Counter Evidence

Counter Evidence Workflow

OBJECTIVE: Find legitimate reasons why the thesis might be wrong, using INDEPENDENT data sources.

Step 1: Identify Thesis Pillars

What are the key bullish arguments?

• Growth assumptions (revenue, earnings, market share)
• Competitive advantages (moat, technology, brand)
• Market opportunity claims (TAM, growth rate)
• Management quality assertions
• Valuation justification

Step 2: Targeted Counter-Search

For each pillar, actively look for contradictions:

• Use search_web_exa with bearish keywords:
  • "[company] risks", "[company] challenges", "[company] lawsuit"
  • "[company] competition losing", "[company] regulatory action"
  • "[company] analyst downgrade", "[company] SEC investigation"
• Use fetch_yfinance_news to check:
  • Whether financial stats match the thesis claims
  • Recent news headlines that contradict the bullish narrative
  • Key stats (PE ratio, growth rates) vs thesis assumptions

Step 3: Assess Severity

Rate each counter-evidence found:

• MINOR: Doesn't invalidate thesis, manageable risk
• MODERATE: Reduces conviction, needs monitoring
• MAJOR: Potentially invalidates key thesis pillar
• CRITICAL: Fundamental flaw, thesis may be wrong

Output Format

COUNTER EVIDENCE REPORT: [SYMBOL]

THESIS PILLAR: [Growth assumption] Counter-Evidence: [What was found from independent sources] Severity: [MINOR/MODERATE/MAJOR/CRITICAL] Implication: [What this means for the thesis]

[Repeat for each pillar]

OVERALL ASSESSMENT: Thesis Vulnerability: [LOW/MODERATE/HIGH] Most Concerning Finding: [Single biggest issue]