AI-Powered Equity Research Reports AI-Powered Equity Research Reports

AI-Powered Equity Research Reports

One of Aerondight’s most practical features is its AI research report generator. Given a ticker, the system produces a 7-section institutional-quality equity analysis — combining quantitative signals, fundamental data, and recent news into a professional PDF.

What’s In a Report

Each report covers:

  1. Executive Summary — overall thesis and conviction level
  2. Quantitative Signals — current scores and signal history
  3. Fundamental Analysis — valuation, quality, and growth metrics
  4. Technical Analysis — price action, momentum, and key levels
  5. Sector Context — relative positioning within the sector
  6. Risk Factors — what could go wrong
  7. Conclusion — actionable recommendation with timeframe

The reports are generated using Claude’s API (Sonnet), fed with the stock’s full scoring history, recent fundamental data, and relevant news. Output is a formatted PDF with color-coded signals and a professional disclaimer.

Cost and Speed

Each report costs approximately $0.005 to generate. That’s half a cent for institutional-quality research. The system can produce reports on-demand for any stock in the ~900 name universe.

Sample Reports

Here are three sample reports generated by the system:

These are real outputs from the production system. Sub-score labels have been redacted where they would reveal internal pillar structure.

Why AI Reports Matter

The scoring engine tells you what to buy. The AI report tells you why. For a systematic trader, the report serves as a sanity check — does the qualitative story support the quantitative signal? When scores and narrative align, conviction is highest.

On Predictive Value

A natural question is whether the AI reports’ conclusions themselves have forecasting power — i.e., do stocks with bullish AI theses actually outperform over the subsequent 3–6 months? This is a study I plan to publish once enough reports have aged through a full evaluation window. Until then, the reports are best understood as a qualitative layer on top of the quantitative scores, not as standalone signals.


← Back to research