From: ar017@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Nolan Whitaker)
Newsgroups: misc.invest
Subject: Re: AIQ & MetaStock
Date: 8 Sep 1992 01:22:34 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


A while back posted a request for information comparing
the AIQ Stock Expert software with MetaStock Professional.
I agreed to post a summary of responses if there was adequate
interest.  Many people indicated that they too were interested
in a discussion of the merits of each piece of software.  I
was particularly interested to know about the BUY/SELL signals
generated by AIQ's expert system.
 
I received no replies from anyone on the net explaining their
experiences with either product.  However, I was able to
locate a limited discussion on Prodigy's Computer Club
bulletin board.  Below is an inconclusive assessment:
 
AIQ:  There were people who had used the software who swore
      by it- they wouldn'y use anything else at any price.
      However, there were many (if not more) who
      indicated that the software's BUY/SELL signals were
      no more accurate than throwing darts... Incidentally,
      one person indicated that the results that AIQ 
      mentions (I haven't seen them so I don't know how
      effective AIQ claims the product to be) treats a
      neutral reading by the software to indicate the
      correct signal (ie: a neutral rating is construed
      by the company to mean a buy if the stock subsequently
      goes up in value and conversely a sell if the stock 
      goes down, the only time the software is considered 
      wrong is if a true BUY signal is given & the stock declines).
 
MetaStock:  Nearly everyone who commented that they had used the
      software seemed to indicate positive feelings toward
      it, though some tended to be more positive than others.
      Basically, it is seen as a good piece of charting software
      with excellent ability to back-test trading systems.
      Even AIQ users who had tried MetaStock gave it good marks,
      although many said that it took much more time to interpret
      the charts-- they liked the BUY/SELL signals automatically
      generated by AIQ.
 
 
NOTE:  The successful users of AIQ indicated that they did not
      rely blindly on the BUY/SELL signals generated by that
      software.  Instead, they used these signals as a place
      to start.  Many would screen several hundred stocks,
      examining only those stocks where a signal had been
      generated.  This way, several stocks could be followed in
      a much shorter time than if the investor manually interpreted 
      the graphs for each stock with MetaStock.
 
 
This is by no means a complete comparison of the two products.  I
am still undecided about which I will buy, but I have ordered a
demo version of MetaStock and a trial version of AIQ Stock Expert.
When these come in and I have a chance to evaluate them, I'll
try to let everyone know what I decided and why.
 
THE PREVAILING ADVICE ON PRODIGY WAS SIMPLY TO TRY THEM BOTH
AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF.
 
============================================================
 
PS: Since writing the above, I have received a trial version
of AIQ StockExpert v3.52 and a demo of MetaStock v3.0.
It is really difficult to compare the two sice AIQ gives a
full working version of their software which stops working 
1 month after installation and Equis (MetaStock company) 
provides only a limited demo which does not allow you to do
anything significant (ie: you can look at the charts on screen,
but can't print them out to see how they look on paper; you
can't use the system tester; you can't update stock data (the
data provided with MetaStock is quite limited and old, while 
the data included with AIQ was extensive and updated through
Aug. 28-- AIQ includes the S&P 100 stocks and the DOW 30.)
 
At first, I was unimpressed with the accuracy of AIQ, but there
are a number of different reports generated by the software.
I orignally used the "ACTION LIST" which reports stocks given a
high expert rating which has since been confirmed by the
MACDI (moving average convergence divergence index) indicator.
The manual seemed to indicate this list was more accurate.  It
seemed to lag (ie: stock had already gone up).
 
However, I found the "EXPERT RATING" report to be much better.
The manual does state that if you wish to use options (instead
of buying actual stock) this report should be used.  This report
tends to anticipate price bottoms (tops) [my LIMITED observance 
so far is that the bottom usually occurs within 1 to 4 days 
after the BUY signal is generated].  This list was very accurate
on June 22, 1992 (the only date I've truly tested).  It gave
6 perfect BUY signals (expert rating=100), 2 99 ratings, and 4
98 ratings.  ALL STOCKS SUBSEQUENTLY WENT UP within 3 months.
(the amount varied)  All stocks which rated 100 increased by
a minimum of $2 3/8 (+3.8%) and a max. of $5 1/4 (+14%).
 
It appears that the SELL signals are good, but not as accurate.
 
 
Nolan W. Whitaker
uk02728@ukpr.uky.edu
Newsgroups: misc.invest