My Investing Formula (v1): The System Behind Every Bet I Make
A 7-part framework I use to evaluate every company built to spot long-term winners before the market catches up.
Why I Needed a System
I started investing in 2021, right after graduating middle school. I was 14 — young, curious, and surrounded by hype.
At the time, my strategy was simple: if I believed in the product, saw the hype building, or thought the space was the future, I bought in. I was big on EVs, so I invested in Rivian and Tesla. I had a gaming PC, so I picked Nvidia and AMD. It wasn’t about financial models, it was about instinct, belief, and where I felt the world was going.
And that’s actually a huge part of my investing philosophy today. It still comes down to real-world intuition and conviction: knowing what people are actually using, what industries are shifting, and what products are built to matter, and believing in my vision.
But over time, I realized that instinct and intuition alone wasn’t enough. I didn’t just want to ride trends, I wanted to understand them. I wanted to know why a company could dominate, how it fit into the broader market, and what the long-term upside really looked like.
So I built a system. A 7-part framework I use to evaluate every stock I consider, grounded in product, vision, timing, and long-term potential. Not just numbers. Not just hype.
This is Version 1 of that system. It’ll evolve, just like I will. But this is the lens I now use to make every major bet.
What Makes a Company Worth Investing In?
When it comes down to it, I think of myself as a qualitative-first investor. I’m not betting purely on numbers, I’m betting on products that matter and companies that are built to win.
Every time I look at a stock, I’m asking myself 5 things:
Is the product actually good?
Is the business model scalable?
How big is the market?
Is there significant room to grow, backed by a bold, believable vision?
Is the price fair for what this could become?
That’s the lens. If a company clears those five filters, I dig in.
The Formula (v1)
Instinct, intuition, and conviction are useful, but I don’t rely on them alone. It is absolutely necessary to take a look at the bigger picture.
Every company I seriously consider goes through the same lens: a 7-part scoring system I’ve built and refined over time to reflect what actually matters to me as an investor.
With the help of AI, each category gets a score out of 10, and I apply a weighted average based on how much I believe it drives long-term returns. Here’s how the formula breaks down:
1. Product & Vision – 33.3%
This is the foundation of my framework. I don’t care how strong the numbers are if the product isn’t exceptional.
Current Products – Is the product genuinely good? Are users choosing it because it’s better, not just louder or cheaper? Have they built something sticky, delightful, or dominant today?
Future Products (and Market Fit) – How well is this company positioned to evolve or expand its product — or benefit as the market evolves around it? Even if the product stays the same, will it become more valuable over time as the space grows?
For example, Unity has a solid platform today. But if AR takes off, its same product becomes exponentially more important, not because it changes, but because the market around it does.
This category captures both how strong the product is today and how well it’s positioned for the future. I’m investing in what a company is now, and what it’s set up to become.
2. Valuation & Upside Potential – 20%
This isn’t just about being “cheap.” It’s about whether the company’s valuation makes sense relative to its long-term potential and whether there’s real upside left.
Market Cap Upside (0–10) – Can this company 10x over time? I assign a score based on how much room there is for long-term expansion in both market cap and impact (a score of 7 implies room for 7x growth).
Profitability Track:
EV/EBITDA – The most respected valuation multiple for profitable companies.
PEG Ratio – Tells me if I’m paying fairly factoring in future growth.
Growth Track:
Forward EV/Revenue – For unprofitable or reinvestment-heavy companies, this is the go-to valuation metric.
EV/Revenue Growth Ratio – My PEG equivalent for earlier-stage names. It tells me how efficiently the company is growing relative to its valuation.
I’m flexible on valuation if the upside is massive but I won’t ignore price entirely.
A company might be great, but if it’s already priced like it’s perfect, I’ll pass.
3. Market & Financials – 20%
A great product still needs a big enough playing field, and the financials need to show that the business can scale within it.
Current & Future TAM – How big is the market today, and how much bigger could it get? I care about companies positioned in expanding ecosystems, not just saturated ones.
Timing – Are we early or late? Timing can be the difference between riding a wave and missing it entirely.
Revenue Growth – How quickly is the company growing?
Free Cash Flow, Gross Margin, and Operating Margin – I’m not obsessed with profitability early on, but I want to see a clear path to financial strength. These metrics help me gauge operational leverage and business model quality.
I don’t need perfect numbers but I need signals that the company is building something durable, scalable, and economically sound.
4. Risk & Execution – 10%
Vision is easy. Execution is what actually builds value, and risk is what kills it.
This category is about pressure-testing the story: Can they actually deliver? What could break? If it’s speculative, what’re the chances they actually execute?
Risk – What could derail this business? Market risk, regulatory risk, technology risk.
Realism – Is their vision believable? Or are they overpromising without substance?
Readiness - Is the product ready to be made? Can it be made with current resources and advancements?
Results – Are they shipping? Are they gaining traction?
I don’t expect perfection. But I need evidence that the team can actually build what they say they will and survive the road ahead. This metric is vital for speculative companies like Tesla.
5. Competition & Differentiation – 10%
Even a great product in a big market can get buried if there’s too much competition or not enough separation. I want to know how defensible this company really is, and whether its edge will last.
Integration – How much of the value chain does the company control?
Are they vertically integrated, horizontally dominant, or dependent on others to scale?Current Competition – How crowded is the space right now? Is the company already facing intense pressure, or are they one of the few serious players?
Future Competition – How much new competition do I expect in the next 5-10 years? Are the barriers high enough to keep others out, or is the door wide open?
The winners are the ones who build the widest moat before the crowd arrives.
6. Brand & Marketing – 3.3%
A great product doesn’t matter if no one knows about it or cares enough to share it. Brand isn’t everything, but it can be a multiplier when it’s real.
Brand Value – Does the brand actually mean something to its users?
Is there emotional loyalty, cultural relevance, or identity attached to it?Sustainability of That Brand – Will the brand still hold weight in 5+ years?
Or is it just catching short-term hype?Network Effects – Does the product become better as more people use it?
Is the brand strengthened by growth or diluted by scale?
When brand and product align, you don’t need to spend to grow, your users do the marketing for you. This metric is more dynamic and dependent on the industry so it’s only 3.33% of the final score.
7. Leadership & Culture – 3.3%
The people behind the company matter. A great leader and team can navigate pivots, out-execute competition, and build a category-defining business. A weak one can fumble even the best product in the best market.
Leadership – Does the founder or executive team have the clarity, conviction, and credibility to drive long-term growth?
Team – Are they attracting A-players? Is there evidence of strong internal culture, high talent density, or smart hiring?
This is one of the hardest categories to grade. Leadership and culture are difficult to quantify, and often take the most research to assess. But here’s the rule of thumb: if the founder is unknown, unproven, or giving off red flags, or the team seems weak, underbuilt, or uninspiring, the score will reflect that. On the other hand, companies led by founders like Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg, backed by teams stacked with top-tier talent, will naturally earn higher marks. I’m betting on execution, and execution comes down to people.
That’s the full system. It’s not about perfection, it’s about product and consistency.
How the System Actually Plays Out
A formula’s only useful if it holds up in practice. So over the past few weeks, I put my 7-part framework to the test, running it across the companies I believe will shape the next decade.
So I ran the numbers. I scored some of the most talked-about companies in tech, along with a few that are flying under the radar, to see how they hold up under my system. No narratives. No shortcuts. Just signal.
Here’s how I interpret the results:
9 and up → Buy Now (category-defining upside, exceptional setup)
7 to 8.9 → Buy (strong signal, solid upside)
5 to 6.9 → Hold (good idea, but not enough edge or clarity)
Under 5 → Sell (too risky, too weak, or too late)
This filter helped me separate conviction from bias, and brought some surprises.
Meta emerged as one of the strongest bets in tech with an 8.7 — a rare combination of product dominance, platform control, and smart AI positioning. Nvidia landed at 7.9, showing just how strong its infrastructure advantage still is, even after the run-up. Meanwhile, Tesla scored a 7.5, reflecting the tension between its category-defining vision and its ongoing execution risk.
But the real signal came from lesser-known plays. Nebius (NBIS), a rising international AI “neocloud” platform, posted a 8.5, almost flashing a rare “Buy Now” signal, possibly being one of the most overlooked opportunities in global infrastructure.
Palantir, despite their strong product, earned a 6.9. This places them in the hold category pretty much entirely due to their overvaluation. Similarly, Unity pulled a 6.0, showing promise but flagging execution concerns, also making them a hold.
On the other end, Intel dropped below the line entirely with a 4.3, weighed down by lagging product vision and average fundamentals.
These scores aren’t static, they’ll evolve as the companies do. But the framework gives me a way to cut through noise and see clearly.
Next, I’ll break down how each of these companies earned their score, and what I’m doing about it.
So What Am I Actually Buying?
The formula isn’t a checklist I blindly follow, it’s a filter. It helps me see through hype, validate my instincts, and spot the tension between potential and price.
Sometimes, I’ll still invest in a company that doesn’t score perfectly. Other times, I’ll pass on one that looks strong on paper but doesn’t feel like it’ll move the needle. I use the framework to understand the full picture and then I trust my judgment.
Here’s how that’s playing out right now:
Meta (8.7) - Meta is my highest-scoring stock and one of my most confident positions. Its product scale, infrastructure depth, and AI+AR roadmap are unmatched.
Nebius (8.5) - This one caught even me off guard. A low-profile AI infrastructure play quietly building international dominance. Their valuation is low relative to potential, and their growth engine looks real. They also have multiple tech-forward businesses, building a strong moat. It’s one of my only near “Buy Now” calls. I see 5-10x potential here if they execute.
Tesla (7.5) - Tesla is a perfect example of why I don’t invest just off the numbers. The score reflects volatility, but I’m betting on the category it’s building. Robotics, autonomy, energy, compute. Tesla is building the real-world AI stack. I’m in for the long game.
Unity (6.0) - Unity didn’t score that well, and I get why. Execution has been shaky. But if AR hits its iPhone moment, Unity becomes a foundational layer overnight. This is a calculated, high-conviction bet on a future I believe is coming. The upside, if it plays out, is asymmetric.
As for the other stocks I mentioned, I’m holding off until an opportunity presents itself. Great companies don’t always make great buys at any price. And as for Intel… yeah, don’t invest in Intel.
This system isn’t static. I’ll keep running new companies through the framework, and when something breaks into the 9+ range — my rare “Buy Now” signal — I’ll share it.
Because at the end of the day, this is about building conviction, seeing clearly, and making bold, calculated bets on the future.
More soon.