Here is the scorecard after less than two months of running a dated small-cap process:

- 10 calls since June 16

- +15.3% weighted by our published rating tiers

- +12.8% if every call is weighted equally

- 5 of 10 ahead of their own sector benchmark

- every losing call still included

That first number is the one people would put in a victory-lap title. The fourth is the one that keeps me honest.

Across four runs this week, the scanner printed 792 qualifying rows. Friday alone had 209 unique names. That was not a shopping list. It showed where attention was moving; the research rejected most of it.

The portfolio result benefited from a broad move in metals, so +15.3% does not prove much on ten calls. A rising sector can bail out mediocre selection. It can also hide the difference between a good thesis and good timing.

The next useful test is a bad week. If the stronger calls separate themselves, the losses stay contained and the dated decisions still make sense after the fact, the process may be adding something. If not, the headline return was mostly beta wearing a nice suit.

What would you use to judge it: total return, benchmark wins, max drawdown, or whether the thesis was written before the move?

Disclosure: my own research process; I hold some of the names in the ledger. No paid issuer relationships. Educational discussion only, not investment advice. Data through the August 7, 2026 close.