▶ Full Post Text
Disclaimer: I built this myself. It's free to use. I'm sharing it once to get feedback from people who actually use VIC, not to advertise. It does cost me money to run (API calls), so I'd ask that you use it reasonably. Run a few ideas you're already looking at, not hundreds at once. There's a simple email/password sign-up to use it. No payment or extra steps. Link below.
What it does
I got tired of manually sifting through Value Investor Club write ups to decide what was worth a deep read. I've been doing something similar for a while with ChatGPT (deep research plus custom prompts) on individual ideas, and it's been useful for filtering. So I turned that workflow into a small web app.
You paste a VIC-style write-up (or link to one). The system runs it through:
1. Initial pass. Quick check: pass vs worth a deeper look, with short reasoning. This usually finishes in a couple of minutes.
2. Optional deep research. Fuller analysis: thesis, base/upside/downside, and a rating. If an idea passes the initial check and you choose to continue, this step can take up to about 30 minutes. It runs in the background so you can leave and come back. You can also just stop after the initial pass.
The idea is to use it as a filter: which write ups deserve your time and which you can skip. Works for your own write-ups too if you want a second pass.
What you get (beyond the rating)
It's not just a pass/fail or a number. The deep research output includes:
* The rating (1-10, inverted; see below) and thesis summary
* Scenarios: base, upside, and downside cases so you can stress-test the idea
* Upcoming catalysts: things to watch (e.g. earnings, events) with rough timing
* Kill-switch rules: conditions that would make you reconsider or exit if you take a position
I've been using the ratings and this stuff to size and manage positions. For ideas it flags as buys, my experience so far has been that the hit rate is pretty good. Obviously that's not a guarantee of anything.
Rating system (important: it's inverted)
Ratings are 1–10 where lower is better (like a concentrated "top 10" list):
* 1-2: Top idea. Strong conviction, clear edge
* 3-4: High conviction. Solid thesis, good risk/reward
* 5-6: Medium. Interesting but with real concerns
* 7-8: Lower priority. Notable weaknesses or uncertainty
* 9-10: Effectively pass. Major issues or not worth the time
So a 3 is strong; an 8 is weak. I've been sizing positions partly off these tiers (smaller size for higher numbers, larger for lower). It's been a useful input, not the only one.
What I'm asking for
* Try it on a few ideas you're already researching (your own or from VIC).
* Tell me what's confusing, what's missing, or what would make it actually useful for your process.
* Use it in a way that doesn't blow up my API bill. A handful of runs is totally fine.
Link: [https://portfolio-pos-app.web.app/](https://portfolio-pos-app.web.app/)
If this isn't your kind of tool, no problem. If it is, I'd value the feedback.