10 replies to this topic

[Rogerdodger]

Anything can happen, but I was looking for a big jump in negative sentiment after Friday's 200+ point sell-off.
(260 points if you count from the highs of the day.)
But Sentimentrader did not budge from Thursday's close.

When is the last time you saw "all the president's men" on CNBC to reassure everybody, as they did Friday?
That smacked of panic IMHO.



TSP, after being on a sell for 4 weeks, finally got one.
Now they have moved to a buy:

07/30/07-08/03/07
Bulls = 45%
Bears = 41%
Ratio = 1.10
Votes = 391
Signal = BUY

For our survey we noticed a Ratio of:
2.00 and higher tends to be bearish
1.25 or less tends to be bullish.

Remember the little rally we had Monday?
It looks like it influenced these guys as this was published about the time everything fell apart:

Edited by Rogerdodger, 28 July 2007 - 11:19 AM.

[spielchekr]

This one did, from those persistant 94% levels

[Rogerdodger]

This one did, from those persistant 94% levels

WOW! It looks like they are in full panic mode. NOT!

[dcengr]

The Rasmussen Consumer Index dropped three-and-a-half points on Saturday and now stands at 106.4. The is the fifth consecutuve day the index has fallen and it is now five points lower than it was one week ago. At 106.4 the index is a point and a half lower than the full month average for June. Nationally, 33% of adults rate the economy as either good or excellent. That's compared to 29% who say the economy is poor and 36% who rate the economy as fair.

The Rasmussen Investor Index declined four and a half points today continuing its steady decline this week. After reaching 144.5 on Wednesday the index has dropped sixteen points in the past three days. The Index is down eight points from a week ago and three-and-a-half points from where it was one month ago.

16 points from 144.5 = 128.5

The Rasmussen Investor Index reached its highest level ever at 150.9 on January 7, 2004. The lowest level ever measured was 91.1 on March 13, 2003.

[spielchekr]

RD, one good sentiment gage seems to be the board's interest in sentiment. I see you have a measly 126 hits on this thread so far, but I named that sentiment in 55 hits.

[arbman]

All these neutrals are actually closet bears scared to short this market, maybe they jumped in this week...





Nah! Half of them did, the other half actually went long, look at the option data below!

The equity guys bottom picked, while the index guys were busy hedging the entire market!

The market should bounce a little, but this bullish sentiment means the work with the downside is not over. These guys will not hesitate to flip long as soon as they see a decent rally, imho...

[spielchekr]

WSJ leads the pack, but reader apathy continues mostly unabated. For a chart alignment from last week with the Dow: http://www.traders-t...?...ic=72954. The complacency of August 2004 was the best readership bottom before this one.

[Rogerdodger]

The market should bounce a little, but this bullish sentiment means the work with the downside is not over.

That's the way I see it, so far anyway.

[OEXCHAOS]

Kisa, Are you looking at the buy to open data or the total? I think that the equity buy to open is better as it gives a clearer read of sentiment. Also, I think you should look at the less than 11 options buyers. That way you weed out larger spread players and programmers who might otherwise muddy the data with market neutral plays and purchases that close positions. Mark

[arbman]

I am sure one can do a finer analysis than my rough cut... They are the open + close buy orders, I look at the sheer amount of leaning of the participants. The reason I also look at the premiums is to see how much of these purchases are actually neutral vs directional plays. The closed buys would not be deep(er) in the money, right?!? The higher the premiums, the more they are likely to be unbalanced. Then I do not have to separate the data for the smaller positions. The large positions can be also flawed in aggregate. A lot of the time when the volume spikes higher like this with the high premiums, there is more firm activity, or hedge funds. But they are usually biased in one direction when the premiums are unbalanced. These are definitely not the small guys creating these massive orders, they don't have much place in this game anymore. IT reversals out of these situations that I am more interested in... - kisa