Today was a 92% up-volume day.
Others:
90% up-volume days: May 13, Jul 19, Aug 10
90% down-volume days: May 5, May 9, Jun 9, Jun 13, Jun 16
These so-called A/D thrust days have significance.
https://twitter.com/WalterDeemer/status/1557462958745190401

I much prefer Marty Zweig’s double 9 to 1 up volume indicator within three months albeit a bit similar to Deemer’s and Lowry Research. Zweig divides up volume by down volume. Today was an impressive and rare 12 to 1. But his indicator already went on a buy on July 19 signaling the end of the bear. His indicator has kicked in at every bear market bottom with the only failure I believe in 2008. I have talked about this ad nauseam but no one ever listens. At bear market bottoms there are always 1001 reasons not to be bullish. Usually his indicator kicks in much closer to the actual bottom than this time around.
Of course Zweig was also known as much as anyone about how not to fight the Fed as well as follow the trend, This is one of the rare times I can recall his two mantras are in direct conflict with his double 9 to 1 indicator kicking in amid an ever tightening Fed. Then again, it kicked in late 2018/early2019 amid a Fed that had been tightening and that signal was spot on.
Edit: We had an 8.5 to one up day on July 1 and that was close enough to a 9 to 1 to convince many of those who religiously follow Zweig’s indicator,

Your summarization and conclusions are encouraging. Those technical signals are, frankly, beyond me..... Even so, I certainly do pay attention to Zweig! And what YOU have shared is not just chopped liver, either. Thank you!

Today was a 92% up-volume day.
Others:
90% up-volume days: May 13, Jul 19, Aug 10
90% down-volume days: May 5, May 9, Jun 9, Jun 13, Jun 16
These so-called A/D thrust days have significance.
https://twitter.com/WalterDeemer/status/1557462958745190401

I much prefer Marty Zweig’s double 9 to 1 up volume indicator within three months albeit a bit similar to Deemer’s and Lowry Research. Zweig divides up volume by down volume. Today was an impressive and rare 12 to 1. But his indicator already went on a buy on July 19 signaling the end of the bear. His indicator has kicked in at every bear market bottom with the only failure I believe in 2008. I have talked about this ad nauseam but no one ever listens. At bear market bottoms there are always 1001 reasons not to be bullish. Usually his indicator kicks in much closer to the actual bottom than this time around.
Of course Zweig was also known as much as anyone about how not to fight the Fed as well as follow the trend, This is one of the rare times I can recall his two mantras are in direct conflict with his double 9 to 1 indicator kicking in amid an ever tightening Fed. Then again, it kicked in late 2018/early2019 amid a Fed that had been tightening and that signal was spot on.
Edit: We had an 8.5 to one up day on July 1 and that was close enough to a 9 to 1 to convince many of those who religiously follow Zweig’s indicator,

Today was a 92% up-volume day.
Others:
90% up-volume days: May 13, Jul 19, Aug 10
90% down-volume days: May 5, May 9, Jun 9, Jun 13, Jun 16
These so-called A/D thrust days have significance.
https://twitter.com/WalterDeemer/status/1557462958745190401

@Derf

I heard via TV that Ford raised the price of their EV truck up over $8K !
Not enjoying that ride, Derf
Added: If you like green,
take a look at Mr. Market

This is why people need to look at which sectors the "green" etf is sampling.
Ford may be charging more for a consumer durable. OTOH, they just signed a big deal with DTE Energy that will result in 650 MW of new solar energy generation in Michigan by 2025.
https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2022/08/10/ford-dtes-solar-deal-help-automaker-go-carbon-free-michigan/10282086002/

Every fund/ETF company is jumping on the "Climate Change " bandwagon, but I think there is a good case to make for active management here, as the technology is rapidly changing and sophisticated engineers and mangers can add a lot of value by knowing what may work and may not. Most ETFs are based on "indexes" that in some cases, the companies create themselves, hardly active management. GM and Ford may well be the ultimate winners of the electric vehicle race, but neither are in most "Green" ETFs based on these indices, only TSLA.
I ( or my kids IRAs) have had positions in TAN LIT PBD PHO ( water) and FCX ( Copper) for years. My son wanted only clean energy and "green" investments so even with the recent "swoon" some of his ETFs are up 250% in the last eight years since we started his accounts.
I recently spent a fair amount of time looking for actively managed funds in "climate change" and found several interesting ideas. It is hard to search for "climate Change" as it is not a fund category that I am aware of, but M* classifies most funds as " natural resources" and you can skim their names pretty quickly. Another way is to look for concentrated positions in some of the usual companies, or other funds that hold significant positions in common with some of the bigger inaccessible funds like GCCHX.
Most funds are only recently organized, but NALFX has a long track record. GMOs Climate Change Fund GCCHX has been in business since 2017 and provides a good comparison, although it has a $5,000,000 minimum. ( Interestingly NALFX beats it with a bit more volatility).
Most are less than a year old.
I nibbled also at RKCIX ( Rockefeller management trying to make up for JD's sins), and GCEBX ( has a bit of an income focus so is less volatile) and NETZ (an ETF run by "Engine no 1, the group that forced XOM to the climate change table).
Other things to think about are materials that will go up in price as demand increases like rare earths (REMX) and "Green minerals" ( GMET). Huge quantities of Cobalt, etc will be needed to transition to carbon neutral. Carbon credits are another idea (KRBN), as is timberland ( hard to find for individuals)
I was thinking of putting this together in a Commentary piece, but my skills are limited to typing so I dumped a lot of these ideas into just a word document.

I eat A LOT of chicken, and have noticed a rise in price. I buy mine at the West Side Market in Cleveland, which tend to be from more local suppliers. Last time I bought a roaster it was about $15...2 or 3 dollars more than a year ago. If I'm buying thighs for the grill, they're really about the same, even at the local market.
Sweet corn prices?!? Oh my...

Right or wrong I bail on new positions if they hit an 7-8% loss. It's benefitted my bottom line a bunch. It tells me that I took those positions too early, that I need to have more patience and/or that I don't have a full understanding of the equity of interest …

@Mark. I’ll withdraw / modify my prior advice. Glad selling for a loss works for you. Realize some sophisticated investors use “stop loss orders” in buying / trading. Beyond my experience level or inclination. But certainly a respected approach.
Yes, I have sold speculative holdings that gained briefly and than reversed direction. Maybe for a percent or two loss. But if you’re gonna jump ship at 15% down … you’re going to have to gain back 16 or 17% elsewhere just to recoup that kind of loss. I’d say take the loss if you seriously misjudged the security. But if confident in your original analysis, stick with it. I’ll confess to buying a few shares of KKR last spring. But bailed in a day or two for a small loss when I realized it was way too aggressive / volatile an investment for me. Had clearly made some major mistakes in my initial analysis and assumptions. Stuff happens.

@hank - who said "Some would bail after a quick 15% loss - a sure way to the poor house." Right or wrong I bail on new positions if they hit an 7-8% loss. It's benefitted my bottom line a bunch. It tells me that I took those positions too early, that I need to have more patience and/or that I don't have a full understanding of the equity of interest, Ergo back to the drawing board and the research data. MDT was my most recent blunder.

A good rally from mid-June lows, whatever it is called - Bear-rally or new up-move. It has now reached the target area that many had for this bounce. Very strong day today. Strange that people are cheering CPI of +8.5% (President erroneously said no inflation when he meant no change in inflation). Where to now?
Major Indexes since 1/3/22 https://stockcharts.com/h-perf/ui?s=$SPX&compare=$COMPQ,$INDU,$TRAN,IWM&id=p07001467085
SPX/SP500 TA https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$SPX&p=D&b=5&g=0&id=p54837283928

What a move!

Umm … I track lots of things just for fun. +15% over a short period is a nice gain. Not uncommon in today’s volatile markets. Capture an quick gain like that and reinvest it back into your (more conservative) overall portfolio. Helps the bottom line over time. But it can move either way on you. Some would bail after a quick 15% loss - a sure way to the poor house.
Nice going @carew388.
With TRP, all the brokerages / asset managers had become dirt cheap earlier in the year. Investors in TROW and the others must now believe folks will start moving back into the markets now that they’ve risen significantly. Ironic in a sense.

I may have called the bottom on this one. TROW has steadily risen from around $113 a month ago to $130.50 now. Up 4.70% today alone and a total gain over 15% since I mentioned it.
No, I didn’t buy it. Hope someone else did
@Derf says “You can’t win them all.” .

We are in. And GRID is included. Per ETF.com:

The sector may include business in electric grid, electric meters and devices, networks, energy storage and management, and enabling software. GRID also screens for minimum liquidity and market cap. To enhance exposure to the smart grid market, the index provider uses a tiered weighting scheme. Securities are initially market cap weighted. Then a collective weight of 80% for Pure Play and 20% for Diversified are allocated. The Index is reconstituted semi-annually and rebalanced quarter.

If you get into this area you need to think about your commitment to electric vehicles. Tesla wags the dog at several of the alt-energy etf's. I'm not into vehicles (consumer durables) as an investment. I want to focus on the production of what goes into the vehicles, and how it is delivered.
Another factor to consider is how you feel about China. It can be a large part of some of these funds. My wife wanted a pure solar play, so she has TAN, which is around 27% China/Hong King.
The other alt/greens we ended up with are PBD

passively managed to invest in a wide array of global renewable energy companies, including those involved in conservation, improving energy efficiency and advancing renewable energy.

And ICLN

those involved in the biofuels, ethanol, geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, and wind industries. Aside from holding companies that produce energy through these means, ICLN also includes companies that develop technology and equipment used in the process.

Taken altogether, these stakes are under 5% of our portfolios. I look at them as long term growth flyers at best, or extensions of our holdings in utilities and infrastructure at worst.
Holding overlap has never been something I worry about. If there is enough differentiation between the theses then individual companies will come and go in larger or smaller bites.
First bought these for our portfolios when they were priced rather a lot higher. I bought more of them in early July 2022 when they were rather a lot lower.
If you add in our water ETF's, then we're over 5%. I look at water as an environment-influenced opportunity going forward.

Thanks @Mark
I agree that this sector has a lot of price swings. And not unlike other sector plays, the etf's being introduced has expanded a lot. My interest and use of etf's for sector investing goes back to the early '80's of using Fidelity select mutual funds.
From a various mix of sectors (wide and narrow) I watch, ICLN and TAN were the only 2 today that closed positive, +.36% and +.56%.

The below link to etf.com has several data sets, including their list of 19 (scroll down the page). The table data is set by AUM, but may be sorted by selecting 3 month return, etc.
Aside from a particular area (solar, wind, water...whatever) We consider AUM to be of importance, as some of the eft's have very low AUM. Being able to trade these etf's may be thin for low AUM issues, and/or have larger spreads.
We purchased a small amount of TAN (solar) when Putin decided to play war in Ukraine.
Any of these sectors may have their own problems for profit; being the whims of the markets, supply chain, legislation and monetary support from countries and also that; share buys/sells and/or options trading by large investment houses (hedge funds, etc.) may affect performance.
For us, less than a 5% position doesn't add enough meaningful value to the overall portfolio. This doesn't mean an immediate 5% + buy, but to obtain this point within a short time frame via "dollar cost averaging". Generally, we buy or sell in a least 5% positions. The mind set being; that we feel comfortable with this choice........OR one should likely not consider the transaction at all.
As to TAN in particular, this etf has held up well in 2022, considering the performance damage done in many areas of the overall markets.
Have you investments in this area? What do you like or are watching???
Note: there may be other choices not on the short list in the link.
19 renewable clean energy etf list
Thank you for your input.
Remain curious,
Catch

Tonight: 08 August, 2022: a toehold Limit Order into QAT at $20.99, which is -8.7 less than where it stands overnight, at $23.01. Who knows how long THAT will take to fill? I'm in no hurry, though. Why? Qatar is a rising market. This order to buy shares is like a "precision strike," rather than to depend only upon my TRAMX, which has been INCHING upward recently. Time will tell, as ever.
***Edited to add: QAT is moving too far, too fast for me. Winning the race, going away. Canceled Limit order. Instead, bought a Postal REIT on a Market Order today. Pleased with the entry price: $16.315. (yes. TRP brokerage.). PSTL.

+1 Mark / 17.5% here. (5 or 6 different ones)
But I think it all depends on the particular stocks and also achieving some balance between the sectors so they don’t all move in the same direction. I’m just a novice on that front, but I’m sure I have a few mutual funds - especially in the mining sector - that are way more volatile than most of the individual equities held.

Yes, that's a good way to put it! With so much already in Financials, I'm looking for a good pick in a different industry. Marine Shipping, or clothing manufacturing, or what have you. ... JRSH. PCFBY. GRIN. SBLK DAC. I need to save up some cash, at the moment, however. RGR fell like a stone after latest Earnings Report disappointed... TRP tells me my personal Rate of Return in RGR is now DOWN -10%. Sucks. But it is a tiny amount of money. That might well be the one I "flip," after the 31st Aug. dividend shows up. Not too far away. Others I'm eyeballing: QAT (ETF.) PSTL (RE.). DBSDY (Singapore Bank ADR.). CLF (but no dividend!)

Sorry. Getting very far afield, here. The early years were a muddled mess for the infant new country. Lots of veterans just plain got SCREWED:
"...In 1797, Knox's claim was upheld. Martin's 100-acre farm was valued by three commissioners: one appointed by the settlers, one by the Proprietors and the third by the first two. Martin's was appraised for the sum of $170, payable over six years in three installments either in cash or in farm products. He could not raise the money and begged Knox to allow him to keep the land. There is no evidence that Knox even acknowledged his plaintive letters and appeared to let him remain on the land. Plumb Martin farmed only eight(8) acres of the original 100 he opted for. Knox died in 1806, never demanding payment from Plumb Martin. By 1811, his farmland was cut by half, and by 1818, when he appeared in the Massachusetts General Court with other Revolutionary War veterans to claim a war pension, he owned nothing.[7]
In 1818, Martin's war pension was approved and he received $96 a year for the rest of his life.[6] Still, other war veterans were fighting for what they were properly owed and, in an effort to further the cause of the veterans, Martin published his memoirs anonymously in 1830. It was not considered a success and mainly fell to the wayside, apparently lost to history.
In 1836, a platoon of United States Light Infantry was marching through Prospect and discovered that Plumb Martin resided there. The platoon stopped outside of his house and fired a salute in honor of the Revolutionary War Hero.
*** So, not only did he fight and win, but afterwards, the Sec. of War first attempted to evict him, but then tacitly relented. "Thanks a lot, that's awfully white of you!"
After all he had been through, JP Martin's gravestone simply states: "A Solder of the Revolution." (Stockton Springs, Maine.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Plumb_Martin

That was very helpful, yogibearbull (gives new meaning to the phrase "regulatory burden"). It makes clear that at present, a comparison of fund performance to a broad-based index is an SEC requirement. I wasn't sure.
But this version of the form mentions exchange traded funds, hence, can't be too old. Do you happen to know whether an agency like the SEC would keep a trailing history of the text of prior versions of a key form like N-1A? Or would those be buried in some paper archive, like pre-1994 EDGAR submissions, and only apparent by unearthing an old 1950 filing for some fund?

Funds follow the current SEC Form N-1A that has been revised over the years. This Form includes what the SEC thinks should be included by the funds now and probably doesn't include anything that would violate/contradict the letter or spirit of the ICA 1940.
https://www.sec.gov/about/forms/formn-1a.pdf

Today in their SEC filings all mutual funds report fund performance relative to a benchmark, historically the S&P 500 or a total market index. But was it always that way?
General reporting requirements date to the 1940 Act. Did that act explicitly specify comparison of fund performance to a benchmark, or did that habit begin later? Easy to imagine the marketing department at some fund on a hot streak coming up with the bright idea to show how much the fund outperformed. Also easy to imagine that comparison to a benchmark was something that John Bogle started doing in the 1960s or 1970s, to suit his purposes.
OTOH, the SEC report that laid the foundation for the 1940 Act benchmarked fund performance against the Standard Statistics index. So maybe it is in the Act.
Anybody know? Or anybody have a mutual fund annual report from the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s? I’d love to know whether a benchmark was customary in fund reports even back then.

There is some story behind this.
So, John Hancock (with Canadian parent MFC) was surprised/blindsighted when its fund JCUAX / JCUIX's (AUM $571 million) subadvisor First Quadrant was acquired by Systematica, and big AMG has stakes in both advisory firms. So, somebody forgot to loop in John Hancock/MFC, or for some reason, John Hancock/MFC doesn't like this move but the parties decided to go ahead.
https://citywireusa.com/professional-buyer/news/hancock-gatekeepers-place-quant-shop-under-review-ahead-of-acquisition/a2390473