📈 Fox's neocon drift misaligns it with its own audience — bad for the business

⚖ Why this verdict

fully deterministic — evaluate.py replays this from daily closes; nothing below is editable or hand-set

1. Window: 2024-07-26 → 2025-07-26 — first mention + 12-month horizon, then the window locks.
2. The call: ▼ SHORT FOXA (primary play). FOXA rose 52.8% over the window → direction-adjusted R = -52.8% (the call lost money).
3. Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned +18.5% → α = -52.8 − (+18.5) = -71.3% — what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the verdict uses.
   Stock-selection read: -34.3% — did FOXA move the predicted way relative to the market. The two only differ on a SHORT: this call was right about direction relative to the index but still cost money versus holding it.
4. Rule fired:
   · HIT — R ≥ +10% AND α ≥ +5

   · PARTIAL — R ≥ +5% OR α ≥ 0

   ▶ MISS — everything else
5. Credit: supporters of a MISS earn 0 each, opposers the inverse — this feeds the scoreboard weights. supported: Sacks

each voice's total force on the score — supports and opposes from every mention, weighted exactly as the replay applied them · share = % of all mention-driven movement

Sacks w=0.89

1 scoring event · 100% of moves

+31.0 → net +31.0

⏳ decay drained -26.3 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one