Investment Philosophy
A contrarian, fundamentals-first approach: buying strong businesses when the market has overpriced a specific, nameable risk — not simply hunting for whatever looks statistically cheap.
My main investment philosophy centers around buying into companies with strong fundamentals which are currently trading below their fair value because risks are being overly priced into the stock — providing the opportunity to make significant market-beating returns through earnings growth and multiple expansion, once those risks fail to materialize.
Whilst most investors are reactive and emotional, that behavior provides others with the opportunity to buy into healthy companies at substantial discounts. This has been a clear theme across many of my past and present holdings.
I persist in searching for businesses that continue to execute whilst Wall Street panics about minor inconveniences.
However, I also won't limit myself only to companies trading significantly off their highs. If a company is trading below what I perceive as fair value, I'm not opposed to starting a position — regardless of how far it's fallen, or whether it's fallen at all.
I'm still a young investor, but I've navigated a number of periods of uncertainty over the last few years, and I'm looking forward to more scares and shakeouts in the financial markets — they tend to be where this approach pays off.
What that means in practice
I look for companies with strong fundamentals where the market has overpriced a specific, nameable risk — not simply whatever looks statistically cheap.
Earnings growth and multiple expansion compound together once a feared outcome fails to materialize — the discount closes as the story catches up to the numbers.
Most market participants are reactive and emotional. Their overreaction to short-term noise is where a patient investor finds price.
Google was supposedly going to be disrupted by ChatGPT. It turned out AI was a tailwind. I try to tell the difference between a real risk to the business and a headline.
A name doesn't need to be down 50% to earn a place in the portfolio. If it's trading below what I think it's worth, that's enough to start a position.
I'm still early in my investing life, but I've been through enough volatility already to know it's where the returns are made — and I'm looking forward to more of it.
From idea to position
| Step | Stage | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| 01 | Idea Generation | Screened for situations where the market's price reaction to a risk looks larger than the risk itself — a feared regulatory outcome, a disrupted narrative, a single bad quarter — in businesses with genuinely strong fundamentals. |
| 02 | Research Note | A full written report: business model, unit economics, valuation range, and — non-negotiable — the specific risks that could break the thesis. |
| 03 | Position Sizing | Sized by conviction and by how much of the loss I could absorb without it changing my behavior elsewhere in the portfolio. |
| 04 | Quarterly Review | Every position is re-examined each quarter against the original thesis — not against the stock price — and documented in the letter regardless of outcome. |
Why I publish this
This started as a private notebook and became a website because writing for an audience — even a small one — forces more rigor than writing for myself alone. Every report and letter here is dated and left as originally published; when my view changes, that gets a new entry rather than a silent edit.
Questions, disagreements, or corrections are always welcome.