The goal of every investor is to “buy low and sell high.”
But unfortunately, the average trader tends to do the exact opposite.
When stocks are going up rapidly, investors often jump in at the top because they are afraid of missing the big winnings. Likewise, when stocks are falling fast, investors usually give up after weeks of losing money and sell out.
The result is that most investors actually buy high and sell low. People just can’t help themselves.
The problem is the emotional nature of humans. We get scared or we get greedy and we don’t act rationally.
But a supercomputer doesn’t have that problem. It simply analyzes the data and makes a logical conclusion.
Take the market crash of 2001…
After an impossible run-up in dot-com stocks during the late 90s, stocks were way overheated. Some were trading at 100 times earnings or more.
And yet people still engaged in buying frenzies for tech stocks that had ZERO revenue.
S.T.A.R.S. on the other hand was very selective. When we ran a back-test on the data from April 2001 through April 2002, it crunched the data and came back with only five companies that matched the desired criteria.
That’s just five total companies… Out of all the publicly traded companies across the stock market.
The computer couldn’t select any other companies because they didn’t meet the predetermined criteria; they were all trading way above book value per share, or were highly overbought, or just plain didn’t have enough earnings.
The computer refused to go along with the crowd.
And how did those five companies fair during that timeframe?
|Advanced Energy Industries… Up 39.5%|
|ATMI, Inc… Up 69.7%|
|Chico’s FAS Inc… Up 123.3%|
|Sonic Automotive Inc… Up 284.4%|
|Sawek, Inc… Up 43.7%|
S.T.A.R.S. only picked out five stocks in total. The average gain was 112%. All while the Dow only went up 6%.
If you had placed $50,000 in the Dow, you would have ended up with $53,000. $50,000 spread out in the five companies S.T.A.R.S. selected would have been worth $106,000.
But that’s the point of S.T.A.R.S.
It’s about quality not quantity.
When stocks are cheap, it hones-in on lots of them – like the 15 it signaled in March 2009. And when they are expensive, it picks out very few. The result, as I’ve shown you, is that it performed incredibly well in our back-tests, during both bull and bear markets.
It actually does what most humans wish they could… indicate the best possible time frames to buy low and sell high.
The system will never spit out a company purely based on speculation like a broker would. A stock absolutely MUST match the criteria to be selected – or it’s simply tossed to the side.
The system’s strict set of rules are the backbone for its success – and it’s the reason I’m so excited to invite a few members to try out our brand new research service based around this powerful tool.
But before I show you how to access it, I’ll bet you’re wondering…
“What makes this systems-based approach better than any other?”
Here’s the answer…
One thing you need to understand is that machines can’t do it all. Sure a “super-cruncher” has all the computing power in the world, but if that power isn’t guided in the right direction, it can be virtually useless.
That’s why so many people have tried and failed at creating a computer that picks stocks.
Either you have a computer programmer who knows very little about how companies and markets work. Or you might have a brilliant market analyst who knows nothing about using supercomputers.
Rarely do you find a person with the technical expertise and the market intelligence necessary to really make things work.
But that’s just the person we have to run S.T.A.R.S., and head up a new publication based on these technological insights.
Even before he began working on our secret supercomputer project, Senior Analyst Marc Lichtenfeld was a rising star at The Oxford Club.
His biotech research service, for example, has handed readers gains of 103% in IMGN in less than a year… 103% in NKTR in seven months… and 211% in PIP in about four months.
He’s been written up in many publications including The Wall Street Journal and The Street.com where he was a Senior Columnist.
In addition, the major investment firms and professionals that rely on his research include:
|A San Francisco-based hedge fund with $8 billion under management…|
|The Director of Research of a $450-million New York-based hedge fund…|
|A Managing Director of a Fifth Avenue (New York)-based investment bank.|
|A Northern California hedge fund whose primary investor is a household name billionaire.|
|A New York-based institutional brokerage that features some of the largest hedge funds as its clients.|
|And several other institutional brokerages and hedge funds.|
Obviously Marc is well-qualified as a market analyst even without the aid of a number-crunching supercomputer like S.T.A.R.S.
Just ask some of his readers…
“I’m now up $7,700. Before joining you I was a pure gambler. You changed my mentality and made me a wiser investor.” – Kevin R., Seattle, Washington
“Your recommendation on Delcath made me approximately $20,000.” – Jack C., Deltona, Florida
“I am glad I made the right move and cashed out my entire position making a 159% profit. Thanks!” – Paula D., Fairfax, Virginia
I share all this with you not to brag about Marc – although we’re certainly proud to have him as a member of our team – but so you can understand how important it is to have someone who is an experienced and successful market analyst running the show.
That way the computer is not just blindly spitting out data. Marc guides it in a desired direction and the computer helps him determine what works.
To give you an exact idea of how this process works, Marc has agreed to an interview about his experience…