Tools — screener, odds, head-to-head, sizing, portfolio

Rank the whole coverage by reachability — can the study’s central fair value be reached in 3 months, given how much the name actually moves?

only in reach only looks cheap

Ticker	Reachability	Gap to fair value	Odds up · 3 mo	Big-win odds

The full list with prices → Coverage

A big gap to fair value is not a recommendation — it can mean opportunity or a valuation that needs its next study cycle. Reachability only says whether the cone’s own 3-month spread covers the study’s central value ("in reach" = inside the middle half of paths, "stretch" = inside the 90% band, "out of reach" = beyond it). Rankings refresh whenever the studies do.

Any two covered names, line by line.

vs

One stock, four plain buckets. Then — if you’ve already decided — size the position as a second step.

Money set aside for this idea (EGP) Most you’ll accept losing (%) Exit level (published supports)

Same arithmetic as the current sizer: position = (money × max-loss%) ÷ distance to your exit. It sizes a decision you’ve already made — it never makes one.

A mix of covered names and the odds of the whole mix — combined under one stated co-movement assumption (same-exchange pairs ρ≈0.55, cross-exchange ρ≈0.25, the same figures the current page publishes), on seeded draws mapped through each study’s own percentiles.

The mix

The odds of this mix · 3 months

Add at least one name.

Target return %

Who moves the result