A transparent, dated record of a paper portfolio built from the ranking — risk-adjusted position sizing, no borrowing, no real capital. Published so the scoring can be judged on results over time, not claims. Benchmarked against SPY over the same window.
| Ticker | Company | Mkt value | Weight | Unreal $ | Unreal % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BKNG | Booking Holdings Inc. | $9,014 | 8.4% | $-773 | -7.90% |
| LVS | Las Vegas Sands Corp. | $8,914 | 8.3% | $-905 | -9.22% |
| INTU | Intuit Inc. | $8,686 | 8.1% | $-838 | -8.80% |
| ADBE | Adobe Inc. | $8,019 | 7.5% | $-348 | -4.16% |
| VICI | VICI Properties Inc. | $7,829 | 7.3% | $-495 | -5.94% |
| ADSK | Autodesk, Inc. | $7,630 | 7.1% | $-168 | -2.15% |
| MCD | McDonald's Corporation | $6,904 | 6.4% | $-128 | -1.82% |
| MSCI | MSCI Inc. | $6,879 | 6.4% | $+44 | +0.65% |
| MCO | Moody's Corporation | $6,783 | 6.3% | $+36 | +0.54% |
| TDG | TransDigm Group Incorporated | $6,685 | 6.2% | $-18 | -0.26% |
| SPGI | S&P Global Inc. | $6,647 | 6.2% | $-23 | -0.34% |
| CDNS | Cadence Design Systems, Inc. | $6,558 | 6.1% | $+252 | +3.99% |
| RMD | ResMed Inc. | $6,542 | 6.1% | $-215 | -3.18% |
| YUM | Yum! Brands, Inc. | $6,515 | 6.1% | $-176 | -2.63% |
| OTIS | Otis Worldwide Corporation | $3,695 | 3.4% | $-37 | -0.99% |
| TOTAL | $107,299 | 100.0% | +9.39% |
This is a paper portfolio. Real prices, no real money, marked against the S&P 500 from the day it went live. We show it the same in the red as in the green — a track record that only kept the good weeks would be worth nothing.
It will lag, sometimes for quarters at a time. It buys quality businesses the market has marked down, which is a patient, contrarian position: in a market led by momentum and mega-caps, it waits, and it trails. That’s the cost of the stance, not a sign it’s broken — and a strong month is no proof it works. The unit of judgment is years, not weeks.
We don’t soften the hard number. When the book is behind, that gap is the first thing on this page — dated, with the drawdown beside it.
Here’s what would actually count against the method: years of underperformance against the S&P through a market that favored quality and value — or the news and insider overlays adding nothing over the plain ranking. Those are the tests. A bad quarter isn’t one of them.
One test has already come back, and it went against us. The method rests on a claim we can state precisely: that doubt is informative because the business is good. Measured across 90 months it is not — doubt predicts returns no better among high-quality names than among weak ones, and the difference runs slightly the other way, within noise. Two earlier pre-registered out-of-sample tests found no selection edge either. We publish that rather than quietly re-weighting until something fits.
So the edge is unproven, and one leg of the reasoning behind it is now measured and unsupported. What the tool does is still real: it reads the whole universe point-in-time, on repeatable rules, and shows its work. That’s precisely why the record is public and dated — so time settles it, not us. Evidence for your judgment, not advice.