Most stock analysis collapses into a single number — a buy rating, a target price, a thesis. The signal disappears. A company can be cheap because it's dying. A company can grow fast and burn through cash before it ever reaches profitability. A company can have a rock-solid balance sheet with no engine pulling it forward. The same "12-month target" hides all of it.
Investa-Gate runs every stock through three independent gates instead — survival, growth, valuation. Each gate is scored on its own, 0 to 100, against benchmarks built for the company's sector. The three count equally in the final score — no gate gets to hide behind another, and every part of the picture stays visible.
The scores come from fundamentals alone — filed financials and analyst consensus. No news, no sentiment, no price momentum touches the number. The Gatekeeper's news-and-sentiment deep dive is a separate layer on top; it never moves the score.
Can the company stay solvent through the cycle? The gate scores financial strength against benchmarks built for the company's sector. What matters for a biotech burning cash isn't what matters for a bank — and we don't pretend it is.
When the picture is severe — distressed balance sheet, going-concern warnings — the verdict gets capped or disqualified regardless of how compelling the other gates look. A "great valuation" on a company about to fail isn't a bargain; it's a warning.
Is the engine still firing? We evaluate revenue trend, profit margin direction, and how forward expectations stack up against analyst consensus. Where reported earnings are distorted by one-time items, the cleaned-up figure is shown alongside the headline — never silently swapped in.
For companies whose entire thesis is growth, weak growth caps the verdict even if the price looks great.
Is the price ahead of, behind, or in line with the business? The gate reads valuation against the company's own history and against its peers — diagnosing whether a "cheap" reading reflects deteriorating fundamentals or a temporary mispricing.
A bank, a biotech, and a software company can't be measured with the same ruler. So while every stock faces the same three gates, each is judged against the yardsticks that fit its business: a REIT's valuation reads on funds from operations, a bank's on book value, a software company's on revenue multiples. What counts as a "healthy margin" or a "cheap price" is set per sector, from the actual universe of companies in it.
Same three questions for everyone. Different evidence for what a good answer looks like.
Every stock lands in one of four bands — WOW, GOOD, MEH, YUCK — with protections that cap the verdict if any one gate fails outright. A pretty composite score isn't allowed to paper over a broken balance sheet or a collapsing growth story.
Every scoring engine is only as honest as its data — and market data feeds lie constantly. Most tools score the lies anyway. We built a layer whose whole job is to catch them first, and it works the hard way: every number has to agree with the company's own other numbers before it's allowed to move a score. Real catches, from our own audits:
Bonds dressed as stocks. We found dozens of exchange-traded bonds and preferred shares circulating in standard data feeds under their parent company's clean name — indistinguishable from equity in every field. Scoring a bond like a stock is a category error, so they were identified, verified one by one, and purged.
Fake growth. A stored "+230% earnings growth" figure that the company's own filed numbers put at +12%. Growth claims measured off one-time-crushed base years. "Explosive" forecasts with no revenue behind them. Each class gets the same treatment: re-derive from the primary figures, and if the claim still can't be explained by anything real, it's excluded — not scored.
Currency traps. Foreign companies whose earnings arrive in pesos or reais against a dollar share price, producing fantasy valuations like a 1× P/E. We don't guess a conversion — we refuse the number and score on what's clean.
Windfall earnings. When a company's bottom line is propped by a one-time gain, a mark-to-market swing, or interest income while operations lose money, its P/E is not allowed to claim "cheap." Inflated earnings looking expensive, however, still count as expensive.
All of it runs nightly, across the entire universe, automatically — and when a rule fires, the raw figure is kept and flagged, never silently rewritten.
Some stocks can't be scored honestly — coverage too thin to trust the estimates, data that contradicts itself, a verdict resting on a single unverifiable number. Most tools print a number anyway. We print UNRATED.
An unreliable score isn't a low score — it's no score. A stock leaves the rankings entirely until its data earns its way back in. That single rule is why the rest of the numbers can be trusted.
Every week, every verdict on every stock is snapshotted and measured forward against the S&P 500 — on a public track record that only moves forward. No backtests, no cherry-picking. If the framework works, you'll see it. If it doesn't, you'll see that too.
The verdict is the headline, not the whole story. Here's the honest workflow:
Start with the verdict to sort the universe — WOW is rare on purpose (roughly the top 1%), so a WOW means "this one earned a closer look," not "buy this."
Then read the three gates to see why. A GOOD built on 90-90-40 is a very different company than one built on 70-70-80 — the first is a strong business at a rich price, the second is solid across the board. The gates are where the actual information lives.
Treat UNRATED as an answer, not a gap. It means the data couldn't be trusted — which is worth knowing before you put money anywhere near it.
Summon the Gatekeeper when you want the deep dive. The scores tell you what the filed numbers say; the Gatekeeper reads the news, the sentiment, and the story around them — in plain language, grounded in the scorecard. Fundamentals first, context second.
Then do what no tool can do for you: decide whether the business fits what you're looking for.
Investa-Gate publishes analytical scoring. It does not publish buy or sell recommendations. It does not produce price targets it can defend. The framework exists to make stock evaluation legible, not to replace judgment. Verify everything independently before making investment decisions.
The homepage carries a complete sample — every gate and the verdict shown.
See a sample verdict