Track record

The consensus mirror's backtest shows +2.2 pts/quarter net vs the S&P 500 over 35 complete quarters (2017Q3 to 2026Q1), directional, NOT statistically significant (t≈1.3; 95% CI includes zero). Most of that average is one quarter: 2026Q1 posted a +47.5 pt edge, roughly half of it two AI-hardware names (SNDK +258%, AMD +186%) marked at what proved to be a local peak; excluding it the edge is +0.9 pts/quarter.

Edge vs S&P 500

+2.22 pts/q

t-statistic

1.31

Complete quarters

The edge is small and, at t = 1.31 over 35 quarters, not statistically significant, the confidence interval includes zero. This is a walk-forward backtest on a broad as-of candidate universe, net of liquidity-scaled trading costs, complete quarters only. One assumption matters more than the rest, so we state it here rather than in a footnote: each quarter’s positions are formed from 13F holdings as of quarter end, and those filings are not public for up to 45 days. Re-run so that nothing is bought until the filing is actually public, the same pipeline returns −3.4 pts/q (t = −1.74) over 34 complete quarters. The edge above does not survive that constraint. Past performance does not predict future results. Data as of Jun 2026.

Risk-adjusted performance

The edge above is a raw return number. Professional allocators judge a strategy on a different question: how much risk did you take to earn it? A book that returns a lot by swinging violently is worse than one that returns a little, smoothly. So here is the whole risk panel over 34 quarters, net of cost, next to the S&P 500, with nothing hidden.

Metric	Prior Moves	S&P 500	What it means
Sharpe ratio	0.59	0.59	return per unit of total risk. Higher is better. This is the number allocators ask for first.
Sortino ratio	0.60	0.48	return per unit of downside risk only. Ignores upside volatility, which you do not mind.
Information ratio	0.28	–	active return over the S&P divided by how much we deviate from it. The direct 'beat the index at controlled risk' score.
Annualized return	+17.9%	+14.4%	the raw number. Higher here, but read it next to volatility below.
Annualized volatility	+23.0%	+17.2%	how much the return bounces around. Lower is calmer. Ours is higher: the extra return comes partly from taking more risk.
Beta to S&P	1.14	1.00	how much we move with the market. 1.26 means we are a slightly amplified version of the index, not market-neutral.
Max drawdown	-27.9%	-23.9%	the worst peak-to-trough fall. Ours is deeper than the market's: the honest cost of the higher return.
Calmar ratio	0.64	0.60	annual return divided by max drawdown. Punishes deep crashes.
Ulcer index	11.1	8.0	how deep and how long you sit underwater. Lower is less painful to hold.
Gain-to-pain	1.69	1.69	total gains divided by total losses. Above 1 means gains outweigh pain.
Return skew	0.08	-1.00	the shape of the tail. Positive (ours) means a right tail of big wins; the market's is negative, a left tail of crashes.
Quarters beating S&P	+65%	–	how often the basket outran the index. Just over half: consistent with a small, uncertain edge.

The honest read: Prior Moves earns more than the S&P (+18%/yr vs +14%) but takes more risk to do it (beta 1.14, a deeper -28% drawdown), so the risk-adjusted Sharpe is only marginally better (0.59 vs 0.59). The genuinely favorable trait is the positive return skew: a right tail of large wins, where the index carries a left tail of crashes. This is a small sample; every ratio has a wide error bar and the edge itself is not statistically significant. Shown because a strategy you cannot see the risk of is one you should not trust. Risk-adjusted performance of the consensus basket, net of cost, over 34 quarters, versus the S&P 500. Ratios use a 1.06% quarterly risk-free rate and standard annualization. This is a small sample: every ratio carries a wide error bar, the edge CI still includes zero, and past performance does not predict future results. Shown for honesty, not as a return promise.

Prediction receipts: called it

The board makes a specific, dated call: which fund adds which name next. Below are the model’s own out-of-sample calls (predicted buy probability at or above 60%), each scored against the actual next filing. Hits and misses both shown. Because JP and UK positions re-file within days, these calls are checkable almost immediately.

JP · 大量保有 (~5 business days)

53 confident calls · hit-rate 85% vs a 28% base rate · out-of-sample AUC 0.89

Call date	Investor	Company	P(add)	Next filing
2026-08-04	oasis_jp	株式会社インフォマート	67%	confirmed ✓
2026-07-29	oasis_jp	株式会社インフォマート	71%	confirmed ✓
2026-07-22	oasis_jp	株式会社インフォマート	66%	confirmed ✓
2026-06-29	3d_jp	Ｊ. フロントリテイリング株式会社	71%	confirmed ✓
2026-06-22	3d_jp	株式会社西武ホールディングス	73%	confirmed ✓
2026-06-11	nippon_active	那須電機鉄工株式会社	61%	confirmed ✓
2026-05-29	simplex	日本航空電子工業株式会社	75%	confirmed ✓
2026-05-12	oasis_jp	イオンフィナンシャルサービス株式会社	62%	confirmed ✓
2026-05-12	oasis_jp	株式会社カカクコム	64%	missed ✗
2026-05-11	oasis_jp	東京製鐵株式会社	66%	confirmed ✓
2026-04-16	oasis_jp	ニッコンホールディングス株式会社	74%	missed ✗
2026-03-31	oasis_jp	コムシスホールディングス株式会社	61%	confirmed ✓

UK · FCA TR-1 (~2 trading days)

1 confident calls · hit-rate 0% vs a 15% base rate · out-of-sample AUC 0.78 (thin sample: still accumulating)

Call date	Investor	Company	P(add)	Next filing
2026-03-19	cevian	SMITH & NEPHEW PLC	80%	missed ✗

Live calls made from today forward are logged with their filing-due date and confirmed as each filing lands (1262 calls currently awaiting their next filing). Receipts are the model's own out-of-sample calls (P(add)>=0.60), dated and scored against the actual next filing. Hits and misses both shown. JP/UK confirm in days, so a call is checkable almost immediately. Research, not advice.

Cryptographically timestamped

Anyone can backdate a self-reported track record. We don’t. Each day’s confident calls are frozen into one file, hashed, and timestamped on the Bitcoin blockchain via OpenTimestamps before the filings land. On 2026-09-01 that was 1262 per-investor calls plus the US Q2026-09-30 board.

sha256 2b8beeebe37cd2c513226902…stamped

Verify: download commit_2026-09-01.json + commit_2026-09-01.json.ots from the public repo and run ots verify commit_2026-09-01.json.ots. The timestamp proves the calls existed on 2026-09-01 and were not edited after the filings. Self-reported receipts can be backdated; this one cannot.

Corrections

What we got wrong and fixed. We publish our mistakes because a research service you can trust is one that shows its corrections, not one that never admits them.

2026-07-03 · Demoted the Europe predicted board

We briefly promoted a Europe (AFM) predicted board at a claimed walk-forward AUC of 0.77.

An adversarial code review flagged that the fund-curation used full-sample filing counts, so information from the future leaked into earlier test folds. A point-in-time re-test (eligibility decided using only filings dated before each window) collapsed the honest AUC to 0.65, below our gate, on just eight live positions.

Europe is back to a disclosed-only board. It will auto-promote only if it clears the honest point-in-time gate on richer data.

2026-07-03 · Corrected the UK board's headline number

The UK predicted board first claimed an out-of-sample AUC of about 0.85.

Same full-sample curation issue. Unlike Europe, the UK lift survived the point-in-time re-test — but at a slightly lower, honest figure.

The UK board now states the point-in-time-validated AUC of about 0.83, and the curation caveat (the exact filing-count band was tuned) is stated on the page.