parallax-scenario-analysis

name

parallax-scenario-analysis

description

React to a news event or scenario: assess portfolio exposure, macro regime shift, sector impact, identify most-exposed holdings, find rotation candidates, and output an information-framed action analysis via Parallax MCP tools. Also surfaces under PM/RIA vocabulary: 'stress book', 'scenario suite', 'stress test' (e.g., rates +100bps, USD shock, 2008 / 2020 / 2022 replays). Requires a portfolio and a scenario description. NOT for routine morning briefs (use /parallax-morning-brief), not for macro outlook without a triggering event (use /parallax-macro-outlook).

Scenario Analysis

When not to use

• Routine morning brief → use /parallax-morning-brief
• General macro outlook → use /parallax-macro-outlook
• Single stock analysis → use /parallax-deep-dive
• Portfolio rebalancing without a trigger event → use /parallax-rebalance

Gotchas

• JIT-load _parallax/parallax-conventions.md for RIC resolution, parallel execution, and fallback patterns
• get_assessment with a scenario-focused prompt is the core analytical engine — feed it everything from prior steps
• get_news_synthesis may already surface the event — check before assuming the user's framing is complete
• Score changes haven't happened yet if the event is breaking — use get_assessment for forward-looking analysis
• For historical events, get_score_analysis can show what actually moved
• This skill produces FORWARD-LOOKING analysis — always caveat uncertainty
• ~68 tokens at 10 holdings (see _parallax/token-costs.md); scales roughly linearly per holding — the >20-holding cap in Phase 2 bounds large books.
• JIT-load _parallax/house-view/loader.md if an active CIO view is present; portfolio-level skill, so apply §3 (multipliers) to replacement-candidate scoring + §4 (the user-supplied scenario is sovereign per §4 — if scenario CONTRADICTS view tilts, surface "scenario contradicts house view" banner; the Action Plan acts on the scenario, not the view) + §5 (preamble + view-aware rendering) + §6 (audit). For an ALIGNED scenario, the Action Plan is more aggressive; for a CONTRADICTING scenario, the conflict is surfaced and the user's stated framing wins.
• When active view is present, use the view-aware disclaimer per loader.md §5 rule 5; otherwise use the standard disclaimer.
• JIT-load _parallax/white-label/integration-pattern.md before the Pre-Render step. Loader call is load_visual_branding() (7-key visual subset; voice structurally excluded — branding["voice"] raises KeyError). Apply §5 (Branding Header) and §7 (About This Report) in Output Format.

Something happened (or might happen). What's exposed? What shifts? What do I do?

Usage

/parallax-scenario-analysis "China announces 25% tariff on US semiconductors" portfolio=[{"symbol":"NVDA.O","weight":0.15},{"symbol":"AAPL.O","weight":0.20},{"symbol":"TSM.N","weight":0.10},{"symbol":"JPM.N","weight":0.15},{"symbol":"XOM.N","weight":0.20},{"symbol":"JNJ.N","weight":0.20}]
/parallax-scenario-analysis "Fed cuts rates 50bps emergency" portfolio=[holdings]
/parallax-scenario-analysis "Oil spikes to $120 on Middle East escalation" portfolio=[holdings]

Workflow

Call ToolSearch with query "+Parallax" to load the deferred MCP tool schemas before the first mcp__claude_ai_Parallax__* call. Execute using mcp__claude_ai_Parallax__* tools. JIT-load _parallax/parallax-conventions.md for execution mode, RIC resolution, and fallback patterns.

Pre-Workflow — Load Active House View

Per _parallax/house-view/loader.md §1 and §2: load and validate any active house view BEFORE running the workflow. If view present, capture the load preamble for rendering at the top of Output Format per §5.1, capture the tilt vector + excludes, and check whether the user-supplied scenario aligns with or contradicts the view per §4. If no active view (or validation failure): run the workflow normally with the standard disclaimer.

Phase 1: Understand the Event (parallel)

Fire all three simultaneously. get_news_synthesis is async (30-90s) and NEVER gates Phase 2, Phase 3, or the assessment: per conventions §5, insert its section when it resolves, or render a "news: pending" placeholder — do not wait on it.

Tool	Parameters	Notes
get_news_synthesis	2-3 most affected sectors	What market already knows
get_telemetry	fields: regime_tag, signals, commentary.headline, commentary.mechanism, divergences	Starting macro environment
macro_analyst	relevant countries/regions; component "tactical" if macro event	Positioning implications

Phase 2: Assess Portfolio Exposure

Phase 2 is staged into two parallel turns: 2a classification + ground-truth must complete before 2b per-equity scoring + sector can fire, because the asset-class decision in 2a determines which holdings are eligible for 2b's get_score_analysis (factor scores are equity-only). Within each sub-phase every call is independent and parallel-safe per _parallax/parallax-conventions.md §3.

Fan-out cap for large portfolios: for portfolios with >20 holdings, restrict 2b's get_score_analysis (and the 2a per-holding fan-outs where cost-bearing — etf_profile is free and unaffected) to the top 20 holdings by weight plus any holding already flagged (⚠ MISMATCH or otherwise). Render a degraded-coverage note in Output Format listing the symbols skipped by the cap.

Phase 2a — Classification + ground-truth (parallel, single tool-call turn)

Tool	Parameters	Notes
analyze_portfolio	portfolio=[{date: <today ISO>, symbol: <ric>, weight: <w>}], fields=["concentration_metrics","sector_allocation","company_contribution","factor_exposures"]	Sector/factor exposures. The parameters holdings and lens do not exist in the deployed schema. WARNING: may exceed 180K chars — fall back to check_portfolio_redundancy if truncated or on MCP schema validation error. Server-side ETF handling: ETFs included here without per-skill branching.
etf_profile	per holding, plain ticker — all N calls fan out in parallel within 2a	Asset-class oracle. Non-error response → ETF; error response ({"error": "No profile data found"}) → equity. Free / instant per _parallax/token-costs.md. Mirrors explain-portfolio Step 1a.
get_company_info	per holding — all N calls fan out in parallel within 2a	Ground-truth name oracle for cross-validation per conventions §2. Per-holding only — do NOT use comma-joined: comma-joined calls fail-empty on partial coverage, which is risky for arbitrary user-supplied portfolios where any single unresolved RIC silently zeroes the entire batch.
build_stock_universe	theme describing what benefits from this scenario (e.g., "domestic US semiconductor manufacturers" if China tariffs hit imports)	Beneficiary discovery (Phase 3 step 7), hoisted here — the theme derives from the scenario text alone, needs no Phase 2 output, so it fires in the 2a turn to overlap the rest of Phase 2. If the theme is genuinely not derivable from the scenario, defer it to after Phase 2b instead.

Gate between 2a and 2b — perform the following checks on 2a results before firing 2b:

1. Asset-class routing: partition holdings into equities (etf_profile error) and etfs (etf_profile non-error). Phase 2b's get_score_analysis runs ONLY on the equities set.
2. Name cross-validation (per conventions §2): for each holding, compare get_company_info.name against any name field surfaced in analyze_portfolio peer rollups. Mismatches are flagged ⚠ MISMATCH and the holding is fully excluded from downstream analysis — both from 2b's get_score_analysis and from Phase 3's get_assessment prompt construction. Do not include mismatched holdings with empty profiles; that produces hallucinated factor profiles in the assessor's output.

Phase 2b — Per-equity score trajectories (parallel, single tool-call turn)

Tool	Parameters	Notes
get_score_analysis	per equity holding (excluding ETFs from 2a and ⚠ MISMATCH holdings), 4-8 weeks — all N calls fan out in parallel within 2b	Current factor trajectories. Skipped holdings are surfaced explicitly in output (see Output Format).
get_peer_snapshot	top 5 beneficiary candidates from the 2a build_stock_universe result — fire in this 2b turn alongside get_score_analysis	Beneficiary scoring (Phase 3 step 8), hoisted here — candidate symbols come from the universe build (different symbols than the score fan-out), so the two are independent and batch together.

Then call get_assessment with a prompt that:

• Describes the scenario
• Lists each equity, non-mismatched holding with its sector and factor profile
• For ETF holdings: lists symbol + sector exposure from analyze_portfolio only (no per-holding factor profile)
• Explicitly excludes ⚠ MISMATCH holdings from the prompt entirely
• Asks: "Rank these holdings from most-exposed to least-exposed to this scenario. For each, explain the transmission mechanism (direct revenue impact, supply chain, regulatory, sentiment)."

Phase 3: Sector Rotation & Replacement Candidates (steps 7-8 overlap Phase 2 — see above)

7. Identify Beneficiaries — build_stock_universe is fired in the Phase 2a turn (theme is scenario-derived; see the 2a table).
8. Score Beneficiaries — get_peer_snapshot for the top 5 universe candidates is fired in the Phase 2b turn (see the 2b table).
9. Compare Replacements — For the top 2-3 replacement candidates, call get_financials with statement "summary" to verify they're fundamentally sound, not just thematically relevant.

Phase 4: Action Plan

10. Synthesize — Call get_assessment with a comprehensive prompt incorporating:

    • The scenario and its transmission mechanisms
    • Portfolio exposure ranking from Phase 2
    • Macro regime and tactical outlook
    • Replacement candidates and their scores
    • Active house view if present (basis_statement + relevant tilts + alignment-vs-contradiction flag with the user-supplied scenario)
    • Ask: "Given this scenario, which holdings' exposure the scenario most affects and what adjustment candidates follow, framed as information. Prioritize by urgency and magnitude of exposure."

11. Audit log — Append entry per loader.md §6.1 if a view was loaded.

Pre-Render — Load white-label branding

Load _parallax/white-label/integration-pattern.md §2 and compute white_label_active + client_name per that section. Apply §5 (Branding Header) and §7 (About This Report) when composing the Output Format. The loader returns exactly seven keys; any other access (e.g. branding["voice"]) raises KeyError — structurally enforced by loader.py.

Output Format

• House View Preamble (only if view active) — render per loader.md §5 rule 1 (banner from Pre-Workflow + low-confidence warnings). If user-supplied scenario CONTRADICTS view tilts, append a "Scenario contradicts house view" line stating which tilt(s) disagree — per loader.md §4, the user's scenario is sovereign. Per loader.md §5.1 the preamble goes at the very top — it precedes the Branding Header.
• Branding Header (only if white_label_active AND client_name != "") — single line immediately below the House View Preamble (or at the very top if no view): **<client_name>** scenario analysis. Logo handling per integration-pattern.md §5: empty path → text only; URL → embed; absolute local (/ or ~) → skip embed and append Logo on file: <basename> to About This Report.
• Scenario Summary (what happened, why it matters — 2-3 sentences)
• Ground-truth Integrity (only render if Phase 2a flagged any mismatches OR ETFs were excluded from per-position trajectory) — table: symbol, returned_name, expected_name, status (⚠ MISMATCH / ETF — sector exposure only / TRUSTED). Mismatched holdings were fully excluded from the assessment prompt; ETF holdings are present in analyze_portfolio sector exposure but not in per-position factor trajectories.
• Macro Regime Impact (how this shifts the current regime, which factors are affected)
• Exposure Heat Map (table: each equity holding ranked by exposure level — High/Medium/Low — with transmission mechanism. ETF holdings appear with sector-level exposure only; mismatched holdings are excluded.)
• Most Exposed (the 2-3 holdings at greatest risk, with specific reasoning)
• Least Affected (safe positions — brief explanation why)
• Sector Rotation Thesis (what benefits from this scenario)
• Replacement Candidates (table: symbol, name, sector, total score, why it fits)
• Action Analysis (prioritized, per conventions §12: exposure-reduction candidates, addition candidates, hold rationale — weight arithmetic framed as analysis, not instructions). Render the informational preface and action-label framing per parallax-conventions.md §12.
• What to Watch (2-3 signals that would confirm or invalidate this thesis)
• Confidence & Caveats (how certain is this analysis, what could go wrong with the rotation)
• About This Report (always present): one line stating branding state per integration-pattern.md §7 markdown column (render per table; do not collapse). If a logo was skipped per the Branding Header rule, append Logo on file: <basename> as a second About This Report line.

AI-interaction disclosure (required regardless of view state): Render parallax-conventions.md §9.2 immediately above the disclaimer below.

If active view: use the view-aware disclaimer per loader.md §5 rule 5. Otherwise:

"This is scenario-based analysis, not investment advice. Forward-looking assessments are inherently uncertain."