A
Buy signal was issued this week!
The Buy
signal was issued Wednesday May 31, 2006 after the close of the
market. Read the Market Update for information
on what brought about this trend change.
Current
Signal Performance as of
Signal
Type |
Trade
Date |
Index |
Return
since issued |
|
|
|
Nasdaq 100 |
|
Russell 2000 |
|
S&P 500 |
|
Cumulative
Returns since First TimingCube
Live Signal (
) as of
Index |
Long
Only
|
Long
Only
with
Margin |
Long
& Short |
Long
& Short
with
Margin |
Buy
& Hold |
Nasdaq 100 |
|
|
|
|
|
Russell 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
S&P 500 |
|
|
|
|
|

Despite
a challenging start to the holiday-shortened week, the major
indices managed to move higher over the 4-day span. The ability
of the Nasdaq Composite to stabilize and rebound in the last
week of May caused our Model to issue a Buy
signal after the close on Wednesday. Because the new Buy
signal came so soon after the previous Sell,
a few subscribers wrote us to ask if it was the result of a
judgment call on our part. It is absolutely not. As has been
the case for all previous signals, this latest Buy was issued
by the same 100% mechanical and unemotional Model we have used
all along and there has been no change whatsoever. Our Model
could not care less about what our opinion on the market is.
It just flashed a Buy
signal so we acted on it without trying to second-guess. The
day after the signal was issued, markets confirmed their rebound
as the Nasdaq Composite jumped almost 2%, its best showing since
mid-April. On the economic front, the May employment report
released Friday should help alleviate recurring inflation concerns,
as payrolls grew less than anticipated and hourly earnings were
only up 0.1% versus the 0.3% that economists expected.
The Nasdaq 100 rebounded 0.41% on the week. It has moved closer
to its 200-day exponential moving average (EMA) but is still
below it and its 50-day EMA. The Russell 2000 and S&P 500
did better, respectively gaining 1.08% and 0.63%. Both indices
remain above their long-term 200-day EMA and have moved back
up to close just below their 50-day EMA. We now have a Buy
signal in effect.

Annual
broker review
We have only reviewed and compared brokers once before (see
Selecting
the right brokerage house) almost two years ago. Since then
the brokerage landscape has evolved quite rapidly and we feel
that as long as the industry is undergoing substantial changes
we should provide more frequent updates, thus this first issue
of the Annual broker review.
This is by no means an exhaustive review of all brokerage choices
available, but a rather narrow look at those brokers with the
characteristics we are looking for as Trend Timers. Since our
subscribers know what and when to buy and sell, we are primarily
looking at price and the availability of the investment vehicles
we focus on as key parameters. We did not evaluate characteristics
such as ease of use, functionality or customer service. We have
intentionally left out so-called full-service brokers such as
Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley or Smith Barney, but our wealthier
subscribers may well be served better by the broad array of
investment and banking services and the personal attention such
firms provide (although we assume that it takes a pretty healthy
account balance to get your friendly broker to come spend some
quality one-on-one time with you on the beach, as they do in
Morgan Stanley commercials ).
What has been happening in the brokerage industry is ferocious
competition and consolidation. The direct result is that brokers
generally offer better features and services than ever before
at lower prices. The differences which used to exist between
bare-bones online brokers and the so-called premium discount
brokers like E*Trade and Fidelity have mostly disappeared. Many
of the online brokers have significantly revamped their Web
sites, added options trading and other previously missing tools
and services. The ongoing fight for market share, increased
revenue and profitability is pointing to more mergers and acquisitions
as the way to boost the economies of scale needed to compete
in this cut-throat environment, and companies such as HarrisDirect
and Scottrade should be good targets for the big boys. Ameritrade
and TD Waterhouse have become TD Ameritrade. E*Trade, already
the product of more than a dozen mergers, has gobbled up BrownCo
(Note that the lower fees BrownCo used to offer their clients
are still honored by E*Trade for the time being, with no word
on if or when this might change). For now, the winner of all
this competitive activity is clearly the investor, with more
services at lower prices.
The table below offers an updated comparison between the key
players. All data were collected directly from the respective
broker Web sites on May 31, 2006 and is believed to be accurate,
but is not guaranteed. Keep in mind that brokerage houses offer
many different types of accounts and the actual terms and conditions
can vary widely depending on location, account type, total account
value and/or activity level. From time to time they also have
special promotional offers which reduce or waive certain commissions
or fees. We wanted our review to reflect the terms and prices
anybody can receive at any time, and not the best deal you could
get if you were an active trader or had a million dollar in
your account (yes, not surprisingly, the million dollar client
gets a sweeter deal than the rest of us). For comparison sake
we have also included ProFunds which, while not really a broker,
present a viable alternative for investors content to invest
in bull/bear mutual funds. For more on this topic also read
Brokerage accounts versus ProFunds or Rydex accounts.
For the most part the differences between brokers have narrowed
over the last couple of years. Fees have generally come down
and many previously hidden charges such as infamous "order handling
fees" from the likes of Charles Schwab have been eliminated.
Keep in mind that the services provided at these prices are
bare-bones. While full-service brokers will generally bundle
a lot of services such as research, tools and broker assistance,
the discount outfits will frequently nickel and dime you for
everything from paper monthly statements to trade confirmations.
When it comes to trading our preferred bull/bear index mutual
funds such as the ProFunds and Rydex families, there are still
surprising variations in prices between brokers. As conceived
by their originators, these types of mutual funds were intended
as no-load, no-transaction fee and no short-term redemption
fees. By now, most brokers have at least gotten these funds
classified correctly as no-transaction fee (NTF) funds and accordingly
do not charge transaction fees. TD Ameritrade is by far the
most confusing and misleading in this regard. While their site
clearly lists ProFunds and Rydex families as NTF, many of their
clients still pay commissions. In fact many are paying increased
commissions as TD Ameritrade informed their customers that as
of May 27th they will change their fee structure for these funds
from $17.99 per trade to $49.99 for Investor class shares. Yes,
they plan to offer a no-transaction fee group of funds which
includes the ProFunds Service class shares which charge a 12b-1
fee of 1% but, in our humble opinion, no one should have to
pay such loads for mutual funds. Further, if you were grand-fathered
in as a TD Waterhouse customer, you may still be paying a $30
commission, but if you have a TD Ameritrade Apex account the
fees are waived. Are you confused yet?
The other big issue with most brokers is that they still impose
so-called STR (Short Term Redemption) fees if the funds are
held less than 90 or 180 days which, as we have just witnessed,
could well happen with the TimingCube signals. The lone exception
in our review is Scottrade which waives STR fees for the Direxion,
Profunds and Rydex families.
Regardless of which broker you use today, the pace of changes
in the industry is such that it is well worth your time to review
your situation from time to time. Also, if you are dealing with
a broker going through an acquisition, you should make sure
you understand how your fees and services will be affected.
| |
Charles
Schwab |
E*Trade |
Fidelity |
Scottrade |
TD
Ameritrade |
ProFunds |
| URL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Minimum
initial amount to open an account |
 |
| Non-IRA |
$2,500 |
$1,000 |
$2,500 |
$500 |
$2,000 |
$15,000 |
| Margin |
$2,500 |
$2,000 |
$2,500 |
$2,000 |
$2,000 |
NA |
| IRA |
$2,000 |
None |
$2,500 |
$500 |
$1,000 |
$15,000 |
 |
| Commissions
for trading equities (online, market orders) |
 |
| Fees |
$19.95 |
$12.99 |
$19.95 |
$7 |
$9.99 |
NA |
| Up
to |
$1,000
shares |
$2,000
shares |
$1,000
shares |
Unlimited |
Unlimited |
NA |
 |
| Commissions
for trading equities (broker-assisted, market orders) |
 |
| Fees |
$54.95
minimum |
$45
+ commission |
$55 |
$27 |
$44.99 |
NA |
| Up
to |
$2,499 |
$2,000
shares |
100
shares |
Unlimited |
Unlimited |
NA |
 |
| Commissions
for trading no load mutual funds (online) |
 |
| Fees |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$49.99 |
$0 |
 |
| Commissions
for trading no load mutual funds (broker-assisted) |
 |
| Fees |
$25
minimum |
$45
+ commission |
$100
- $250 |
$20 |
? |
$0 |
Short
term
redemption fees
(mutual funds) |
90
days
or less $74.95 |
90
days
or less $49.99 |
180
days
or less $75 |
180
days
or less $17
(Except
ProFunds,
Rydex, Direxion) |
90
days
or less 0.60%
($39
to $199) |
None |
 |
| Commissions
for trading options (online) |
 |
| Fees |
$9.95
+ $1.40 per
contract |
$12.99
+ $1.25 per
contract |
$19.95
+ $0.75 per
contract |
$7.00
+ $1.25 per
contract |
$9.99
+ $0.75 per
contract |
NA |
 |
| Extras |
 |
| Margin
rates |
10.50% |
9.99% |
10.825% |
10.25% |
10.75% |
NA |
Account
maintenance
fees |
None |
$40/QTR
if<$10,000
in account |
None |
None |
None |
NA |
| Local
offices |
Yes |
Few |
Yes |
Yes |
Few |
NA |

Question:
Are there oil and energy investments to use with the signal?
After reading last week's Trend Timing School article entitled
"Over a barrel", many subscribers came away
convinced that oil and the energy sector in general are in for
a long-term bull market that they would like to capitalize on.
Before going any further we must point out one more time that
the TimingCube
Model deals with the broad market trend and that individual
industry sectors are not well correlated with either the broad
market or our signals. So if you chose to invest in these notoriously
volatile markets, we wish you all the best but know that you
are on your own to determine when it is time to buy and sell.
Here are a few energy related ETFs (not
correlated with the TimingCube
Signal!):
- Energy
Select Sector SPDR (XLE)
- iShares
Dow Jones U.S. Energy (IYE)
- Vanguard
Energy VIPERs (VDE)
Warm
wishes and until next week.
The TimingCube
Staff
|
|