📈 Uninsurable coastal property gets repriced down

⚖ Why this verdict

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

1. Window: 2023-10-27 → 2024-10-27 — first mention + 12-month horizon, then the window locks.
2. The call: ▼ SHORT LEN (primary play). LEN rose 69.1% over the window → direction-adjusted R = -69.1% (the call lost money).
3. Benchmark: holding SPY over the same window returned +42.9% → α = -69.1 − (+42.9) = -112.0% — what this call made or lost against just owning the index. This is the number the verdict uses.
   Stock-selection read: -26.2% — did LEN 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: Chamath, Friedberg, 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

Friedberg w=0.87

3 scoring events · 58% of moves

+58.6 → net +58.6

Chamath w=0.84

3 scoring events · 30% of moves

+30.3 → net +30.3

Sacks w=0.89

1 scoring event · 12% of moves

+12.6 → net +12.6

⏳ decay drained -55.8 over the idea's life — that's time passing, attributed to no one