Rubric Scoring Instructions¶
Use these rubrics to score each symbol during the weekly review. Score every symbol on all three rubrics before moving to the next phase.
Rubrics¶
1. News Sentiment (weight: 0.30)¶
Whether recent news flow is bullish, bearish, or neutral for the position.
| Score | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 0-1 | Strongly bearish | Overwhelmingly negative news. Material adverse events dominating headlines. |
| 2-3 | Bearish | Mostly negative news. Downgrades, misses, or competitive threats in focus. |
| 4-5 | Neutral / mixed | Balanced news flow. No strong directional signal from recent coverage. |
| 6-7 | Bullish | Mostly positive news. Upgrades, beats, or positive catalysts in focus. |
| 8-9 | Strongly bullish | Overwhelmingly positive news. Multiple positive catalysts converging. |
| 10 | Euphoric | Exceptional positive sentiment. Caution — may signal crowded trade or peak optimism. |
Consider: 1. What is the overall tone of recent coverage? 2. Are there material positive or negative catalysts in the news? 3. Is sentiment shifting compared to prior weeks? 4. At extreme scores (0-1 or 9-10), flag potential overreaction.
2. Thesis Alignment (weight: 0.40)¶
How well current data matches the original investment thesis conditions.
| Score | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 0-1 | Thesis broken | Core assumptions have been invalidated. The reason for holding no longer exists. |
| 2-3 | Thesis weakening | Key thesis pillars are eroding. Evidence of structural headwinds accumulating. |
| 4-5 | Thesis neutral | Thesis is intact but not advancing. No new confirming or disconfirming evidence. |
| 6-7 | Thesis progressing | Thesis conditions are being met. Positive evidence outweighs negative. |
| 8-9 | Thesis strongly confirmed | Multiple thesis conditions exceeded. Strong confirming evidence across dimensions. |
| 10 | Thesis exceeded | Thesis fully realized or surpassed. Consider whether upside is now priced in. |
Consider: 1. Are the core thesis assumptions still valid? 2. Is recent evidence confirming or disconfirming the thesis? 3. Have any thesis conditions been met or invalidated since last review?
3. Valuation Signal (weight: 0.30)¶
Whether the stock appears cheap, fair, or expensive relative to fundamentals and history.
| Score | Label | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 0-1 | Extremely overvalued | Price implies perfection. Multiples at historical extremes with no fundamental justification. |
| 2-3 | Overvalued | Trading above fair value. Limited upside at current levels. |
| 4-5 | Fairly valued | Price roughly reflects fundamentals. Neither a bargain nor expensive. |
| 6-7 | Undervalued | Trading below fair value. Discount appears unjustified by fundamentals. |
| 8-9 | Significantly undervalued | Deep discount to intrinsic value. Market is pricing in worst case. |
| 10 | Extreme bargain | Once-in-a-cycle valuation. Verify this isn't a value trap before acting. |
Consider: 1. Where is the current price relative to the 52-week range? 2. How does the P/E compare to historical norms and sector peers? 3. Is the valuation justified by current growth trajectory? 4. At extreme scores, note whether this could be a value trap (low) or momentum peak (high).
General Scoring Rules¶
- Use the anchor descriptions above to calibrate your scores. Do not score outside 0-10.
- Rationale must cite specific evidence from the symbol's data packet (news headlines, price action, thesis conditions).
- If insufficient data exists to score a rubric confidently, skip that rubric entirely rather than assigning a neutral default. Note the data gap in evidence instead.
- At extreme scores (0-1 or 9-10), provide extra justification.
Output Format¶
For each rubric score, provide: - score: integer 0-10 - rationale: 1-2 sentence explanation citing evidence