"The NEoWave Equity Fund (NEF) closely tracks trades given in this section. Following today’s Emergency report, the NEF exited its Long SPY with everyone else (the fill was 112.68,which gave us a 1.10% return). Since this trade only lasted a few weeks, that equates to a 19% annual interest rate on capital! Not bad in this economy." So when there has been a -1% stop loss in a couple of days over the past year and a bit, why don't I get the annualized equivalent loss? Again, Mr Neely, be humble. You have a lot to be humble about, you have a lot of errors to compensate for. Letting all of us retards know what a 1.1% return in a few weeks represents on an annual basis, attempting to tout your genius timing techniques is just poor form. "so, we cleared 90 points or $4,500 per contract" The oldest trick in the book. When you want to sell a product, talk money. When you don't want the attention, omit the dollar loss you sustained. I am losing all respect that I had built up over the years. And this even after a profitable trade. Cribrange.

In 2004, Harry Dent said this : Dow 40,000, Nasdaq 20,000 by 2009; Harry Dent predicts a 'New Millionaire Economy' CBS MarketWatch.com ^ | 11/03/2004 | Paul B. Farrell Nice. Cribrange.

Erratum : replace 'oversold' with 'overbought'.

Dear all, What I don't understand, is that a couple of weeks ago, Neely called a top based on his MOAT index, as he stated that oversold levels had been reached on daily AND weekly time frames. After being stopped out, this same oversold MOAT index on multiple time frames, was then used to predict a rise. All this, in a matter of a week or so. Now, if this MOAT index was indeed showing oversold levels on a daily and weekly basis and observing that in essence, the market has done nothing in reality over the past fortnight, how could this same index be used to call a rise? Once again, it isn't so much the error in delta forecast that I bothers me (although the string of losses cannot be very good marketing material for his fund), but it is the seemingly complete lack of logic surrounding his approach that confuses me. If you replaced 'Neely' with say 'Mr.X', I would be forced to conclude that he is a complete and utter charlatan. On a final note, should this market finally commence a retreat today or tomorrow and provoke a short trade from Neely, this would be the final straw. Thank you all for listening, Cribrange.

So we are now going from Neely to Bradley. Oh dear. Yelnick, I think you have lost it. Cribrange.

DG, Analysis aside, I love how you systematically take the bait. Regards, Cribrange

DG, Thanks for responding to my comment on a previous thread. I actually agree with you. The 'certainty' element to his posts as you correctly put it, has had to be toned down. In his recent analysis this was felt, most probably coincidentally, but nonetheless reassuring to a certain degree. He has gone short again. To be fair, I don't think it is a bad idea at this level and time. However, this has prompted a thought I had during last year's Q2 rise and multiple stop outs he suffered. Frequently, he would get stopped out quite close to an interim high, only to see the market come back off and frequently reach previous shorting levels. This in turn would prompt him to reshort and suffer the same consequence. My thought was this : why does he not offer his recommendations, but with options? Maybe short term ATM options may offer him the similar leverage he gets from futures and even if he doesn't, he would at the very least put an end to this continual whipsawing, that has clearly dented his confidence and his readers and get back on the saddle. Just a thought. Cribrange.

I think you have to feel for Glenn Neely. After announcing triumphantly he is launching his fund after a stellar performance in 2008, since mid 2009 he has been slapped around like a red headed step child. Today, for the umpteenth time, he has been stopped out on all 3 time frames. To make matters worse, because he has lost money and credibility, he has fallen back on the oh so secret MOAT oscillator. Sorry the what? Ah. Old and probably very poor subscribers would know about this secret weapon of his. Allegedly. Hands up who think he's looking at the RSI readings off Yahoo Finance? I have read his book, followed him, traded off him, tracked his performance (although I am now giving it up as I have taken up Hamster breeding instead) and I am now sick of it. It's not so much that he has got so terribly wrong. It's the way he presents himself. I love the long term charts he shows with the forecast he made in 2008 of a bear market. Great call. And he keeps it there to show everyone how clever he is. However, he fails to illustrate the complete and absolute shocker in the summer of 2009. Something along the lines of 'rarely in my career do I ever make these kind of statements, but the top is in and ...'. Wrong. Wrong. And wrong again. Cribrange

DG, Nice put down. Cribrange.

DG, Many thanks for that. I have been following the guy for a while but didn't have any hard data. I wonder if he supplies this himself? Surely he must keep a track record, especially seeing as it appears he trades his signals? Anyhow, stellar performance since last October. Mark, if you don't consider his analysis, then why bother posting here? I can respect that you prefer a simple moving average to him, but then what is the point in heckling? If you really think that, why are you attempting to sway our opinion? This is after all a zero sum game and if I were you, I would be willing us all on into our certain financial collapse. Glenn Loser Neely. You are priceless. You subscribe to Neely and continue to bash him with your attempt at reverse psychology. You must be frightfully clever. Yelnick, love the blog, would be even better without the hecklers. Sincerely, Cribrange

DG, The track record of Neely you provided since October of last year is very useful. Would you per chance have data further back? Regards, Cribrange