FOR RESEARCH TEAMS - ONE AUDITABLE PROCESS
Equity research your whole team runs the same way
One bench, five stations, every assumption logged. AgentTrading gives research teams a vetting process that runs the same way for every analyst, with an audit trail attached.
Research and fund team leads who need one consistent, auditable vetting process across every analyst on the desk.
- 1 THESIS
- 2 EVIDENCE
- 3 BACKTEST
- 4 RISK
- 5 VERDICT
02 EVIDENCE · FUNDAMENTALS
04 RISK · IN PLAIN ENGLISH
Sample scenarios, not a live backtest of what you typed. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Educational analysis only, not financial advice.
In short
Equity research tools for teams have one job the spreadsheets never manage: making the vetting process identical no matter who runs it. AgentTrading gives a research desk one bench, thesis, evidence, backtest, risk, verdict, so a junior's screen of an idea follows the same stations, the same 20+ years of split- and dividend-adjusted data, and the same 0.1% default cost per trade as a senior's, and the assumption log proves it: date range, parameters, and costs are recorded on every run, which turns "how did you test this" from an interrogation into a link. The manual loop it replaces, a screener, ten filings, and a hand-built spreadsheet backtest, runs 4 to 6 hours per idea; the bench runs it in minutes, and risk is read out in plain English before capital is ever discussed. Per-seat charting stacks like TrendSpider run $59 to $349 per month per analyst and still leave every analyst with a private methodology; AgentTrading's Enterprise plan adds SSO, roles and seats, a shared audit trail, SLA, invoicing, and a security review for firms that require one. Two honest boundaries: coverage is US-listed stocks and ETFs, and the ROI case is time and process consistency, never returns, because past performance does not guarantee future results. Educational analysis only; the investment committee decides.
Past performance does not guarantee future results. For educational and informational purposes only. Not financial advice. Consult a licensed advisor.
ON YOUR BENCH - RESEARCH TEAMS
What changes when the vetting is honest
Juniors vet like seniors
The bench walks every analyst through the same five stations: thesis, evidence, backtest, risk, verdict. Process quality stops depending on who happened to run the screen that morning.
An audit trail instead of an interrogation
"How did you test this" becomes a link. Every run logs its date range, parameters, and cost assumptions, so review meetings weeks later start from the same recorded facts, not from memory.
4 to 6 hours becomes minutes per idea
The manual loop, screener, filings, spreadsheet backtest, is half a day per idea. The bench runs it in minutes, so the desk vets more ideas without hiring around the bottleneck.
Risk surfaced before capital is discussed
Drawdown, concentration, regime dependence, and sample size are read out in plain English on every run, so the risk conversation happens before the sizing conversation, in that order, every time.
FOR THE TEAM LEAD - PROCESS ROI
One process, an audit trail, and hours back per idea
A 4-analyst desk vetting 10 ideas a week at 4 to 6 manual hours each spends roughly 200 hours a month on the loop. On the bench the same desk runs it in a fraction of the time, and every idea it kills or keeps has a written assumptions log. ROI here is time and process; nobody honest quantifies future returns.
Enterprise signals
SSO / SAML
Roles & seats
Shared audit log
Priority support
Invoicing
Security review & DPA
THE MATH - TIME, NOT MAGIC
The manual loop is 4 to 6 hours per idea
A screener, ten filings, and a spreadsheet backtest, for every single idea. The bench runs the same loop in minutes and logs what it assumed. Count what that is worth in your week.
Your research hours, backTIME ONLY. NO RETURN MATH.
Manual vetting / month
h
Hours back with the bench
~h
On the same bench
The pass every analyst runs is AI stock research: thesis to evidence to verdict with the assumptions logged, on the same backtesting software bench. Risk is read out before capital is discussed, as covered on investment risk analysis, and Enterprise terms, SSO, roles, SLA, live on pricing. Teams comparing this against the platforms they already licence should read AI equity research tools and platforms, which sets out what AlphaSense, Hebbia and Rogo cover and what none of them checks, and will AI replace equity research analysts for what the current studies found about AI-assisted output.
QUESTIONS - ASKED AND ANSWERED
Research teams: the common questions
What tools do equity research teams use?
Typically a data platform for fundamentals and estimates, a document search layer for filings, transcripts and broker research, and a modeling stack in spreadsheets. Most of that category is sales-priced: FactSet, AlphaSense, Hebbia and Morningstar Direct all publish no figure at all, so budgeting starts with a scoping call rather than a price page.
How do you make investment research reproducible?
Record the rule, the data window, the cost assumption and the benchmark alongside every result, so a colleague can rerun it and get the same answer. Most research fails this test not through carelessness but because the assumptions lived in someone's head. AgentTrading prints all four on every result for exactly this reason.
How do you stop backtests from being overfitted?
Limit how many variants you try before you look, and be honest about how many you tried. Bailey, Borwein, Lopez de Prado and Zhu showed in the Notices of the American Mathematical Society in May 2014 that with only five years of daily data, testing more than about 45 independent configurations near enough guarantees an in-sample Sharpe of 1.0 with expected out-of-sample performance of zero.
Why do published strategies stop working?
Because publication is itself an event. McLean and Pontiff, in the Journal of Finance in 2016, examined 97 published return predictors and found returns roughly 26% lower out of sample and 58% lower after publication. Treat any strategy sourced from a paper or a newsletter as a hypothesis to retest on your own data, not a finding to deploy.
What does a shared testing bench change for a research team?
It changes what reviews are about. When every idea arrives with the rule restated, the window stated, costs charged and the benchmark identical, review time goes into judging the idea instead of reconstructing how it was measured. The saving is in process and time, not in returns, and nobody should promise otherwise.
Past performance does not guarantee future results. For educational and informational purposes only. Not financial advice. Consult a licensed advisor.
Who else runs the bench
Your next idea deserves a verdict, not a hunch.
Bring a thesis or a ticker. Get the evidence, the backtest, the risks, and an honest stamp. Then decide for yourself.
Past performance does not guarantee future results. For educational and informational purposes only. Not financial advice. Consult a licensed advisor.