Evidence-based investing research
Value Investing Strategy (Strategy Overview)
Allocations for November 2026 (Final)
Cash TLT LQD SPY
Momentum Investing Strategy (Strategy Overview)
Allocations for November 2026 (Final)
1st ETF 2nd ETF 3rd ETF

How Guru Grades Are Graded

Every call is a quote with a date and a source, graded right or wrong against what the S&P 500 did by its due date. As of Nov 13, 2026, 1,179 counted calls have a grade, and 41% of them were right.

Counted, graded
1,179
Right
41%
Always bullish
62%
Gurus with a grade
20

How calls made since 2022 are graded

Where calls come from

Calls are collected from gurus’ own sites and letters and from news articles that quote them. Each one is kept with the exact words, the date it was published and a link to the source. Only calls about the direction of the U.S. stock market are kept.

Which calls count

  • One call per guru, direction, timeframe and week. The same forecast is often reported by several outlets. Within one week only a guru’s earliest bullish call and earliest bearish call for each timeframe count; the rest are listed as repeats (412 so far). A call that week with a different timeframe (three months rather than year end, say) is a different forecast and counts on its own.
  • Neutral calls (“could go either way”) are listed but not counted.
  • Calls too vague to grade are listed but not counted.
  • Gurus quoted far more often than others are sampled: a set number of randomly chosen calls a month is collected for them, so they don’t outweigh everyone else. Their pages say how many.

When a call comes due

Each call gets its due date when it is collected, before the outcome is known. A stated timeframe sets it: “by year end” or “this year” is December 31, a named month or quarter is its last day, “six months” is 126 trading days and “next year” or “12 months” is one year. A call with no timeframe comes due three months (63 trading days) after it was made.

Right or wrong

At the due date the call is checked against the S&P 500 from its close on the day the call was published. The index move is taken as it is, not adjusted for the market’s normal rise. The words matter: a bullish call needs a gain of about 2% or more, a “correction” needs a fall of about 5%, and a “crash” or “bear market” a much larger one. A stated index target must be reached. A call with two equal parts that went different ways counts as one right and one wrong.

Claude, Anthropic’s AI model, proposes each grade with a one-line reason, using rules drawn from the editor’s own 2005–2012 grades. Grades are published as Claude proposes them, without editorial review beforehand. The editor can correct any grade.

Score

Each graded call also has a score from 0 to 100. It measures only how far the S&P 500 moved over the call’s timeframe compared with a normal market for that length of time (a gain of about 8% a year). 50 means the index did what it normally does. A bullish call scores above 50 when the index did better than normal and below 50 when it did worse: about 84 means it beat its normal gain by one typical swing, and about 16 means it fell short by one. A bearish call is the mirror image, and a neutral call scores highest when the index did what it normally does. The score ignores the call’s wording, so a call can be wrong with a high score (a target missed in a rising market). Scores do not affect percent right or the letter.

Percent right and letter grades

Percent right is right calls divided by counted graded calls. A letter needs at least 20 counted graded calls, with about two years or more between the first and the last. Every counted call since 2022 is used, not only the last two years. A grade resting on few calls is less reliable than the total for all gurus.

A
65% or more
B
55–64%
C
45–54%
D
35–44%
F
below 35%

Today 20 gurus have a letter: A 1, B 4, C 2, D 6, F 7.

The always-bullish benchmark

The S&P 500 rises more often than it falls, so a forecaster who always said “stocks will go higher” would score well. The benchmark is that forecaster, graded by the same rules: for every counted call, a pretend call “stocks will go higher” made the same day with the same timeframe. Across all counted calls it was right 62% of the time. Each guru’s page compares the guru with it on that guru’s own dates.

The figure above covers every guru’s call dates. A guru’s own dates can be harder or easier: someone who made many calls just before falls is compared with always bullish on those same dates, on the guru’s page. A bullish call that names a target, a size or a deadline must also meet it, so a mostly bullish guru can score below always bullish.

Like any bullish call, the pretend call is right only if the S&P 500 is higher at the due date, and:

  • for a calendar date (year end, a named month), that is all;
  • for six months or a year, the index must not fall more than 10% in the first three months;
  • for three months or less, or no stated timeframe, the index must also rise at least 2% at some point, must not fall 5% in the first month without rising 2% that month, must never fall more than 10% and, if its best rise was under 5%, must never fall 4% or more.

These are the grader’s rules for a plain bullish call; checked against Claude’s own grades of the pretend calls, they give the same answer on 95% of counted calls. The S&P 500 itself was higher at the due date after 73% of counted calls; the benchmark is lower because, like a guru, it also needs a real rise without a deep early fall. Gurus’ bullish calls were 63% right and their bearish calls 22%.

The 2005–2012 method

The old method, as published with the final report

Used for the 2005–2012 study of 68 gurus and 6,582 forecasts. It differs from today’s in two ways: it adjusted returns for the market’s normal rise, and it matched a call’s horizon to how often the guru published.

The essential grading methodology is to compare forecasts for the U.S. stock market (whether quantified or qualitative) to S&P 500 index returns over the future interval(s) most relevant to the forecast horizon. However, many forecasts contain ambiguities about degree and timing, equivocations and/or conditions. In general, we:

  • Exclude forecasts that are too vague to grade and forecasts that include conditions requiring consideration of data other than stock market returns.
  • Match the frequency of a guru’s commentaries (such as weekly or monthly) to the forecast horizon, unless the forecast specifies some other timing.
  • Detrend forecasts by considering the long-run empirical behavior of the S&P 500 Index, which indicates that future returns over the next week, month, three months, six months and year are “normally” about 0.1%, 0.6%, 2%, 4% and 8%, respectively. For example, if a guru says investors should be bullish on U.S. stocks over the next six months, and the S&P 500 Index is up by only 1% over that interval, we would judge the call incorrect.
  • Grade complex forecasts with elements proving both correct and incorrect as both right and wrong (not half right and half wrong).

Weaknesses in the methodology include:

  • Some forecasts may be more important than others, but all are comparably weighted. In other words, measuring forecast accuracy is unlike measuring portfolio returns.
  • Consecutive forecasts by a given guru often are not independent, in that the forecast publishing interval is shorter than the forecast horizon (suggesting that the guru repetitively uses similar information to generate forecasts). This serial correlation of forecasts effectively reduces sample size.
  • In a few cases, for gurus with small samples, we include forecasts not explicitly tied to future stock market returns. There are not enough of these exceptions to affect aggregate findings.
  • Grading vague forecasts requires judgment. Random judgment errors tend to cancel over time, but judgment biases could affect findings. Detailed grades are available via links below to individual guru records. Within those records are further links to source commentaries and articles (some links are defunct). Readers can therefore inspect forecast grades and (in many cases) forecast selection/context.
  • S&P 500 Index return measurements for grading commence at the close on forecast publication dates, resulting in some looseness in grading because forecast publication may be before the open or after the close. Very few forecast grades are sensitive to a one-day return, and we try to take looseness into account in grading any forecasts that focus on the very short term.

Neither CXO Advisory Group LLC, nor any of its members personally, received any payments from the gurus graded. A few gurus offered access to private forecasts, but we either did not accept or did not utilize such access. Early in the project, we did solicit and use descriptions of market timing methods from three gurus with relatively high accuracies (see “Related Studies” below).

The 2005–2012 final report