Volume & money flow · daily rule · Industrials & materials
Money Flow Index on Stella-Jones
SJ with the play, last two years
Shading shows the play's call from the close that triggered it.
Money Flow Index (14)
Dashed lines at 20, 80.
Growth of C$10,000 since 2005
Log scale. After trading costs, with T-bill interest while out.
The record
The play against buying and holding SJ over exactly the same dates, after costs.
| Play, since 2005 | Hold, since 2005 | Play, 5 yrs | Hold, 5 yrs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annual return | +6.2% | +20.3% | +4.5% | +11.4% |
| Total return | +268% | +5,417% | +25% | +71% |
| Worst drawdown | −69.6% | −73.1% | −32.6% | −35.0% |
| Volatility | 18.9% | 28.6% | 16.6% | 27.4% |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.32 | 0.73 | 0.12 | 0.39 |
| Time invested | 36% | 100% | ||
| Switches per year | 2.8 | 0 |
Every call, graded
Right on 34 of 62 closed calls (55%). In calls averaged +4.8%; out calls saw SJ move +12.8% on average.
| Called | Call | Price | Until | SJ moved | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 8, 2026 | OUT | C$79.72 | now | −19.3% | open |
| Apr 24, 2026 | IN | C$83.64 | Jun 8, 2026 | −4.7% | ✕ wrong |
| Jul 9, 2025 | OUT | C$78.69 | Apr 24, 2026 | +6.3% | ✕ wrong |
| Aug 8, 2024 | IN | C$83.93 | Jul 9, 2025 | −6.2% | ✕ wrong |
| Jun 15, 2023 | OUT | C$63.31 | Aug 8, 2024 | +32.6% | ✕ wrong |
| Mar 31, 2023 | IN | C$49.10 | Jun 15, 2023 | +28.9% | ✓ right |
| Aug 9, 2022 | OUT | C$34.66 | Mar 31, 2023 | +41.7% | ✕ wrong |
| Mar 9, 2022 | IN | C$36.33 | Aug 9, 2022 | −4.6% | ✕ wrong |
| Jul 13, 2021 | OUT | C$40.67 | Mar 9, 2022 | −10.7% | ✓ right |
| Jun 2, 2021 | IN | C$42.96 | Jul 13, 2021 | −5.3% | ✕ wrong |
| Apr 14, 2020 | OUT | C$29.29 | Jun 2, 2021 | +46.6% | ✕ wrong |
| Oct 10, 2019 | IN | C$34.16 | Apr 14, 2020 | −14.2% | ✕ wrong |
An in call is right when the price rose before the next call; an out call is right when it fell. The latest 12 of 63 calls shown.
How the play works
- In when the 14-day MFI crosses up through 20.
- Out when it crosses down through 80.
The creators also stress divergences, which this rule ignores.
The case against
Valeriy Zakamulin tested moving-average timing on up to 155 years of U.S. stock data and found no statistically significant edge in the second half of that record. The rules earned their keep in a few severe bear markets and lagged buy and hold for long stretches in between.