- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 4/30/10 at 9:42 pm to wegotdatwood
LSURUSSIAN,
what are you feelings between AA vs. CENX?
ive watched both for a while, and have been wanting to invest in AA for a while. however CENX is very appealing as it tends to follow the trend of AA.
i am an amateur trader, but ive made a few good moves. just looking for other insight.
TIA
also, i enjoy trolling all you guys rants. very interetsing
what are you feelings between AA vs. CENX?
ive watched both for a while, and have been wanting to invest in AA for a while. however CENX is very appealing as it tends to follow the trend of AA.
i am an amateur trader, but ive made a few good moves. just looking for other insight.
TIA
also, i enjoy trolling all you guys rants. very interetsing
Posted on 4/30/10 at 10:04 pm to donRANDOMnumbers
I'm not that familiar with CENX. Just about all I know is that they are about one-tenth the size of AA. So, if you prefer a small to mid-cap then CENX is for you.
I pretty much stick with AA, although they've hit a rough patch the past couple of weeks. (I bought some more today when they dipped.) I think in 2 years a lot of people will look back and say
, I could have had AA at 13 something!!
I'm not sure if this helps you. Please don't invest on what I say. Do your own research before you invest.
I pretty much stick with AA, although they've hit a rough patch the past couple of weeks. (I bought some more today when they dipped.) I think in 2 years a lot of people will look back and say
, I could have had AA at 13 something!! I'm not sure if this helps you. Please don't invest on what I say. Do your own research before you invest.
Posted on 4/30/10 at 10:34 pm to LSURussian
appreciate your thoughts. ive been following them for a while. im a big fan of metals and mining in general.
i was lucky enough to go on a big ride with PCU, but should have never sold it when i did
i was lucky enough to go on a big ride with PCU, but should have never sold it when i did
Posted on 4/30/10 at 10:52 pm to donRANDOMnumbers
quote:
also, i enjoy trolling all you guys rants. very interetsing
Nothin wrong with Trollin. Love this thread! Makes me think....
Posted on 5/1/10 at 7:56 am to scormi5
I had aa for a while... I had bought it around 9 and sold it around 14. Thinking about getting back into it now.
Posted on 5/1/10 at 6:27 pm to LSU1018
Anyone like BYD Electronic? Was reading up a little bit on it. Warren Buffett apprently likes it. They make products for electric/hybrid cars. They are out of China. g2g.
Posted on 5/1/10 at 6:59 pm to wegotdatwood
This must be the longest thread on MT.
Posted on 5/1/10 at 7:16 pm to wegotdatwood
quote:
They are out of China.
Are you sure about that? Their HQs are in Nevada.
Posted on 5/2/10 at 4:53 am to RedStickBR
Posted on 5/2/10 at 11:09 am to RedStickBR
Red,
Im looking across alot of sectors and stocks running right underneath recent 1 year highs. Can we make significant gains from here in your opinion? I see the summer energy prices killing any rally.
Im looking across alot of sectors and stocks running right underneath recent 1 year highs. Can we make significant gains from here in your opinion? I see the summer energy prices killing any rally.
Posted on 5/2/10 at 1:59 pm to wegotdatwood
Thanks wegotdawood, I'll look into it.
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:05 pm to STEALTH
quote:
Im looking across alot of sectors and stocks running right underneath recent 1 year highs. Can we make significant gains from here in your opinion? I see the summer energy prices killing any rally.
As the market is still quite toppy in my opinion, and it appears the market will continue selling off bad news re: GS, which likely will continue well into the future, I agree that investors should be very cautious in buying large cap stocks, even more so if said stocks are trading at or near 52-week highs.
This, in large part, is why I'm sticking to small-mid caps (listed stocks trading under 10 dollars). There are two reasons for this:
1.
2. If and when the Dow finally does see a 1-2 week sell off, there will be a large volume of capital that flows into these smaller cap stocks. It always happens and I'll be in before it does so.
This post was edited on 5/2/10 at 4:10 pm
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:10 pm to RedStickBR
quote:
1. Most of these stocks have beta values greater than one, meaning they'll probably be more volatile than the general market, but are not subjected to move in the same direction as the market. So their volatility is tied more to intrinsic technical and fundamental quality as opposed to general market swings, which I'm perfectly fine with.
Curious how you came to that conclusion.
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:19 pm to kfizzle85
The closer the value is to 1, the more likely the underlying security will be to move with the market. A beta value far below 1 will be less volatile than the market. However, it will not necessarily be subject to move with the market. So if the market sees a 10% swing up, a stock with a beta value much less than 1 may see only a 5% swing, however it is not as likely to be in the same direction as the market as would be true for a stock with a Beta value of 1.
The inverse is true for stocks with Betas much higher than 1, which are the ones I'm interested in. They will be more volatile than the market, but the swings don't have to be in the same direction as the market. That's always how I've understood it at least.
Thus, if a stock has a beta value of 4, meaning it's much more volatile than the market, but that volatility is not due to market swings, it must be tied to other factors, such as fundamental and technical movers.
The inverse is true for stocks with Betas much higher than 1, which are the ones I'm interested in. They will be more volatile than the market, but the swings don't have to be in the same direction as the market. That's always how I've understood it at least.
Thus, if a stock has a beta value of 4, meaning it's much more volatile than the market, but that volatility is not due to market swings, it must be tied to other factors, such as fundamental and technical movers.
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:33 pm to RedStickBR
quote:
The closer the value is to 1, the more likely the underlying security will be to move with the market. A beta value far below 1 will be less volatile than the market.
Beta measures systematic/non-diversifiable risk, but it doesn't tell you anything about direction.
quote:
however it is not as likely to be in the same direction as the market as would be true for a stock with a Beta value of 1.
The inverse is true for stocks with Betas much higher than 1, which are the ones I'm interested in. They will be more volatile than the market, but the swings don't have to be in the same direction as the market.
I think you're drawing conclusions that beta does not provide you with. The stocks don't have to move in the same direction as the market, but you can't tell which direction they may or may not move from beta, you need to look at a correlation coefficient (or semi-standard deviation). Beta doesn't tell you anything about direction, volatility is measured by standard deviation, and standard deviation is two-sided.
This post was edited on 5/2/10 at 2:35 pm
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:38 pm to kfizzle85
quote:
Beta is calculated using regression analysis, and you can think of beta as the tendency of a security's returns to respond to swings in the market. A beta of 1 indicates that the security's price will move with the market. A beta of less than 1 means that the security will be less volatile than the market. A beta of greater than 1 indicates that the security's price will be more volatile than the market. For example, if a stock's beta is 1.2, it's theoretically 20% more volatile than the market.
Perhaps I'm reading too much into the bolded sentence. Are you saying he's referring not to the direction of price movement, but rather to the percentage of the swing as compared to the percentage of the market swing?
So Beta of 1 means if the market moves 5%, that security will likely also move 5%, but that move can be in either direction?
This post was edited on 5/2/10 at 2:39 pm
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:43 pm to RedStickBR
FWIW I'm just desparately looking for an excuse not to study and write this paper. I've been making seafood gumbo since 1230. I have zero motivation right now.
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:45 pm to RedStickBR
Yes, exactly.
Posted on 5/2/10 at 2:45 pm to RedStickBR
quote:
So Beta of 1 means if the market moves 5%, that security will likely also move 5%, but that move can be in either direction?
I don't really see how you got that.
He said it moves with the market. I think that implies the same direction.
Page 13 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News