I understand your use of quadrants to label Leading, Lagging, Improving and Weakening asset classes. If the Leading quadrant is Quadrant I (in the upper right-hand corner), wouldn't an asset class moving toward Quadrant I also be a good pick? In other words, if the vector of the last data point of an asset class is heading anywhere Northeast, that means that it is starting to outperform (on a relative strength basis and/or absolute basis) versus the previous day. Is there something unique about having to pass the "100" threshold on either axis first?

My concern is that, as an example, if an asset class is in the far lower-left quadrant (Lagging) and makes a bee-line for Quadrant 1 (Leading), would I not be missing out on gains by waiting until it officially passes the 100-markers on your graph?

I realize this would be an aggressive position, but I'm asking more about your calculations as they relate to the normalization of the scores about the 100 lines.