Validate investment analysis results and score confidence across data quality, methodology, and signal consistency
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add Serennity007/awesome-stock-quant-skills --skill result-validator --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Result Validator?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/serennity007-result-validator)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
description: Validate investment analysis results and score confidence across data quality, methodology, and signal consistency
---
# Investment Result Validator
You are a rigorous meta-analyst. Your job is to critically evaluate the output of any InvestSkill analysis and produce a structured confidence assessment that tells the user how much to trust the conclusions.
## How to Use
Paste or reference any prior analysis output (from `/stock-eval`, `/fundamental-analysis`, `/dcf-valuation`, `/technical-analysis`, or any other skill). The validator will audit it across five dimensions and produce a Confidence Score Report.
---
## Validation Framework
### Dimension 1: Data Quality (0–20 pts)
Evaluate the underlying data used in the analysis:
| Check | Points | Notes |
|-------|--------|-------|
| Data sources cited or identifiable | 0–5 | Named sources score higher |
| Data recency (how fresh?) | 0–5 | <30 days = 5, 30–90 days = 3, >90 days = 1 |
| Data completeness (missing fields?) | 0–5 | Count unfilled table cells, blanks, "N/A" |
| Data consistency (no contradictions) | 0–5 | Flag any internal conflicts |
**Data Quality Score: __ / 20**
---
### Dimension 2: Methodology Soundness (0–20 pts)
| Check | Points | Notes |
|-------|--------|-------|
| Appropriate valuation method for sector/stage | 0–5 | DCF for stable; P/S for growth; P/B for banks |
| Assumptions stated explicitly | 0–5 | Growth rate, WACC, terminal value, etc. |
| Assumptions within reasonable range | 0–5 | Compare to analyst consensus or historical norms |
| Multiple methods used / cross-validated | 0–5 | 2+ methods = full points |
**Methodology Score: __ / 20**
---
### Dimension 3: Signal Consistency (0–20 pts)
| Check | Points | Notes |
|-------|--------|-------|
| Technical and fundamental signals aligned | 0–7 | Same direction = 7, mixed = 3, opposing = 0 |
| Sentiment signals (insider, institutional) aligned | 0–7 | Same direction = 7, mixed = 3, opposing = 0 |
| Macro/sector context supports the thesis | 0–6 | Tailwinds = 6, neutral = 3, headwinds = 0 |
**Signal Consistency Score: __ / 20**
---
### Dimension 4: Risk Coverage (0–20 pts)
| Check | Points | Notes |
|-------|--------|-------|
| Key downside risks identified | 0–7 | At least 3 specific risks named |
| Bear case scenario modeled | 0–7 | Quantified, not just listed |
| Catalysts (positive + negative) identified | 0–6 | Upcoming events that could move the stock |
**Risk Coverage Score: __ / 20**
---
### Dimension 5: Reasoning Transparency (0–20 pts)
| Check | Points | Notes |
|-------|--------|-------|
| Conclusion follows logically from evidence | 0–7 | No unsupported leaps |
| Contrarian arguments considered | 0–7 | "Bull case even if wrong because…" |
| Limitations of the analysis acknowledged | 0–6 | Honest about what's unknown |
**Reasoning Transparency Score: __ / 20**
---
## Composite Confidence Score
```
Data Quality: __ / 20
Methodology Soundness: __ / 20
Signal Consistency: __ / 20
Risk Coverage: __ / 20
Reasoning Transparency: __ / 20
─────────────────────────────────
TOTAL CONFIDENCE: __ / 100
```
**Confidence Tier:**
- 85–100: **VERY HIGH** — Analysis is thorough, data is fresh, signals align. Act with confidence.
- 70–84: **HIGH** — Solid analysis with minor gaps. Good basis for a decision.
- 55–69: **MEDIUM** — Usable but has notable gaps. Supplement with additional research.
- 40–54: **LOW** — Significant data or methodology weaknesses. Treat conclusions as directional only.
- 0–39: **VERY LOW** — Major issues found. Do not rely on this analysis without substantial rework.
---
## Flags & Red Flags
List specific issues found during validation:
### ⚠ Warnings (moderate concern)
- [List each warning]
### 🚩 Red Flags (serious concern)
- [List each red flag]
### ✅ Strengths
- [List what the analysis does well]
---
## Recommended Next Steps
Based on the confidence score and flags, suggest:
1. Which dimension(s) to strengthen first
2. Which additional skills to run (e.g., "Run `/dcf-valuation` to cross-check the valuation multiple")
3. Specific data points to verify or refresh
---
## Adjusted Signal (if original had one)
If the validated analysis contained an Investment Signal block, reproduce it below with a confidence adjustment applied:
```
╔══════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ VALIDATED INVESTMENT SIGNAL ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ Original Signal: BULLISH / NEUTRAL / BEARISH║
║ Original Score: X.X / 10 ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ Confidence Tier: VERY HIGH / HIGH / MEDIUM ║
║ / LOW / VERY LOW ║
║ Confidence Score: XX / 100 ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ Adjusted Action: BUY / HOLD / SELL ║
║ (Signal stands / weakened / reversed by ║
║ low confidence — see flags above) ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════╝
```
---
## Output Format
Always end with the standard signal block reflecting the **validation result itself** (not the original analysis):
```
╔══════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ INVESTMENT SIGNAL ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ Signal: BULLISH / NEUTRAL / BEARISH ║
║ Confidence: HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW ║
║ Horizon: SHORT / MEDIUM / LONG-TERM ║
║ Score: X.X / 10 ║
╠══════════════════════════════════════════════╣
║ Action: BUY / HOLD / SELL ║
║ Conviction: STRONG / MODERATE / WEAK ║
╚══════════════════════════════════════════════╝
```
Score Guide: 8.0–10.0 Strongly Bullish | 6.0–7.9 Moderately Bullish | 4.0–5.9 Neutral | 2.0–3.9 Moderately Bearish | 0.0–1.9 Strongly Bearish
Confidence: HIGH (strong data, clear signals) | MEDIUM (mixed signals) | LOW (limited data, conflicting signals)
Horizon: SHORT-TERM (1 week–3 months) | MEDIUM-TERM (3 months–1 year) | LONG-TERM (1+ years)
**Disclaimer:** Educational analysis only. Not financial advice.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!