<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: LOW: Lowe&#8217;s Shouldn&#8217;t Be Flocking With Home Depot</title>
	<link>http://stockmarketbeat.com/blog1/2007/08/25/low-lowes-shouldnt-be-flocking-with-home-depot/</link>
	<description>Our beat: The stock market. Our job: Beat it.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Trent</title>
		<link>http://stockmarketbeat.com/blog1/2007/08/25/low-lowes-shouldnt-be-flocking-with-home-depot/#comment-53102</link>
		<author>Trent</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 01:16:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://stockmarketbeat.com/blog1/2007/08/25/low-lowes-shouldnt-be-flocking-with-home-depot/#comment-53102</guid>
		<description>But that is my point - the market moves are swamping the relative performance - thus there is little to show for Lowes' recent accomplishments. Even your version of the chart shows the relative performance running within +- 10%, which is noise in my book. If you are able to profit by leveraging up 20x and betting that the spread won't exceed 10% power to you, but that's not my game.

The market moves don't swamp the swings if you look at the charts for, e.g. &lt;a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=hpq&#038;compidx=aaaaa%3A0&#038;comp=dell&#038;ma=0&#038;maval=9&#038;uf=0&#038;lf=1&#038;lf2=0&#038;lf3=0&#038;type=2&#038;size=2&#038;state=8&#038;sid=2385&#038;style=320&#038;time=9&#038;freq=1&#038;nosettings=1&#038;rand=9190&#038;mocktick=1" rel="nofollow"&gt;Hewlett Packard vs Dell&lt;/a&gt; or &lt;a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=hpq&#038;compidx=aaaaa%3A0&#038;comp=ibm&#038;ma=0&#038;maval=9&#038;uf=0&#038;lf=1&#038;lf2=0&#038;lf3=0&#038;type=2&#038;size=2&#038;state=8&#038;sid=2385&#038;style=320&#038;time=9&#038;freq=1&#038;nosettings=1&#038;rand=9095&#038;mocktick=1" rel="nofollow"&gt;IBM&lt;/a&gt; or (until recently) &lt;a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/frames.asp?symb=hpq&#038;time=8&#038;freq=1" rel="nofollow"&gt;Coke vs Pepsi&lt;/a&gt; or even &lt;a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=t&#038;compidx=aaaaa%3A0&#038;comp=vz&#038;ma=0&#038;maval=9&#038;uf=0&#038;lf=1&#038;lf2=0&#038;lf3=0&#038;type=2&#038;size=2&#038;state=8&#038;sid=2156816&#038;style=320&#038;time=9&#038;freq=1&#038;nosettings=1&#038;rand=184&#038;mocktick=1" rel="nofollow"&gt;AT&#038;T vs Verizon.&lt;/a&gt; You get my point...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But that is my point - the market moves are swamping the relative performance - thus there is little to show for Lowes&#8217; recent accomplishments. Even your version of the chart shows the relative performance running within +- 10%, which is noise in my book. If you are able to profit by leveraging up 20x and betting that the spread won&#8217;t exceed 10% power to you, but that&#8217;s not my game.</p>
<p>The market moves don&#8217;t swamp the swings if you look at the charts for, e.g. <a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=hpq&#038;compidx=aaaaa%3A0&#038;comp=dell&#038;ma=0&#038;maval=9&#038;uf=0&#038;lf=1&#038;lf2=0&#038;lf3=0&#038;type=2&#038;size=2&#038;state=8&#038;sid=2385&#038;style=320&#038;time=9&#038;freq=1&#038;nosettings=1&#038;rand=9190&#038;mocktick=1" rel="nofollow">Hewlett Packard vs Dell</a> or <a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=hpq&#038;compidx=aaaaa%3A0&#038;comp=ibm&#038;ma=0&#038;maval=9&#038;uf=0&#038;lf=1&#038;lf2=0&#038;lf3=0&#038;type=2&#038;size=2&#038;state=8&#038;sid=2385&#038;style=320&#038;time=9&#038;freq=1&#038;nosettings=1&#038;rand=9095&#038;mocktick=1" rel="nofollow">IBM</a> or (until recently) <a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/frames.asp?symb=hpq&#038;time=8&#038;freq=1" rel="nofollow">Coke vs Pepsi</a> or even <a href="http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=t&#038;compidx=aaaaa%3A0&#038;comp=vz&#038;ma=0&#038;maval=9&#038;uf=0&#038;lf=1&#038;lf2=0&#038;lf3=0&#038;type=2&#038;size=2&#038;state=8&#038;sid=2156816&#038;style=320&#038;time=9&#038;freq=1&#038;nosettings=1&#038;rand=184&#038;mocktick=1" rel="nofollow">AT&#038;T vs Verizon.</a> You get my point&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wcw</title>
		<link>http://stockmarketbeat.com/blog1/2007/08/25/low-lowes-shouldnt-be-flocking-with-home-depot/#comment-53101</link>
		<author>wcw</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 15:48:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://stockmarketbeat.com/blog1/2007/08/25/low-lowes-shouldnt-be-flocking-with-home-depot/#comment-53101</guid>
		<description>Or you could plot relative total returns: http://www.bignose.org/~wcw/HDLOW.png

While recent swings between the two companies aren't nearly as heavy as they have been, there are still swings.  Market moves just swamp them if you plot both lines on a chart.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or you could plot relative total returns: <a href="http://www.bignose.org/~wcw/HDLOW.png" rel="nofollow">http://www.bignose.org/~wcw/HDLOW.png</a></p>
<p>While recent swings between the two companies aren&#8217;t nearly as heavy as they have been, there are still swings.  Market moves just swamp them if you plot both lines on a chart.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
