🛠 Build Lab
2026-07-18 21:37 · top combos to build, ranked by signal
911
Total
329
Ready
582
Blocked
+33pp
Top sep
Top 10 Build Candidates — tap to expand
#1 · Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × CARC × Quality Value Score
BLOCKED
T1 +1.5pp · T2 +17.70pp · held 81% / ctrl 80% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × CARC × Quality Value Score. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+1.5pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+17.70pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/82S/0H
Held win rate
81.5%
Control win rate
80.0% (n=10)
Combined score
74.7
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
69
Classification
INVESTIGATE
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
CARC
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#2 · Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score
BLOCKED
T1 +0.5pp · T2 +16.32pp · held 84% / ctrl 83% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+0.5pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+16.32pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 97% cov · 0C/0F/93S/0H
Held win rate
83.9%
Control win rate
83.3% (n=12)
Combined score
76.9
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
69
Classification
INVESTIGATE
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#3 · RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score
BLOCKED
T1 +0.9pp · T2 +16.24pp · held 83% / ctrl 82% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+0.9pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+16.24pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 97% cov · 0C/0F/90S/0H
Held win rate
82.8%
Control win rate
81.8% (n=11)
Combined score
75.9
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
66
Classification
INVESTIGATE
RSI x Avg Eps Growth
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#4 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread
READY
T1 +6.0pp · T2 +14.94pp · held 92% / ctrl 86% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+6.0pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+14.94pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/98S/0H
Held win rate
91.7%
Control win rate
85.7% (n=14)
Combined score
81.5
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
61
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#5 · Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × ROIC-FCF Quality Gate
BLOCKED
T1 +1.8pp · T2 +14.58pp · held 82% / ctrl 80% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × ROIC-FCF Quality Gate. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+1.8pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+14.58pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 97% cov · 0C/0F/59S/0H
Held win rate
81.8%
Control win rate
80.0% (n=10)
Combined score
74.9
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
60
Classification
INVESTIGATE
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
ROIC-FCF Quality Gate
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#6 · Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score × ROIC-FCF Quality Gate
BLOCKED
T1 +1.8pp · T2 +14.44pp · held 82% / ctrl 80% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: Avg. EPS Growth × RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score × ROIC-FCF Quality Gate. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+1.8pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+14.44pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 97% cov · 0C/0F/57S/0H
Held win rate
81.8%
Control win rate
80.0% (n=10)
Combined score
74.9
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
62
Classification
INVESTIGATE
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
ROIC-FCF Quality Gate
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#7 · FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread
READY
T1 +6.7pp · T2 +13.72pp · held 90% / ctrl 83% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+6.7pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+13.72pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/93S/0H
Held win rate
90.0%
Control win rate
83.3% (n=12)
Combined score
80.0
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
60
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
RSI x Avg Eps Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#8 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread
READY
T1 +10.4pp · T2 +13.63pp · held 92% / ctrl 81% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+10.4pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+13.63pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 96% cov · 1C/0F/106S/0H
Held win rate
91.7%
Control win rate
81.2% (n=16)
Combined score
80.2
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
58
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#9 · FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × CARC × PFCF vs PE Spread
READY
T1 +13.9pp · T2 +13.00pp · held 89% / ctrl 75% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × CARC × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+13.9pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+13.00pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 97% cov · 0C/0F/88S/0H
Held win rate
88.9%
Control win rate
75.0% (n=12)
Combined score
76.9
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
60
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
RSI x Avg Eps Growth
✓ READY
CARC
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#10 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × CARC × PFCF vs PE Spread
READY
T1 +11.4pp · T2 +12.91pp · held 90% / ctrl 79% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × CARC × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+11.4pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+12.91pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 97% cov · 0C/0F/90S/0H
Held win rate
90.0%
Control win rate
78.6% (n=14)
Combined score
78.6
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
61
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
CARC
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
▾ Show #11–25 (15 more)
#11 · FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread
READY
T1 +11.4pp · T2 +12.44pp · held 90% / ctrl 79% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+11.4pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+12.44pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 95% cov · 1C/0F/101S/0H
Held win rate
90.0%
Control win rate
78.6% (n=14)
Combined score
78.6
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
57
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
RSI x Avg Eps Growth
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#12 · FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Avg. EPS Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread
READY
T1 +11.4pp · T2 +12.36pp · held 90% / ctrl 79% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Avg. EPS Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+11.4pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+12.36pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 95% cov · 1C/0F/99S/0H
Held win rate
90.0%
Control win rate
78.6% (n=14)
Combined score
78.6
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
58
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
RSI x Avg Eps Growth
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#13 · FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Quality Value Score × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
READY
T1 -14.0pp · T2 +10.73pp · held 77% / ctrl 91% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Quality Value Score × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
-14.0pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+10.73pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/91S/0H
Held win rate
76.9%
Control win rate
90.9% (n=11)
Combined score
75.7
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
57
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
RSI x Avg Eps Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#14 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
READY
T1 -6.7pp · T2 +10.55pp · held 80% / ctrl 87% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × PFCF vs PE Spread × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
-6.7pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+10.55pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 95% cov · 1C/0F/89S/0H
Held win rate
80.0%
Control win rate
86.7% (n=15)
Combined score
76.0
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
48
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#15 · RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × PFCF vs PE Spread
BLOCKED
T1 +11.7pp · T2 +10.36pp · held 92% / ctrl 80% · k=2
Build composite metric from 2 components: RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+11.7pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+10.36pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 90% cov · 0C/0F/119S/0H
Held win rate
91.7%
Control win rate
80.0% (n=10)
Combined score
79.8
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
53
Classification
INVESTIGATE
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#16 · RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread
BLOCKED
T1 +11.7pp · T2 +10.29pp · held 92% / ctrl 80% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+11.7pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+10.29pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 91% cov · 0C/0F/118S/0H
Held win rate
91.7%
Control win rate
80.0% (n=10)
Combined score
79.8
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
59
Classification
INVESTIGATE
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#17 · RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × PFCF vs PE Spread × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
BLOCKED
T1 +3.3pp · T2 +9.92pp · held 83% / ctrl 80% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × PFCF vs PE Spread × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+3.3pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+9.92pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 91% cov · 0C/0F/106S/0H
Held win rate
83.3%
Control win rate
80.0% (n=10)
Combined score
75.7
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
42
Classification
INVESTIGATE
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#18 · RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
BLOCKED
T1 +3.3pp · T2 +9.85pp · held 83% / ctrl 80% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: RSI-Net EBITDA Signal × Quality Value Score × PFCF vs PE Spread × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+3.3pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+9.85pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 90% cov · 0C/0F/105S/0H
Held win rate
83.3%
Control win rate
80.0% (n=10)
Combined score
75.7
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
49
Classification
INVESTIGATE
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal
⚠ INVESTIGATE
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
PFCF vs PE Spread
✓ READY
Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
✓ READY
Blocker
RSI-Net EBITDA Signal — Holdings agrees but control disagrees — review secondary metrics sheet
Next step
/buildmetric
#19 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
READY
T1 -11.5pp · T2 +9.55pp · held 81% / ctrl 92% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
-11.5pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+9.55pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/95S/0H
Held win rate
80.8%
Control win rate
92.3% (n=13)
Combined score
78.1
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
58
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#20 · FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF v EBITDA
READY
T1 +13.6pp · T2 +7.65pp · held 87% / ctrl 73% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × RSI x Avg Eps Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF v EBITDA. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+13.6pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+7.65pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/164S/0H
Held win rate
87.0%
Control win rate
73.3% (n=15)
Combined score
75.5
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
65
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
RSI x Avg Eps Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
PFCF v EBITDA
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#21 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
READY
T1 -0.5pp · T2 +7.42pp · held 81% / ctrl 81% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Watson-ROIC Confidence Index. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
-0.5pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+7.42pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 94% cov · 1C/0F/105S/0H
Held win rate
80.8%
Control win rate
81.2% (n=16)
Combined score
74.8
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
55
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
Watson-ROIC Confidence Index
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#22 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score
READY
T1 +10.5pp · T2 +6.54pp · held 86% / ctrl 76% · k=3
Build composite metric from 3 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+10.5pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+6.54pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/231S/0H
Held win rate
86.5%
Control win rate
76.0% (n=25)
Combined score
76.0
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
72
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#23 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × SM Watson 3
BLOCKED
T1 +32.6pp · T2 +5.48pp · held 94% / ctrl 62% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × SM Watson 3. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+32.6pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+5.48pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 96% cov · 0C/0F/94S/0H
Held win rate
94.1%
Control win rate
61.5% (n=13)
Combined score
75.5
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
72
Classification
INVESTIGATE
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
SM Watson 3
✓ READY
Blocker
SM Watson 3 has HIGH input overlap with gate rule(s): FCF Efficency — resolve gate first. See references/METRIC_OVERLAP_MAP.md.
Next step
/buildmetric
#24 · FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF v EBITDA
READY
T1 +18.0pp · T2 +5.15pp · held 91% / ctrl 73% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × Avg. EPS Growth × Quality Value Score × PFCF v EBITDA. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+18.0pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
+5.15pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 98% cov · 0C/0F/178S/0H
Held win rate
91.3%
Control win rate
73.3% (n=15)
Combined score
77.7
Direction score
10
Avg SIL score
66
Classification
READY
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Avg. EPS Growth
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
PFCF v EBITDA
✓ READY
Next step
/buildmetric
#25 · FCF Efficency × Quality Value Score × SM Watson 3 × SM2: Growth-Momentum Premium
BLOCKED
T1 +6.1pp · T2 -0.39pp · held 73% / ctrl 67% · k=4
Build composite metric from 4 components: FCF Efficency × Quality Value Score × SM Watson 3 × SM2: Growth-Momentum Premium. Name TBD — pick during /buildmetric.
Type 1 · classifier lift (held − ctrl winrate)
+6.1pp
Type 2 · real return spread (passers − failers actual returns, pilot)
-0.39pp
Type 2 confidence
HIGH · 97% cov · 0C/0F/130S/0H
Held win rate
72.7%
Control win rate
66.7% (n=12)
Combined score
76.4
Direction score
20
Avg SIL score
72
Classification
INVESTIGATE
FCF Efficency
✓ READY
Quality Value Score
✓ READY
SM Watson 3
✓ READY
SM2: Growth-Momentum Premium
✓ READY
Blocker
SM Watson 3 has HIGH input overlap with gate rule(s): FCF Efficency — resolve gate first. See references/METRIC_OVERLAP_MAP.md.
Next step
/buildmetric
▾ L1+L2 Hybrid Candidates (10 of 8,220) — tap to expand
Combos drawn from L1+L2 hybrid pool — each contains ≥1 L1 metric. Sorted by lift pp.
#1 · EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + Beta
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=26
Combo
EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + Beta ÷ (P/B+1)
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
26
k
4
Combo MPS
58.8
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#2 · EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + P/B
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=26
Combo
EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + P/B × P/FCF
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
26
k
4
Combo MPS
58.6
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#3 · EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + Beta
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=26
Combo
EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + Beta ÷ (P/B+1)
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
26
k
4
Combo MPS
58.8
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#4 · EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + P/B ×
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=26
Combo
EPS-ROA PE Score + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + P/B × P/FCF
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
26
k
4
Combo MPS
58.6
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#5 · Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + Beta
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=24
Combo
Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + Beta ÷ (P/B+1)
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
24
k
4
Combo MPS
61.2
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#6 · Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + P/B ×
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=24
Combo
Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROIC × P/FCF + P/B × P/FCF
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
24
k
4
Combo MPS
61.0
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#7 · Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + Beta ÷
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=24
Combo
Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + Beta ÷ (P/B+1)
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
24
k
4
Combo MPS
61.2
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#8 · Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + P/B ×
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=4 · n=24
Combo
Avg. EPS Growth + Quality Value Score + ROI × P/FCF + P/B × P/FCF
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
24
k
4
Combo MPS
61.0
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#9 · FCF Efficency + EPS-ROA PE Score + ROIC × P/FCF
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=3 · n=23
Combo
FCF Efficency + EPS-ROA PE Score + ROIC × P/FCF
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
23
k
3
Combo MPS
64.5
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
#10 · FCF Efficency + EPS-ROA PE Score + ROI × P/FCF
A
lift +78.6pp · wr 100% (base 21%) · k=3 · n=23
Combo
FCF Efficency + EPS-ROA PE Score + ROI × P/FCF
Lift pp
+78.6pp
Win rate
100.0% (baseline 21.39%)
Avg return passing
1.00
N passing
23
k
3
Combo MPS
64.5
Grade
A
Diversity
LOW_OVERLAP
What This Means
Build Lab ranks BF combos by signal strength. Sep pp = held win rate − control win rate (the separation mechanism). Ready = all components built; can run /buildmetric directly. Blocked = a component is missing or unbuilt — see expanded row for blocker reason.
ℹ Generated 2026-07-18 21:37:41 ET
Source: metric_build_queue_new.csv
Pipeline run: 2026-07-18