Executive Summary
Across 219 articles, our hit rate this run is 73.7% and our average signal return is 11.9%, so the overall record is still solid. Among the tiers with meaningful sample sizes, Sell is performing best on both accuracy and average signal return, while Buy is the weakest this run; Hold remains respectable but less directional by design.
This is one in a recurring series that reviews LF0 Research’s own past ratings against what actually happened to the stock. The goal is an honest scorecard, not a highlight reel — full methodology and every call we’ve ever made is at /research-performance/.
If You’d Followed Every Pick
Beyond individual calls, here’s the model portfolio question: what if you’d put $1 into every Buy/Strong Buy pick the day we published it, and a separate $1 short into every Sell/Strong Sell pick? We’ve rated stocks at very different times — some calls go back to June 2026, others were made last week — so each pick’s $1 only joins its book on its own publish date. The return below is pooled value versus total capital actually deployed at each point in time, not a return measured from one shared start date.
- Long book: +2.2% on 5 pick(s), $1 each. $5.00 deployed is worth $5.11 today.
- Short book: +12.0% on 71 pick(s), $1 each. $71.00 deployed is worth $79.50 today.
- Combined, long + short (i.e. every pick since we started): +11.3% on 76 pick(s), $1 each. $76.00 deployed is worth $84.61 today.
For comparison, here’s what the same $76.00 would have returned in a lump-sum buy-and-hold of the broad market since our first tracked pick (2026-06-09). This isn’t an identical methodology, since our capital went in gradually rather than all at once, but it’s the closest honest same-period reference point:
- S&P 500 (SPY): +4.9%. $76.00 would be worth $79.73 today.
- Nasdaq-100 (QQQ): +1.3%. $76.00 would be worth $76.97 today.
This Week’s Calls
BW — Sell (Notable mover — best active signal return)
What happened: We rated BW Sell at an entry price of $17.76, and it last traded at $4.56. That is a -74.3% stock return, or a +74.3% signal return for the short call.
Why: Our call leaned on the idea that the valuation was already pricing in a recovery that had not yet shown up in cash generation, with the 2026 debt maturity still hanging over the story. That caution held up: the stock fell sharply, which fits the view that the turnaround case was not yet being rewarded by the market.
CIFR — Sell (Notable mover — best active signal return)
What happened: We rated CIFR Sell at an entry price of $21.85, and it last traded at $8.10. That is a -62.9% stock return, or a +62.9% signal return for the short call.
Why: We argued that the stock was already discounting a successful HPC ramp even though the reported numbers still looked like a business in transition. The decline supports that view, because the market did not sustain the premium we thought was too demanding for the operating profile.
FLNC — Sell (Notable mover — best active signal return)
What we said: We said FLNC had a large storage opportunity, but the call depended on backlog quality, margin execution, liquidity, and whether short interest was overpricing the operational risk. The original thesis was that the business still needed to prove it could turn growth into durable cash generation rather than just revenue.
What happened: We rated FLNC Sell at an entry price of $14.42, and it last traded at $6.09. That is a -57.8% stock return, or a +57.8% signal return for the short call.
Why: The original concern about cash burn and weak self-funding economics held up well, since the stock moved lower instead of rewarding the growth story. The 115.9 GW pipeline and 7.5 GW contracted backlog kept the long-term case alive, but they did not offset the market’s focus on the still-negative cash profile.
NLST — Sell (Notable mover — worst active signal return)
What we said: We said the stock was pricing in cleaner cash conversion than Netlist had actually delivered. The key tension was that revenue had topped $100M and EBITDA had turned positive, but operating cash flow was still negative and valuation looked rich versus those results.
What happened: We rated NLST Sell at an entry price of $2.44, and it last traded at $6.90. That is a +182.8% stock return, or a -182.8% signal return for the short call.
Why: This was a wrong call because the market kept rewarding the revenue and EBITDA improvement instead of punishing the remaining cash-flow gap. Our emphasis on the valuation being ahead of the business did not hold up against the stock’s sharp rerating.
SDGR — Sell (Notable mover — worst active signal return)
What we said: We said Schrödinger had a real platform moat, but the numbers still showed a business that was not yet converting that moat into durable cash flow. The original thesis centered on the gap between healthy gross margin and negative operating cash flow, which made the valuation look too rich.
What happened: We rated SDGR Sell at an entry price of $17.40, and it last traded at $29.99. That is a +72.4% stock return, or a -72.4% signal return for the short call.
Why: The thesis did not hold up because the market was willing to pay for the platform and growth story despite the cash burn. Our focus on the negative operating cash flow was valid, but it was not enough to offset the rerating the stock received.
BMNR — Sell (Notable mover — worst active signal return)
What happened: We rated BMNR Sell at an entry price of $17.74, and it last traded at $21.66. That is a +22.1% stock return, or a -22.1% signal return for the short call.
Why: We were waiting for the revenue jump to prove it could survive and turn into cash, but the stock moved higher before that case was tested. The call has not worked so far because the market has continued to credit the growth story ahead of the cash-flow proof we wanted.
How Each Rating Did
Buy — 5 call(s)
Buy is mixed this run: with only 5 calls, the 40.0% accuracy is too small a sample to treat as a durable pattern. UAN was the standout on the upside, while CAR was the weakest, which is a reminder that this tier has been uneven rather than consistently strong.
Hold — 143 call(s)
Hold remains the most measured tier, with 143 calls and 65.7% accuracy, but it is not a high-conviction directional bucket. USAC was the steadiest name, while TEAM moved the most, showing that some Holds barely budged even as others were far from static.
Sell — 57 call(s)
Sell is the strongest tier this run on both accuracy and average signal return, and the sample size is large enough to take that seriously. BW was the best short, while NLST was the biggest miss, which shows the tier has worked well overall even though a few names have moved sharply against us.
Strong Sell — 14 call(s)
Strong Sell has been constructive but less consistent than Sell, with 14 calls and 64.3% accuracy. SMR was the standout positive call, while LUNR was the weakest, so this tier has had useful winners but not enough consistency to call it dominant.
Sector Tilt
How the calls we’re actively tracking are distributed across sectors:
| Sector | Long | Short | Hold | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technology | 0 | 24 | 25 | 49 |
| Industrials | 1 | 13 | 24 | 38 |
| Healthcare | 2 | 8 | 18 | 28 |
| Consumer Cyclical | 0 | 3 | 13 | 16 |
| Consumer Defensive | 0 | 0 | 15 | 15 |
| Basic Materials | 2 | 2 | 11 | 15 |
| Energy | 0 | 5 | 10 | 15 |
| Financial Services | 0 | 4 | 9 | 13 |
| Communication Services | 0 | 5 | 6 | 11 |
| Utilities | 0 | 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Real Estate | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Unclassified | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
Cumulative Signal Return
Lessons This Week
This week’s spotlight reinforced a familiar split: our short calls work best when the market is still paying for a recovery that has not yet shown up in cash generation, but they can fail badly when investors decide to reward early operating improvement before the cash flow catches up. The common thread is that revenue and EBITDA progress alone are not enough to guarantee the stock will fall; when the market believes the rerating is justified, we need to be especially careful about leaning too hard on the remaining cash-flow gap.
Conclusion
Putting it all together: a $1 long book of every Buy/Strong Buy pick is at $1.02 (+2.2%) across 5 picks; and a $1 short book of every Sell/Strong Sell pick is at $1.12 (+12.0%) across 71 picks.
So far, the short book has outpaced the long book.
This is a running scorecard, not a finished one — both books will keep changing as more picks join and more tracking windows close. We’ll keep restating this comparison every week.
Past performance does not guarantee future results. Nothing here is investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell securities. Ratings are tracked for 182 days from publication, then frozen as a permanent record.
Leave a Comment