Analyze a security using Benjamin Graham's Defensive Investor Criteria
"Everything you are doing is fine. Here are a few practical notes in performing this analysis: Find all the primary filing information on EDGAR. For NYSE:MEI, you can use https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000065270&type=10-K&dateb=&owner=exclude&count=40 This is the original 10-K. To evaluate earnings growth you need per share earnings for the past three years and 10,11,12 years ago. You do NOT need diluted earnings (because in the long term share dilution comes out anyway, just like ""normalized"" earnings). The formula is avg(Y_-1+Y_-2+Y_-3) / is avg(Y_-10+Y_-11+Y_-12) Be careful with the pricing rules you are using, the asset one gets complicated. I recommend NOT using the pricing rules #6 and #7 to select the stock. Instead you can use them to set a maximum price for the stock and then you can compare the current price to your maximum price. I am also working to understand these rules and have cited Graham's rules into a checklist and worksheet to find all companies that meet his criteria. Basically my goal is to bottom feed the deals that Warren Buffett is not interested in. If you are interested to invest time into this project, please see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vuFmoJDktMYtS64od2HUTV9I351AxvhyjAaC0N3TXrA"
As sdg said, the consensus is that the CPP is pretty solid.  An actuarial report is submitted to Parliament every three years, and it's worth getting the numbers from that report so you know where your CPP contributions are invested.  You may think there's more risk in CPP's portfolio than they let on.  Either way, your own savings and investments are the best defense against inadequacy of the CPP.  But you should be careful, as the CPP mostly invests in the same stuff the retail investor does - equity and fixed income.  So the typical investor will be exposed to the risks as the CPP fund. However, CPP is not the only source of retirement income for Canadians.  There is also the Guaranteed Income Supplement and Old Age Security, and they are funded differently from CPP.  CPP benefits are funded by returns from the investment fund, as well as contributions.  GIS and OAS are paid out of the Government of Canada's revenue each year.  In my opinion, those programs are more vulnerable than CPP as they could just be legislated out of existence in tough economic times.  (However, I also see that as unlikely because the elderly are a pretty powerful block of voters.) "No one can claim markets are perfectly efficient. The Grossman-Stiglitz paradox explains one reason why it is impossible for the market to be perfectly effecient, and there are plenty of investors that show it is practically possible to consistently beat the market (e.g. ""The Superinvestors of Graham-and-Doddsville"" or RenTec's Medallion Fund).  However, even if you accept as true that prices behave strangely around round numbers, that isn't a refutation of the efficient market hypothesis. The efficient market hypothesis says that price reflect all available information, so the expected price tomorrow is just the price today (not taking into account the time value of money).  The efficient market hypothesis says nothing about how prices are distributed. Historically, a random walk has been used, but that is neither a consequence of the EMH nor a required assumption.  You could say that prices are more volatile the nearer they are to a round number or new high, but that doesn't necessarily give you an edge in making money off the stock." "No. The full text of the Landlord-Tenant Act (specifically, section 554.614 of Act 348 of the year 1972) makes no mention of this. Searching the law for ""interest"" doesn't yield anything of interest (pardon the pun).  Specifically, section 554.604 of the same law states that: (1) The security deposit shall be deposited in a regulated financial   institution. A landlord may use the moneys so deposited for any   purposes he desires if he deposits with the secretary of state a cash   bond or surety bond written by a surety company licensed to do   business in this state and acceptable to the attorney general to   secure the entire deposits up to $50,000.00 and 25% of any amount   exceeding $50,000.00. The attorney general may find a bond   unacceptable based only upon reasonable criteria relating to the   sufficiency of the bond, and shall notify the landlord in writing of   his reasons for the unacceptability of the bond. (2) The bond shall be for the benefit of persons making security   deposits with the landlord. A person for whose benefit the bond is   written or his legal representative may bring an action in the   district, common pleas or municipal court where the landlord resides   or does business for collection on the bond. While it does sound like the landlord is required to deposit the money in a bank or other secured form, e.g. the Secretary of State, he/she isn't required to place it in an account that will earn interest." Benjamin Grahams strategy was to invest in REALLY SAFE stocks. In his time lean businesses weren't as common as they are now and he found many companies with assets greater than the value of their shares. Putting a number figure on it isn't really necessary but the concept is useful. Its the idea that bigger companies are less turbulent (Which is something to avoid for an investor). Most companies in the top 500 or whatever will satisfy this. No, and using a 37 year old formula in finance that is as simple as: should make it obvious technical analysis is more of a game for retail traders than investment advice. When it comes to currencies, there are a myriad of macroeconomic occurrences that do not follow a predictable timescale. Using indicators like RSI on any time frame will not magically illuminate broad human psychology and give you an edge. It is theoretically possible for a single public stock's price to be driven by a range of technical traders who all buy at RSI 30 and sell at RSI 70, after becoming a favorite stock on social media, but it is infinitely more likely for all market participants to have completely different goals. My reaction to this is that your observation @D.W. is spot on correct: It sounds like long-term market timing: trying to do a better job than   the rest of the market at predicting, based upon a simple formula,   whether the market is over-priced or under-priced. I read the post by the founder of Valuation Informed Indexing, Rob Bennet. Glance at  the comments section. Rob clearly states that he doesn't even use his own strategy, and has not owned, nor traded, any stocks since 1996! As another commenter summarizes it, addressing Rob: This is 2011. You’ve been 100% out of stocks — including indexes —   since 1996? That’s 15 years of taking whatever the bond market, CDs or   TIPS will yield (often and currently less than 2%)... I’m curious how   you defend not following your own program even as you recommend it for   others? Rob basically says that stocks haven't shown the right signals for buying since 1996, so he's stuck with bonds, CD's and fixed-income instead. This is a VERY long-term horizon point of view (a bit of sarcasm edges in from me). Answering your more general question, what do I think of this particular Price/ Earnings based ratio as a way to signal asset allocation change i.e. Valuation Informed Investing? I don't like it much. Understanding the BS equation is not needed. What is needed is an understanding of the bell curve.   You seem to understand volatility. 68% of the time an event will fall inside one standard deviation. 16% of the time it will be higher, 16%, lower.  Now, if my $100 stock has a STD of $10, there's a 16% chance it will trade above $110. But if the STD is $5, the chance is 2.3% per the chart below. The higher volatility makes the option more valuable as there's a highr chance of it being 'in the money.' My answer is an over simplification, per your request. "Though you're looking to repeat this review with multiple securities and events at different times, I've taken liberty in assuming you are not looking to conduct backtests with hundreds of events.  I've answered below assuming it's an ad hoc review for a single event pertaining to one security. Had the event occurred more recently, your full-service broker could often get it for you for free.  Even some discount brokers will offer it so.  If the stock and its options were actively traded, you can request ""time and sales,"" or ""TNS,"" data for the dates you have in mind.  If not active, then request ""time and quotes,"" or ""TNQ"" data. If the event happened long ago, as seems to be the case, then your choices become much more limited and possibly costly.  Below are some suggestions: Wall Street Journal and Investors' Business Daily print copies have daily stock options trading data.  They are best for trading data on actively traded options.  Since the event sounds like it was a major one for the company, it may have been actively traded that day and hence reported in the papers' listings.  Some of the print pages have been digitized; otherwise you'll need to review the archived printed copies. Bloomberg has these data and access to them will depend on whether the account you use has that particular subscription.  I've used it to get detailed equity trading data on defunct and delisted companies on specific dates and times and for and futures trading data.  If you don't have personal access to Bloomberg, as many do not, you can try to request access from a public, commercial or business school library. The stock options exchanges sell their data; some strictly to resellers and others to anyone willing to pay.  If you know which exchange(s) the options traded on, you can contact the exchange's market data services department and request TNS and / or TNQ data and a list of resellers, as the resellers may be cheaper for single queries."