When is VOLUME "GOOD" or "BAD" for the worlds largest companies?

When is VOLUME "GOOD" or "BAD"? What if we studies ONLY volume?

for one of the worlds largest computer companies...!?

I wanted to study one of the more important less studied ideas "volume" (very specifically)... what would we discover?

The reason I wanted to look ONLY at volume... is???? Some of the worlds most important “stocks and markets” seem to be totally ignoring “price”. Just about everyone is “victim”… price matters a lot (to everyone?)… but recently I’ve tried trading based “only” on volume and mostly on volume… its kinda like being “vegan or vegetarian” and trying to be an economist of the stock market index.

One interesting problem with the global stock market just like the “real world” is ... for the worlds largest companies they make up a VERY surprising % of the total SP 500? For example the top 10 companies or even the top “few” companies are maybe 10% to 5% of the global economy and very surprisingly these 10 companies are about 21% of the total SP500?! So its almost like the top few companies are the "only companies on earth" at least from an (detailed) “economics standing”?

Apple is one of these “top tier dogs”… but what about the volume of apple?

VOLUME DETAILED ANALYSIS and RESEARCH:

Reproducing the “original price” from a (volume based) “Time Series” analysis is a common (and very useful and used) idea in "signal processing" and DSPs (digital signal processors in use today). They have entire courses on the topic of doing frequency analysis and studying signals in “different” ways or domains but the idea I wanted here was VOLUME in specific. Whats interesting about the recent “volume” of Apple Computer is that its been “low” or “negative”. Most people agree that the “price” of a stock (apple) is usually wrong or “extremely dangerous and unhealthy” when the volume is “lower”. The problem is that almost all the stocks in the stock market meaning the "the entire SP500" is going up for for about 20+? years while the volume is going down since about 2008!? Before 2008 the volume “always went up” (for everyone and everything in the stock market?!!?!!?). "Volume" is a even “weirder strange volume phenomena” when you realize that almost 70%+ of all “trades” on the “open range live stock market” are done by ("bigshots")... algorithm trading machines… so this is very curious.. and suspicious.. why is the entire volume of the stocks going DOWN? .. seriously?! yes volume has been going down for at least 10 to 12 years?!?! why has the stock markets “volume” been going down since 2008? Has anyone has ever really studied this “volume fact” perhaps because its “too simple”… ;) or "i missed it?" its maybe because of some new type of undefined “security inflation” not with "cold cash money" itself but with stocks by themselves that go up and up on “low volume” for decades?? Why is the stock market going up on "low volume?"

Apple has for sure been going up and up.. and way way too up ...?

Next I'm going into the "volume details"... however, lets think about X*Y*Z
Almost everyone talks about price and very very few people research and discuss volume. THIS IS VOLUME ONLY! :) Volume is perhaps 1/3 of the full “scientific” analysis of a companies stock? X*Y*Z? Its like Length x Width… and then adding Height. For example we usually just look at Price and Time and many charts and peoples studies even remove “volume” from their analysis totally?

THE (VOLUME) DETAILS:

IT WAS THE WINTER 2009?:
Something “very strange” happened in the winter of 2009 people suddenly "people" stopped being interested in Apple Computer? Is this the truth?
Possibly from the volume of the stock of 2009?? Perhaps the “real” problem started in the Summer of 2005 (after the dot com bubble in Silicon Vally had emptied out silicon valley of pentium processors?) The winter of 2001 “was the year” that everything changed for “microprocessors”. The processors where suddenly “fast” and running in the hundreds of MHz and even getting ready for the “GHz”? There was another very serious crash that didn’t really show up in the winter of 2011 for apple and after that after the winter of 2011 something really “wasn’t good” at apple.

Apples Stock was off to a “too quick” start and perhaps hurt the company for it entire 30 to 40 years into the future to this day? From the Volume you can see that there was a lot of “positive” volume in apples stock until about Christmas of 1982. Things where still good around Christmas of 1982 but there must have been some problem and this lasted until 1991. So the first year of Apple was a success however, something went wrong in the mid 80’s

In the summer (june of 1997) there was a very big “new apple”… in fact this according to the volume was the possible “real start” of apple computer… ?

The most difficult part for me to understand of apple computers history is from 2001 to 2005 because I was living in Silicon Valley at the time. However it seems that the real recovery for silicon valley and for apple didn’t start until about May (spring) of 2010. This was the “final” good times for apple and perhaps at this time apple thought about greatly increasing their size… the problem that I recently realized is that both Microsoft and Apple have greatly increased their sizes of their office space. I recently drove past the Microsoft Headquarters outside of Seattle and noticed that ½ the campus is under construction looking like something “very seriously” bad happened to Microsoft but technically its a lot of construction. What really worried me was that Microsoft has more large cranes building “skyscrapers” in rural Redmond Washington then a large city like Dublin Ireland. It makes one really question whats going on if both Apple and Microsoft are simultaneously gigantically increasing their office space sizes?

Apple “new building” is larger then the Pentagon and that means they are “larger then the federal government” in a lot of ways?

So the major recent change in volume was from “very stable” to “very unstable” at Apple around January of 2009. The volume reached some of the lowest levels since the 1980’s (relatively).

Finally, what made Apple a “real company” happened in 1991. I put a “star” here.. and then a tiny star to show the specific point in the volume. The volume “didn’t jump” it moved “slowly up” after the summer (july) of 1991. from then on the volume was fairly solid and stable in a “positive” direction. This is likely one of the most important parts in the history of apple.. the interesting point is that the volume in 2011 shows a “Mirror” or opposite of the phase in the 1980’s and 1990’s that was “stable” however, the “new stable” is “less interest” in apple stock?

So the “sudden” up in volume is actually a “bad” up… its likely that we will see some stable volume in the next 10 to 20 years for apple… however, in the next 5 could be the most important for apple. The volume of the stock is “less” then usual and this means that “less people are interested” in apple computer as a company stock. Really since 2011 this is the first time in the history of apple that the company has “been stable in a bad way” other then the late 1985’s and also around 2001. however, the 2001 “crash” in a lot of ways “helped apple”. The volume was good and went up and then stayed positive (after the dot com crash of 2001) until about 2008 and then the 2008 crash was the “real” crash for apple…

the recent “spike” in volume at apple looks like a “icing” on the cake for a not funeral… its important that we let apple go in a stable way… how long will it take? Well.. its taken us 40 years to “make apples computer” it might take us 20 years or 10 to find a new type of apple…?

I’m still optimistic.. however what we need to understand is “positive volume” that is bad… almost all type of “negative volume” or less then usual volume is “bad” for a company. If I’m quickly able to “guess” at what types of volume are “bad” for apple in the history of 40 years it looks like the problems for volume are mostly around the late 1990’s and also after 2009. Its likely that although the volume was “less” around 1985’s it was still “helpful” for apple… so it maybe that high volume spikes signal something good is happening for the industry if there are multiple spikes in a positive direction. When the company started in the 1980’s apple spiked up but then spiked down but not “significantly down” into “negative” (oscillator is at 3 to 12 or one season spring and summer, or fall and winter so thats why I did a 3 to 12 oscillator based on astronomy and seasons. The phase between 1991 and 2001 was a “learning” phase for “how the company need to “evaporate”. And the volume increase from November of 2001 to August of 2005 is how computer companies work together in a downward trend.

Anyway, I had fun studying the volume. If your interested in Volume you should for sure look into “Volume Oscillators” “On-Balance-Volume” “Accumulators and Distribution”, “VWAP” and a few others.. but I used a “basic” volume oscillator because its very very clear and obvious what it means and ONLY is based on volume and has nothing to do with price…

I did some of my own “math” to study the SP500 “angels” at the top of the world and discovered that the top 10 companies are about 11% of the total SP500. So for example…

% of TOTAL STOCK MARKET VALUE
S&P 500 = 51%
S&P 100 = 32%
TOP 10? = 11.12%
S&P MidCap 400 = 7%
S&P SmallCap 600 = 3%
S&P 1500 = 90%
S&P 900 (S&P 500 + S&P 400) = 58%

The problem isnt just that the top 10 companies are 11% of the total stock markets value.. the other problem is that these 10 companies are about 21% of the total SP500 “index”?

So that means studying the two “most important computer companies” APPLE and Microsoft is actually very important. These are the most important Computer Companies ever… at least today?

However, the problem with most of these “boring” studies that most people do is that they only study price.

So, lets look at ONLY “volume” and “time and date” ... and completely “ignore” price? And see what we discover about one of the worlds “most important computers”?

I’m really curious what others think about specific dates on the timeframe used in this volume chart…

:)

Hope this helps!

Asher