How the score is calculated
Every number on this platform is produced by written rules operating on published data. No part of a score is estimated, guessed, or produced by an AI model. You can reproduce any composite by hand from the figures shown on the stock page — if the arithmetic on screen does not add up, that is a bug and we want to hear about it.
The short version
- Each company is measured on five dimensions, each scored 0–100.
- Most measurements are relative: a company is ranked against companies in its own sector and region, because a 22× price-to-earnings ratio means something different for a utility and a software company.
- The five dimensions are combined using weights that depend on your investor profile.
- If too much data is missing, we publish no score at all rather than a number we cannot stand behind.
The five dimensions
- fundamental
- Is this company financially healthy and attractively valued?
- Free cash flow yield, price-to-earnings, EV/EBITDA, return on invested capital, return on equity, debt-to-equity, revenue growth and gross margin — each ranked against sector peers. Banks and insurers use a different metric set, because debt is their raw material rather than leverage.
- technical
- What is price momentum saying, and is entry timing favorable?
- Trend structure across 20/50/200-day moving averages, MACD, RSI, volume trend, Bollinger position and average true range. All standard published parameters — nothing invented here.
- macro
- Is the current macro environment favorable or hostile for this stock?
- A single economic regime score from policy rates, inflation trend, the yield curve, credit spreads and manufacturing activity — then adjusted for how sensitive the company’s sector is to that environment.
- sentiment
- What is the collective market mood, and is it shifting?
- News tone over 30 days weighted toward recent stories, net insider buying and selling, and short interest.
- risk
- How much downside risk does this stock carry, and what kind?
- Realised volatility, maximum drawdown, trading liquidity, beta against a regional benchmark, and balance-sheet strength. Inverted, so a high score means low risk.
The risk dimension is inverted. A high risk score means low risk — a stable, liquid, lightly-indebted company scores near 100. It is labelled on every screen because it is the single easiest thing to misread.
How your profile changes the score
The same company is measured identically for everyone. What changes is how much each dimension counts.
| Dimension | Value Investor | Swing Trader |
|---|---|---|
| Fundamental | 45% | 10% |
| Technical | 10% | 45% |
| Macro | 20% | 20% |
| Sentiment | 5% | 15% |
| Risk | 20% | 10% |
The technical dimension goes further than reweighting: the same chart is interpreted differently. A stock that has fallen hard reads as a possible discount to a value investor and as absent momentum to a swing trader, so the two profiles score an identical price history differently — not merely weight it differently.
What the labels mean
| Score | Label | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 85–100 | Strong Positive | Signals aligned |
| 70–84 | Favorable | Mostly positive |
| 55–69 | Monitor | Mixed signals |
| 40–54 | Elevated Risk | Risk rising |
| 0–39 | Weak Signal | Low priority |
These are descriptions of what the data shows, not instructions. A “Weak Signal” is not a warning to sell — it means the measurements we take are not currently favourable, which is a different statement.
When we refuse to show a score
Real data has holes. Rather than filling them with assumptions, we do this:
- A missing measurement is dropped and its weight spread over the rest.
- A dimension missing more than 40% of its inputs is not scored at all, and its weight moves to the others.
- Below 60% total coverage, no composite is published — the page says so instead of showing a number.
- Every stock page shows its coverage and a confidence level, so you always know how complete the picture is.
Known limitations
Publishing these is deliberate. A methodology without limitations is marketing.
- The economic view is US-anchored
Interest rates, inflation and credit conditions are measured from US data. US policy drives global liquidity, but for a Japanese or European company this is a simplification — their own central banks matter too. Regional economic regimes are planned.
- Sentiment is thinner than it will be
Analyst revisions, options positioning and social sentiment are not yet included. Short interest is unavailable from our current data provider, so that component is empty and its weight moves elsewhere.
- News is not collected for every company
News is gathered for the most traded companies and anything a user is watching. Elsewhere the sentiment dimension will show as having no data — which is why coverage is displayed on every page.
- Restated accounts
When a company restates prior figures, our data provider may supply the corrected numbers rather than the originals. Historical testing therefore sees slightly better information than was actually available at the time. We cannot fully eliminate this at our data tier and would rather say so.
- Return on invested capital assumes a tax rate
Our data does not include tax expense, so a flat 25% is assumed. It is applied to every company equally, so it does not disturb the ranking — but the absolute figure is an approximation.
- No trading costs
Nothing here accounts for commissions, spreads or taxes. Any comparison of scores to outcomes is before costs.
Accuracy
We have built the machinery to test these scores against history — replaying them over past dates using only the information that was public at the time, including companies that later went bankrupt or were acquired.
We have not yet run that test on real market data, so we make no accuracy claim. When we do, we will publish the result — including the parts that are unflattering. Until then, treat these scores as a structured summary of published data, not as evidence of predictive power.