Every stock gets a single 0–100 composite score and a recommendation label. The score is a weighted average of seven categories, each scored out of 100. Separately, three independent valuation models estimate a fair value. Nothing here is investment advice — it's a transparent, rules-based scorecard so you can see exactly why a stock ranks where it does.
Each category produces a score from 0–100. The composite is the weighted sum, rounded to a whole number:
The seven weights:
| Category | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| Business Quality | 25% | Returns on capital, margins, track-record depth |
| Growth Track Record | 20% | Multi-year EPS / revenue / FCF / book-value growth |
| Valuation | 20% | Upside vs. the three fair-value models |
| Financial Health | 15% | Leverage, coverage, liquidity |
| Earnings Quality | 10% | Cash backing of earnings, PEG, ROE |
| Momentum & Technicals | 5% | RSI, moving-average trend, 1-year return |
| Analyst Consensus | 5% | Street rating, target upside, coverage breadth |
Missing data scores 0 for that line item rather than being skipped, so thinly-covered stocks naturally score lower (a deliberate conservatism).
| Composite | Label | Stars |
|---|---|---|
| 85–100 | STRONG BUY | ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 70–84 | BUY | ⭐⭐ |
| 55–69 | WATCHLIST | ⭐ |
| 40–54 | HOLD | ⚠️ |
| 25–39 | CAUTION | ⛔ |
| 0–24 | AVOID | 🚫 |
Each category is the average of its line items (each scored 0–10), rescaled to 0–100. Thresholds below show the value needed to earn each point level — a stock that beats the top threshold gets the full 10, and it steps down from there.
How good is the underlying business at turning capital into profit?
| Metric | Full marks (10) | Scoring steps |
|---|---|---|
| ROIC | ≥ 25% | 25→10, 20→9, 15→8, 10→7, 5→4, else 2 |
| Gross Margin | ≥ 60% | 60→10, 40→8, 25→6, 15→4, else 2 |
| Operating Margin | ≥ 25% | 25→10, 15→8, 10→6, 5→4, else 2 |
| FCF Margin | ≥ 20% | 20→10, 12→8, 7→6, 3→4, else 2 |
| Data Longevity | 5 / 5 yrs | depth of usable financial history (5y→10 … 1y→2) |
Has the company compounded over the long run — and consistently?
| Metric | Full marks (10) | Scoring steps |
|---|---|---|
| EPS CAGR 5Y | ≥ 20% | each: 20→10, 15→9, 10→8, 7→6, 4→4, else 2 |
| Revenue CAGR 5Y | ≥ 20% | |
| BVPS CAGR 5Y | ≥ 20% | |
| FCF CAGR 5Y | ≥ 20% | |
| Consistency (3Y & 5Y) | 4 / 4 | count of metrics with both 3Y and 5Y CAGR ≥ 10% |
| Rule #1 Passes | 5 / 5 | Phil Town's "big 5" (ROIC, EPS, sales, equity, FCF all growing) |
Can the balance sheet survive a downturn?
| Metric | Full marks (10) | Scoring steps |
|---|---|---|
| Debt / Equity | < 0.3x | <0.3→10, <0.7→8, <1.2→6, <2.0→4, else 1 |
| Interest Coverage | ≥ 15x | 15→10, 8→8, 5→6, 3→4, 1→2 |
| Current Ratio | ≥ 3.0 | 3→10, 2→9, 1.5→7, 1.0→5, 0.8→3 |
| Debt / EBITDA | < 1x | <1→10, <2→8, <3→6, <5→3, else 1 |
Is it cheap relative to the three fair-value models (see below)?
| Metric | Full marks (10) | Scoring steps (by % upside) |
|---|---|---|
| DCF Upside | ≥ 50% | each: +50→10, +30→9, +15→7, 0→5, −15→3, −30→1 |
| Comps Upside | ≥ 50% | |
| EPV / Graham Upside | ≥ 50% | |
| Below Margin-of-Safety price | Yes = 10 | price ≤ DCF margin-of-safety price |
| Models Agree | 3 / 3 | # of models showing positive upside (3→10, 2→7, 1→4) |
Are the earnings real (cash-backed) and reasonably priced for the growth?
| Metric | Full marks (10) | Scoring steps |
|---|---|---|
| EPS Positive | EPS > 0 | positive trailing EPS = 10, else 0 |
| FCF / Net Income | ≥ 1.2x | 1.2→10, 0.9→8, 0.7→6, 0.5→4, else 2 (cash converts to profit) |
| PEG Ratio | < 0.8 | <0.8→10, <1.2→8, <2.0→5, else 2 |
| ROE | ≥ 30% | 30→10, 20→8, 15→7, 10→5, else 2 |
A light technical overlay — rewards healthy, non-overheated trends.
| Metric | Best score | Scoring steps |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 30–40 → 10 | 40–60→8, 30–40→10, 60–70→6, >70→3 (overbought), else 4 |
| MA50 / MA200 | > 1.05 → 10 | >1.05→10, >1.0→7, >0.95→4, else 2 (uptrend = above) |
| 1-Year Return | ≥ 30% → 10 | 30→10, 15→8, 0→6, −10→4, −25→2 |
What does Wall Street think — and how many are even watching?
| Metric | Full marks (10) | Scoring steps |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst Upside | ≥ 30% | vs. mean target: 30→10, 15→8, 5→6, 0→4, −10→2 |
| Analyst Rating | Strong Buy | Strong Buy→10, Buy/Overweight→8, Hold→5, Underperform→2, Sell→1 |
| # of Analysts | ≥ 20 | 20→10, 10→8, 5→6, 2→4, 1→2 (coverage breadth) |
The Valuation category and the per-stock "fair value" come from three independent models. Each is computed, sanity-checked against the current price, and discarded if implausible. "Upside" = (fair value − price) ÷ price.
Projects free cash flow forward 10 years and discounts it back to today.
Values the stock off the median multiples of its peers.
A conservative "no-growth" floor blended with Ben Graham's classic formula.
A low EPV/Graham value relative to price usually means the market is pricing in growth that this floor ignores by design. Plausibility window: 0.03×–8× price.
All thresholds are fixed, rules-based, and applied identically to every stock. This is an educational screening tool, not investment advice — always do your own research.