| name | investor-checklist |
| description | Apply quality + value investor mental models to stock analysis. Use for long-term investor
assessment inspired by public principles associated with Rakesh Jhunjhunwala, Radhakishan
Damani, Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger, Peter Lynch, Benjamin Graham, and Howard Marks.
|
Investor Quality Checklist
Apply public investing principles as a checklist. Do not claim to quote or represent any investor.
Data dependency: This skill synthesizes from the outputs of stock-profile, financial-report-analysis, valuation-analysis, red-flag-analysis, and technical-analysis. If used standalone, gather those inputs first.
Mental Models
- Jhunjhunwala-style: big opportunity size, earnings growth, promoter quality, sector tailwind, long-term conviction.
- Damani-style: simple business, cash generation, valuation comfort, downside protection, patience.
- Buffett/Munger-style: durable moat, honest management, pricing power, high ROE/ROCE, low debt.
- Peter Lynch-style: understandable story, visible growth runway, reasonable price for growth.
- Graham-style: margin of safety, balance-sheet protection, avoid overpaying.
- Howard Marks-style: cycle awareness, sentiment, risk compensation, probability-weighted downside.
When To Use Which Model
Do not blend all six. Default to one primary model based on the stock type:
| Stock Type | Primary Model | Skip |
|---|
| Large-cap quality compounder (Nifty 50 / Nifty 100) | Buffett/Munger | Graham, Marks |
| High-growth midcap / smallcap with visible runway | Peter Lynch | Graham |
| Turnaround or deep-value situation | Graham | Lynch |
| Sector-thematic bet with large opportunity | Jhunjhunwala | Graham |
| Stable business with cash-generous management | Damani | Marks |
| Cyclical at trough / early recovery | Howard Marks | Buffett |
Pick one primary. Note 1-2 secondary overlays if genuinely relevant. Do not apply Buffett's moat standard to a smallcap turnaround — it will always fail and produce misleading output.
Checklist
Score each item as Strong / Acceptable / Weak / Unknown:
- Business is understandable
- Earnings can grow for 3-5 years
- Moat or competitive edge exists
- Management/promoter quality is acceptable
- Capital allocation is sensible
- ROE/ROCE and cash flows are strong
- Debt is manageable
- Valuation is reasonable versus growth
- Margin of safety exists
- There is a credible multibagger or compounding path
- Thesis breakers are visible and monitorable
India-Specific Checks
Apply these additionally for NSE/BSE stocks:
- Working capital cycle: Are debtor days expanding while creditors are shrinking? This is the most common Indian midcap cash trap. Investigate if DIO + DSO > 180 combined.
- Promoter pledge: Anything above 20% of promoter holdings is a governance risk. Watch for sudden increases.
- Related-party transactions: Flag if RPTs with promoter entities are growing faster than revenue.
- Auditor qualification: Any qualified report, emphasis of matter, or auditor change is a red flag. Do not ignore it.
- Subsidiary leakage: Check if subsidiaries are burning cash that the parent is funding. Holding company discount and cross-holding structures are common in India.
- Brand vs. generic: In pharma and FMCG, understand whether revenue is brand premium or commodity-priced. Brand moat is more durable.
- Execution track record: Promoter track record across cycles matters more in India than in developed markets because institutional governance is weaker.
Factor Weighting
Not all checklist items are equally important. Weight the verdict accordingly:
| Tier | Factors | Weight |
|---|
| Tier 1 — Disqualifiers | Management quality, earnings quality, debt sustainability | If any Tier 1 factor is Weak, downgrade the verdict significantly regardless of other scores |
| Tier 2 — Core quality | Moat, ROE/ROCE, cash flow, growth runway | Core compounders need most of these strong |
| Tier 3 — Valuation | Margin of safety, valuation vs growth | Important but less disqualifying than Tier 1 |
A fraud company with perfect margins is still a fraud. A Weak on management quality or earnings quality should never be rated "High-quality compounder."
Output
## Investor Quality Checklist
| Factor | Assessment | Comment |
|--------|------------|---------|
Investor lens verdict: [High-quality compounder / Good but expensive / Cyclical opportunity / Turnaround / Speculative / Weak]
Use this section to sharpen the final recommendation, not to romanticize the stock.
Attribution note: These mental models are public summaries of well-known investing principles. They are educational shorthand, not personal endorsements or quotes from any investor.
