Ken has discovered some inconsistencies with what I have written and my current stock holdings. Here's what he said:

You mentioned you are holding or have held SPAR, KRSL, PCP, HDNG, TSS. From the data on AAII's website which is as of 2/28, none of those stocks have a number 1 Zacks rank. As a matter of fact, SPAR, KRSL and HDNG have no Zacks rank, N/A. Only one stock in the screen, GRMN, has a number 1 Zacks rank.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you're not only buying the Zweig's number one Zacks rank stocks. As a matter of fact, out of the five top long term performing AAII screen, four of them will not have five number 1 Zacks ranked stocks in them. Only the Est Rev Up 5% screen will have at least five but then again that screen plays right into the hands of the Zacks number 1 rank's criteria.

My response:

Thanks for your question, Ken. Here's the deal. As I've mentioned before, I've also been tracking whether or not a stock's relative strength impacts its performance in a screen. I've found that it does (see earlier posts). So I weight the top 5 stocks with the highest relative strength and also consider whether the stocks are rated #1 by Zacks.

I've found that a combination of the two gives me better diversification and allows me to choose more stocks. Last week, for example, only 3 stocks were rated #1: NOV, MS, and GRMN. So I picked a couple of more that were rated high in relative strength.

I won't sell a stock if it slips from #1 to #2 on the Zacks rating unless it is no longer listed on the screen (I'll put a 3% trailing stop on it then). PCP continues to perform and even though it rates a "2" on Zacks it is still listed on the Zweig screen so I'll keep it until it starts weakening.

Screening for Relative Strength

I've been following the relative strength of the stocks that filter into my screens since January of 2003. I've been especially interested in the stocks that shake out as the highest relative strength in my screens on a weekly basis. For the Zweig screen, investing in the highest relative strength stock each week since January 2003 would have resulted in a 5656% compounded return so far. Holy freakin' cow.

It gets better. I hypothesized that if I mechanically invested in the #1 Relative Strength stock only when a MACD chart indicated that the stock was trending upward I could avoid some of the bigger losses. I started tracking what would happen in August of 2004. Less than 3 years later the returns are 4258% so far. Not too shabby.

Last year, I foolishly tried to invest a large part of my portfolio this way (in just one stock) and soon realized that I couldn't take the heat of the daily swings. My worst day zapped me with a 9% loss on my total portfolio. Despite the enormous past returns, I couldn't justify the worry and pain of large losses.

I've got a much more balanced portfolio now and I have taken the advice of traders who are smarter than I am. I no longer risk more than 2% of my portfolio on any one trade (a common rule of thumb with successful traders). The growth has been less exponential, but my sanity is what's important.