The masterbrain's trajectory (blue, curved through its 7 checkpoints), the deterministic v0.3 control (dashed), and the actual price (green) overlaid from the prediction date forward.
Forecast Change-12.1% to $870.00
Predicted High$1,010.00at 1 month
Predicted Low$870.00at 6 months
Max Drawdown (predicted)-12.1%
Forecast
The masterbrain trajectory — 7 dated checkpoints. Short rungs (2w, 1m) show the typical range as the primary claim; point calls run from 2 months out. Every claim still gets graded.
Predicted Aug 2, 2026 12:40 am
Bear
GEV trends lower to
$870.00
(-12.1% from $990.29)
by Feb 2027.
ride-then-fade
ThesisGEV is deeply overvalued on fundamentals but sustained by a powerful AI-power/energy-transition narrative with high beta and momentum. Near-term the cult narrative holds and the neutral regime allows drift, but over 6 months some valuation gravity plus post-earnings fatigue pulls it modestly lower toward the deterministic baseline without full mean reversion.
Invalidated ifA decisive break above 1080 on strong volume (narrative reacceleration) or a break below 850 (thesis intact); a hawkish macro shock crushing high-beta names would also invalidate the gentle-drift path.
Checkpointtime after the call
Datewhen it gets graded
Predictedthe claim: closing price
Current priceactual close — fills in over time
Predicted returnpredicted vs $990.29 at call
Conv.brain's confidence, 1–10
Driverwhy the brain put the point here
Prediction made
Aug 2, 2026
—
$990.29at call
—
—
The anchor — every point below is measured from this price and date.
2 weeks
Aug 16, 2026
$874.97–$1,105.61typical range · internal point $1,002.00
What actually happened:
closed $1,063.25
on Aug 14, 2026 = +7.4% vs the call
(predicted +1.2%)
· direction MISS
(called flat, was up)
· off by 6.2 pp
· accuracy 4/10
· typical range ±11.6%:
inside the band
· S&P +4.7%
over the same window — lagged it
1 month
Sep 2, 2026
$823.17–$1,157.41typical range · internal point $1,010.00
—
±16.9%
5/10
AI-power theme buoyancy, no earnings catalyst
What actually happened:
closed $898.53
on Sep 1, 2026 = -9.3% vs the call
(predicted +2.0%)
· direction MISS
(called flat, was down)
· off by 11.3 pp
· accuracy 4/10
· typical range ±16.9%:
inside the band
· S&P +1.9%
over the same window — lagged it
What actually happened:
closed $987.45
on Oct 1, 2026 = -0.3% vs the call
(predicted -0.5%)
· direction HIT
(called flat, was flat)
· off by 0.3 pp
· accuracy 10/10
· S&P +2.4%
over the same window — beat it
3 months
Nov 2, 2026
$950.00
—
-4.1%
4/10
Q3 print risk, high-beta sensitivity to any rate wobble
4 months
Dec 2, 2026
$920.00
—
-7.1%
4/10
valuation gravity, narrative fatigue after another quarter
5 months
Jan 2, 2027
$895.00
—
-9.6%
3/10
year-end profit taking on 2026 winners
6 months
Feb 2, 2027
$870.00
—
-12.1%
3/10
partial convergence toward deterministic baseline
Why ranges on the short rungs?
A 102-prediction trial (2026-07-21) showed 2-week point calls carry no information here —
three prompt formulations all lost to simply predicting zero — while the stock's own
volatility scale (σ×√t) described those windows well. So the short rungs claim what's
actually knowable: the typical travel, with earnings timing flagged where the variance
will come from. The internal point calls keep being generated and graded to map where
real skill begins. Full evidence: stocks/predictions/V0.5-DESIGN.md §8.
Deterministic control (v0.3 value line) targets
$833.62
(-15.8%)
— both lines get graded at every checkpoint, so the brain has to beat the formula, not just replace it.
Brain: claude-opus-4-7.
Weaknesses
No weaknesses recorded for this run.
All inputs present, no fallbacks used — nothing to flag.
Equation Inputs
Everything feeding the v0.6.0 model — value anchors, the stock's own price behaviour, and the tunable knobs.
Value anchors (from deep analysis)
Price at call
$990.29
Composite fair value
$234.58
Signal-adjusted fair value
$242.58
DCF fair value
$126.62
Anchored-PE fair value
$638.82
Buy-below (value lens)
$450.00
Value net score
-82
Value confidence
8 / 10
Quality net score
+51
Memo confidence
8 / 10
Deserved value (base)
—
Quality tilt
—
Deserved value (used)
—
Coherence (value × quality)
—
Price behaviour (trailing — shapes the realism line)