility) reaching 50+ is a likely indication that an intermediate term cycle low is imminent (triggered by an extreme of fear).
One needs to keep in mind that the sentiment picture can change drastically in a few hours or even less from what I discussed using the previous close's sentiment figures. It's important to look at VXN intraday and compare it to the figure I discuss from the previous session's close. If fear rises substantially (large + Delta VXN) that portends a rally and if complacency jumps (large - Delta VXN) substantially that portends weakness. An unexpectedly large jump in fear or complacency can dramatically change the very short term sentiment picture.
It's important to remember that when capitulation becomes a major factor that fear/volatility (VXN) can rise dramatically and though that normally would portend a nice rally, a lag time arises and one has to wait for the cycle low to go long QQQ once serious capitulation begins. The steep drop and quick snapback at NASDAQ cycle lows tends to form a V (a retest of the cycle low is a possibility also which is a W).
I suspect that the more extreme fear/volatility becomes (VXN spiking above 90 to 91+ as it did on 9-21-01 when the last extreme cycle low (major bottom) occurred) the more likely a "V" will occur and a more moderate peak level of fear/volatility (VXN failing to reach 80) greatly increases the likelihood of a "W" pattern (retest and potential double bottom formation) cycle low occurring.
If you buy QQQ at the wrong time you might experience substantial downside. Buying very near the cycle low takes nerves of steel and is only for highly skilled traders due to the extreme volatility. Don't try this at home unless maybe you are a highly skilled trader or you can live with a great deal of risk. For neophytes IF you try to trade the gold stocks or QQQ (or any highly volatile stock) you should only be using a modest amount of risk capital and should have a risk mitigation strategy.
Happy trading, may the force be with you,
Joe F. Rocks!
=====================================================================================
The dashed lines above were for the folks at Trading-Ideas.Com and AfterHourTrades.Com so they knew which commentary to use when this commentary was updated daily.
When using this site I suggest that you might need to open the home page in a number of different windows. You might want to access a number of pages at the same time such as this page, Astrikos real time VXN, Astrikos real time COMPX, etc. I added more real time resources to help time the upcoming cycle low and to improve the short term trading resources.
Please tell everyone about Joe F. Rocks! via word of mouth and email. Why not shoot an e mail right now to as many folks as you can think of? You'll feel better after doing so. Bottom line is that you are getting great information for free (at least for now).
Why not make Joe F. Rocks! your start page? In Internet
Explorer
under "Tools" select "Internet Options" then select "General" where you
can set your start page to http://www.joefrocks.com/ . At the very
least
if you like this site add it to your favorite places in a spot where
you
can readily find it. Please continue to tell your friends,
relatives,
and associates about Joe F. Rocks! via e mail and word of mouth!
If you want to help this site out please feel free to add my
home page link ( http://www.joefrocks.com/ ) and/or any other links to
my content as long as your site isn't porno, hate, etc. related. It'll
be a great way to improve the stickiness of your site and help this
site
out as well. Wealthy and not so wealthy folks in such far flung places
as Russia and the
Slovak
Republic read Joe F. Rocks! I've received dozens of favorable
comments/reviews
concerning my work and this site.
NASDAQ "Institutional" (really block trading data that includes individuals as well) Money Flow (Primary growth stock indicator) for the week ending 8-6 = Positive. Uptick block trades outpaced downtick block trades (724 more uptick blocks) by 3.22% (2.53% more downticks the prior week, 0.94%, 1.79%, 1.16%, 1.89% more upticks the prior four weeks, 1.54%, 3.34%, 0.74%, 2.49%, 7.70%, 1.04%, 1.67%, 1.25% more downticks the prior eight weeks, 3.51% more upticks the prior week, 3.68%, 0.46%, 2.99%, 4.75%, 3.36%, 1.05%, 0.41%, 3.86%, 3.64%, 0.31%, 3.74%, 3.47%, 2.26%, 2.61%, 5.20%, 5.86%, 2.86%, 7.41%, 2.27%, 2.71%, 1.50%, 4.87%, 3.32%, 2.82%, 5.31%, 3.04%, 0.84% more downticks the prior 27 consecutive weeks, 1.82%, 1.47% more upticks during the prior two weeks, 0.85% more downticks during the prior week, 0.34%, 0.33%, 0.28% more downticks during the three weeks ending 9-12-03 (two weeks were skipped after this), 0.36%, 0.93%, 2.48%, 1.05%, 1.28%, 1.76% more upticks the prior six weeks, 1.99%, 2.61% more downticks the prior two weeks, 2.04% more uptick blocks the prior week, 0.66% more downtick blocks the prior week, 1.13% more uptick blocks the prior week, 1.74%, 4.84% more downtick blocks the prior two weeks, 2.20% more uptick blocks the prior week, 1.53% more downticks the prior week, 0.59% more upticks the prior week, 1.65%, 0.74%, 1.72% more downticks the prior three weeks, 5.67%, 2.54%, 0.80% more upticks the prior three weeks, 1.36% more downticks the prior week, 1.27%, 2.98%, 2.86%, 1.58%, 2.42%, 3.97%, 2.87%, 4.46%, 3.58% more upticks the prior nine weeks, 0.70% more downticks the prior week, 0.35% more upticks the prior week, 0.78%, 0.76% more downticks the prior two weeks, 2.96%, 1.8