Thesis Audit

Thesis Audit

Read-only across the user's live account(s). reference/READ-ONLY-POLICY.md (hard rule) and reference/RESEARCH-STANDARDS.md (peer and technical frameworks, data efficiency, completeness checklist, news freshness, disclosure) apply. Steps name capabilities — resolve each against reference/BROKER-CAPABILITIES.md for the active broker.

This is the deep, whole-book version of one lens: portfolio-review tests theses as one section among five, and portfolio-plan-builder's audit mode only reports which invalidators have been hit. Here the re-test is the work — every thesis row, measured against a number.

Steps

1. Load the theses. PORTFOLIO-PLAN.md — Position theses (thesis, invalidator, target weight, per-row Reviewed date), plus the Decision log (a thesis the user already re-affirmed shouldn't be re-litigated) and Risk limits for the horizon each thesis is written against. No theses section → say so and offer portfolio-plan-builder; never reconstruct a thesis from the fact that a position exists.

2. Reconcile against live holdings — equity holdings capability from every active broker, plus the MF sleeve (SIP register, or INDmoney's fund holdings if active). Three reconciliation findings, all worth reporting even though no market data is involved:

   • a thesis row for something no longer held (stale row),
   • a material holding with no thesis (why is this owned?),
   • actual weight vs. the row's target weight.

3. Classify each invalidator by what would test it, before pulling anything: a price level, a fundamental number (margin, revenue, debt, payout), an event or date (results, verdict, approval, lock-in), or untestable ("if the story changes"). An untestable invalidator is itself the finding — flag it and propose a checkable rewrite.

4. Pull only what the invalidators need, per the data-efficiency rules: one batched LTP call covering every name; technical indicators batched (up to 10) only for price-level invalidators; fundamentals (single-name or screener) only where the invalidator is fundamental; historical candles only for a level or drawdown the indicators don't give. A thesis whose invalidator is nowhere near tripping doesn't earn a deep dive.

5. News only for event-shaped invalidators — date-anchored, 1–2 searches for that name, per the freshness rules. "Nothing in the last 30 days on the thing that would break this" is a valid result.

6. Classify each thesis and show the number that decided it:

   • Intact — invalidator measured, comfortably untripped.
   • Weakening — moving toward the invalidator; say how far.
   • Tripped — the stated condition is met. The loudest finding in the report, whether or not the price agrees.
   • Untestable — no measurable invalidator.
   • Stale — Reviewed older than ~6 months, or written for conditions that no longer exist.

   A rising price does not repair a broken thesis, and a falling price does not break an intact one — separate the two explicitly.

7. Present. Lead with the counts and the tripped rows. Then one table: holding, weight, thesis (abbreviated), invalidator, status, measured value, suggested action. Detail prose only for tripped/weakening rows, each meeting the completeness checklist; data as-of near the top; disclosure block, since a "thesis broken → consider reducing" is a view. Formal version: reference/templates/thesis-audit.md.

8. Propose plan edits, don't write them — rewritten invalidators, refreshed Reviewed dates, a thesis row for an unexplained holding. Only portfolio-plan-builder writes that file. For a tripped thesis, hand off to stock-research to re-underwrite the name from scratch, rebalancing-planner to size any change, and tax-capital-gains before anything gets sold.