Glossary · 45 defined terms
Archetypes, regime labels, conviction tiers. Each definition is referenced by the dossiers and the daily journal. Citable, dated, stable.
Quality balance sheet, secular tailwind, multi-year hold candidate.
Names with durable earnings power and a long runway. Sizing is generous, stop discipline lenient, holding period measured in quarters or years. Earnings beats compound rather than expire.
Mean-reverting earnings, regime-sensitive entry.
Names that win when a specific macro regime turns. Entry is gated on the macro setup, sizing scales with cycle conviction, exit is regime-state dependent rather than price-target dependent.
Highest-conviction name within an active theme cluster.
The cleanest pure-play within an established theme cluster. Sized higher than basket peers, but downgraded the moment the theme transitions to MATURING or SATURATED.
M&A, spin-off, restructuring, regulatory event.
Event-driven names where the catalyst is known and dated. Sizing is event-aware, exits are tied to event resolution rather than price action.
Pre/post-print setup with an explicit binary outcome.
Names whose price gates on a single quarterly release. Entry pre-print only on confirmed bullish setup; auto-exit windows around the print.
High-beta, short-interest-driven; hard sizing cap.
Squeeze-candidates and meme-style basket movers. Hard 1% sizing cap regardless of conviction, auto-trim on RSI > 82, never average down.
Cash-flow durable, low-beta, regime hedge.
Staples, utilities, dividend aristocrats. Used as a regime hedge during RISK-OFF; sized inversely to cyclical exposure.
Cross-asset proxy for a thematic risk (XLE / GLD / TLT / …).
An ETF or single-name macro expression of a thematic view, held to balance portfolio beta rather than for standalone alpha.
Risk-asset tailwind across credit + rates + breakevens.
Buy-thresholds eased, size multiplier 1.0, cash floor 5%. The model bids its strongest-graded names freely.
Mixed signals, no directional conviction.
Default neutral lean. Buy-thresholds neutral, sizing standard, position count capped tighter. Adds only on the strongest-graded setups.
Risk-asset headwind across the rate / credit / breadth complex.
Buy-threshold tightened, size multiplier 0.5, cash floor 30%. Only the strongest-graded names pass; the retail-squeeze archetype is switched off.
A single binary event is gating regime direction.
Used when one near-term event (CPI, NFP, Fed) will resolve regime ambiguity. Position sizing halved across the board until the event resolves.
Inflation expectations rising into a slowing-growth read.
Energy + materials hedges favoured; long-duration assets deprioritised. Cash floor raised; defensive sizing increased.
Recovery from RISK-OFF without full risk-asset confirmation.
A transitional read — partial easing of RISK-OFF tightening. Sizing graduated, buy-threshold loosened in steps.
The model's highest calibrated confidence — reserved for the cleanest setups.
The top tier. Reserved for the cleanest setup × balance sheet × narrative combinations. Sizing leans larger; stop discipline still firm.
Strong setup × narrative × balance-sheet alignment.
Standard target conviction for entry. The bull case is sourced and the invalidation trigger is concrete and near-term checkable.
Setup intact but at least one bull-case bullet is contested.
Probe-only conviction. Smaller sizing, tighter stop, accept higher kill rate.
Partial setup — one of three confirmation factors present.
Watchlist-grade or sub-1% probe only. Often paired with an explicit waiting condition (e.g. higher-low to confirm).
An internal read on each candidate, strongest to weakest, before sizing.
The model grades each candidate on narrative, balance sheet, and setup alignment — strongest to weakest. The strongest grade is reserved for names where all three clear independent thresholds. You mostly see its effect through the conviction tier published on the dossier.
The strongest quality grade — narrative, balance sheet and setup all clear.
Reserved for names where the bull case, the balance sheet, and the setup each clear an independent bar. It maps to HIGH or SUPREME conviction depending on the regime.
A passable read whose case is contested on at least one front.
The balance sheet has unresolved questions, the setup is partial, or the narrative is mature. Maps to LOW or MEDIUM conviction; probe-only sizing.
The one-paragraph bull-case summary on every dossier.
What the bet is, in plain English, anchored in sourced bullets from the bull-case body. Updated each time a dossier is re-analysed; the version date is published.
The explicit kill criterion published with every dossier.
A pre-committed price, news, or event that, if it fires, strips the conviction and marks the thesis broken. Functions as a public commitment, not a soft warning.
Dated events the dossier expects to move the name.
Earnings dates, regulatory deadlines, sector catalysts, FOMC, CPI. Each entry is dated and references its source. The next-30-days slice is shown on the dossier page.
A group of correlated names that move together on shared catalysts.
Themes are treated as primary, not afterthoughts. A name's basket co-movement is read alongside its standalone setup; cluster confirmation can lift a single-name conviction. Examples: quantum-computing, sovereign-compute, retail-squeeze-baskets.
Independent corroboration of a thesis by basket peers moving on the same catalyst.
If the theme leader and at least two basket peers all confirm the same direction on the same headline, the system upgrades signal weight. Cluster failure on the same headline downgrades it.
A confirmation pattern: price prints a low above the prior low on expanding volume.
Used as a waiting condition for retail-squeeze setups: never chase the gap; wait for a higher-low that holds the catalyst base before probing.
The price-structure read: moving averages, RSI, levels, basing pattern, volume.
Moving averages, RSI, basing pattern, volume profile, levels. The dossier's 'Setup & Price Structure' section captures it in plain English.
The continuous price feed of US equity markets.
Shorthand for the live market the system reads each day. orbyd is US-only by design — the model is calibrated on this regulatory + reporting environment.
Every name the model considers each day: held positions, watchlist, and the top-100 momentum screen.
Held positions + watchlist + the top-100 momentum names that pass the liquidity screen. Refreshed every premarket. The breadth keeps narratives from being missed.
The current regime call's mapping to sizing / threshold settings.
Each regime (Risk-on, Choppy, Risk-off, …) maps to a specific set of settings — buy-threshold, size multiplier, max exposure, and cash floor. The journal records the active tier daily.
orbyd's publishing principle: the reasoning, the names, and the record are all public.
Dossiers, regime calls, the names held and circling, archetype/regime classifiers — all published with source links and dated, the day each call is made.
The names orbyd holds now plus the names it's circling — research attributes only.
The held positions and watchlist published as names with conviction, archetype, theme, thesis and a kill trigger, the day each call is made. A live, reasoned book instead of a logo wall published a quarter late.
The public scoreboard: every thesis resolved as played-out or invalidated, dated and scored.
Each thesis ships a falsifiable kill criterion; when it resolves it lands in the ledger as played-out or invalidated, dated, with whether the published trigger fired. Strictly non-monetary: it scores whether each published claim held up, leaving aside trade timing, sizing and P&L entirely.
The share of resolved theses that played out (vs were invalidated).
Among theses that have resolved, the fraction marked played-out rather than invalidated. Reported overall and broken out by conviction tier, archetype, and the macro regime in force at resolution.
The forecasting-accuracy score on orbyd's conviction calls (0 perfect, 0.25 coin-flip).
Mean squared error between the probability a conviction tier implies (SUPREME≈0.9 … LOW≈0.5) and the binary outcome. Decomposed (Murphy) into calibration, resolution and uncertainty. For external context, Tetlock's Good Judgment Project superforecasters scored ≈ 0.08 on geopolitical questions, and published forecasting evals put the strongest LLMs near ≈ 0.10 — both on different question sets, so they are reference points, not a like-for-like comparison. orbyd's own measured score lives on /track-record/.
Whether stated conviction matches reality — does SUPREME actually play out far more often than LOW?
A model is calibrated when its conviction tiers play out at the rates they imply. orbyd publishes the gap between claimed and observed play-out rates per tier (the reliability diagram), so confidence is checkable rather than asserted.
Whether staking conviction beats forecasting the base rate (1 − Brier ∕ uncertainty). Zero means no edge demonstrated yet.
The Brier skill score asks whether the conviction tiers add information over a model that simply forecasts the overall play-out rate every time. A positive score means the tiers earn their keep; zero means they don't yet. orbyd's sits near zero — the honest read on a record still too young to settle the question. See /skill-or-luck/ and /track-record/.
How much the conviction tiers separate outcomes from the base rate — the discrimination term in the Brier decomposition. Higher is better.
Not to be confused with a thesis resolving played-out or invalidated. This is the discrimination term in the Murphy decomposition: the degree to which SUPREME, HIGH, MEDIUM and LOW actually sort outcomes apart instead of all reverting to the base rate. Near-zero resolution means the tiers don't yet separate — confidence may track reality (good calibration) while conviction still carries no extra information.
The plot of predicted versus observed play-out rate per conviction tier; the diagonal is perfect calibration.
The artifact orbyd renders on /track-record/. Each dot is one conviction tier plotted at its implied probability against the rate at which its theses actually played out; the diagonal line marks perfect calibration. Dots above the line are overconfident, below it underconfident, and the spread between dots is what resolution measures.
How often theses play out overall, before any conviction is staked — the benchmark a skill score has to beat.
The unconditional play-out rate across every resolved thesis. A forecaster who simply predicted this number every time would score the uncertainty term and nothing more; the base rate is therefore the floor that staking conviction must clear to demonstrate skill. The uncertainty term in the Brier decomposition derives directly from it.
A claim is only meaningful if some observation could prove it wrong — the principle behind every dossier's invalidation trigger.
Popper's criterion: a thesis that no possible outcome could refute explains nothing. Every orbyd dossier ships a pre-committed invalidation trigger precisely so the claim can be marked broken in public, and that falsifiability is what makes the scored record possible — a thesis you can't disprove can't be Brier-scored either.
Judging a record only by its survivors — the distortion an append-only, every-call-resolved ledger is built to defeat.
When losers are quietly dropped and only winners are counted, any track record looks skilled. It is why most 'AI beats the market by X%' claims are unfalsifiable. orbyd's structural answer is an append-only ledger where every thesis resolves in public and the invalidated ones stay on the board — the institutional analogue is the GIPS rule that a composite must include every account, not just the good ones.
A simulated, non-live account: nothing to sell, no book to pump, no order to front-run — so the incentive that bends most research isn't present.
orbyd's pipeline runs on a simulated account by design. Because no real capital changes hands, there is no position to talk up, no order flow to front-run, and no product to sell off the back of a call. The conflict of interest that distorts most sell-side and influencer research is structurally absent, which is part of why the record can be published in full.
Splitting the Brier score into calibration, resolution and uncertainty (Brier = calibration − resolution + uncertainty).
Allan Murphy's identity decomposes the Brier score into three readable parts: calibration (how far claimed confidence sits from observed rates), resolution (how much the tiers separate outcomes), and uncertainty (the irreducible difficulty of the question). A low calibration term paired with near-zero resolution is exactly what a skill-≈0 record looks like — confidence that tracks reality, conviction tiers that don't yet add information. orbyd surfaces all three on /track-record/.