Example portfolios, scored.

Seven of the largest companies in the world, held in equal amounts. It looks diversified because there are seven names. The engine measures what the seven names have in common.

The purest concentration case there is. Every metric the engine has for spread collapses to one, and the score shows how a great company and a fragile portfolio can be the same thing.

The portfolio every allocation debate starts from: a broad equity fund and a broad bond fund. Two holdings, thousands of underlying securities. The engine scores what it can see.

US stocks, international stocks and bonds in a 50/30/20 example. The analysis uses the three fund positions; it does not measure the underlying securities or overlap between funds.

A fixed, equal-weight example published on 17 September 2026. These companies have different dividend histories, including reductions by AT&T and 3M. This is not a list of current Dividend Aristocrats or a claim of uninterrupted dividend growth.

The acronym that defined a decade of retail investing. Five companies, one theme. The engine puts a number on how much of the outcome depends on that theme.

An illustrative basket published on 17 September 2026. The displayed weights are fixed inputs for exploring concentration, not verified current Berkshire Hathaway holdings or the contents of a specific 13F filing. Rescoring updates the analysis, not the basket.

Disruptive growth, held with conviction. This is what a high-beta portfolio looks like to the engine: the risk-balance and trend components carry most of the story.

The names that show up in most Norwegian retail portfolios. Energy, banking, seafood and industrials, all listed in Oslo. The engine resolves Oslo Børs tickers directly, so this is scored the same way as any US basket.

Six funds covering most of the investable world. The interesting part is what the engine reports as missing: fund-level holdings carry less evidence than single stocks, and the score is honest about that.