> Several years ago, someone claimed that CSI retained the data for
> these dead companies in their database

they still advertise a delisted stocks database as an optional extra 
(at a price)

brian_z


--- In [email protected], "Phsst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've been with QP EOD for many years now and after looking at 
several
> other data suppliers, I would not change.
> 
> The data integrity is very good. The AB interface is fast. 
> 
> There is a caveat that everybody should be aware of however:
> 
> Back at the top of the dot com bubble, QP had over 10K common stocks
> in the database. Now there are just over 5500 common stocks in the
> database. So as companies come and go, QP drops them from the 
database.
> 
> Why is this an issue you might ask...
> 
> Removing dead issues from the database results in a psuedo "looking
> forward" aspect to your backtesting results. In other words, if 
failed
> companies are removed from your database by the nice folks at QP, 
then
> you are being deprived of seeing how your backtested systems would
> have been affected using the data from those failed stocks.
> 
> Several years ago, someone claimed that CSI retained the data for
> these dead companies in their database, but over the years I've 
looked
> at CSI and have been disappointed at their charges while not being
> convinced about the exact nature of the data they supply.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Howard B" <howardbandy@> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings all --
> > 
> > Let me add my voice to those suggesting that you reconsider 
leaving
> Quotes
> > Plus.
> > 
> > I am a subscriber to QP for both EOD and RealTime.
> > 
> > I have had difficulties with QP's billing department.  Gary got 
them
> > straightened out for me.
> > 
> > I am satisfied with the quality of the data.
> > 
> > Consistency is worth a lot.  Most of my research and most of my
> trading is
> > done based on systems that I have developed using QP data.  If I 
were to
> > change to another vendor, I would begin to notice differences.  
That
> would
> > concern me, and I would spend way too much time deciding whether I
> needed to
> > be worried or not.  In the end, my choices would be to redo a 
great
> deal of
> > research, or go back to QP to resolve the differences.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Howard
>


Reply via email to