UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (11) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: mungofitch Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Winner! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 262211  
Subject: Re: SoWR and New Relative Value Screen Date: 2/10/2013 9:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 10
I like the overall approach, in particular the use of "within industry" rankings.

suggestions would be appreciated

Here's a simple one:
Why seek high volatility?
If you leave that out at 20 stocks deep it gives higher CAGR, steadier
returns (lower rolling six month downside deviation) and a slightly simpler screen.
As a general rule, and contrary to much academic claptrap, less volatile stocks have better performance.

That list of weights sure does look like it has been pretty carefully [over?]tuned.
To get an idea of how much that matters, I tried a detuned version with
all the weights set to 1 except free cash flow which is clearly the heavy one.
(that choice itself wasn't tuned, it's the only thing I tried)

At 20 stocks deep CAGR drops from 44 to 36 and pseudodowndev rises from 14 to 18
At 10 stocks deep CAGR drops from 51 to 41 and pseudodowndev rises from 19 to 25
So it looks like the tuning is giving both higher and steadier returns.
To the extent that it's useful or harmless tuning, that's fine,
but real life results won't be as good as either of those.
One might also try a detuned version with (say) only two weightings of
either "high" or "low" for all the different parameters.
Maybe weight 1 for some and a single weight (2.5?) for all the others, something like that.

Have you tried a "no financials" version?
Nothing to do with the financial crisis, but more because things like
revenue and free cash flow don't mean nearly the same thing at a bank.
There are similarly good reasons for perhaps considering no-utilities and
no-mines/materials versions, as they are not the "plain product or service"
firms for whom so many great metrics are useful (sales, cash flow, free cash flow, ROE).

This is fairly strongly slanted to being a growth/momentum shoot-for-the moon screen: sales growth, EPS growth, momentum.
It would be interesting to contrast it with a companion value screen built the same way.
Longer lookback momentum, more value parameters like current EY,
average earnings last N years as a % of price, dividend yield, ROE.

Not sure if this will help, but unlagged company momentum works well,
and so does lagged momentum for a single company.
RRS is a lot like lagged momentum. One of the rankings potentially worth
putting into the mix is a percentrank of simple no-lag short-lookback RS of the industry versus other industries.
This is the "salmon" approach: going against the stream as you want to
de-emphasize (allow weak) short term performance of a company within
an industry having strong short term performance.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (11) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next


Post of the Day:
Macro Economics

Looking at Oil and Gas
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.