invest-like.com's Buffett-Fit Score is a single number from 0 to 100 saying how closely a stock fits Warren Buffett's documented criteria. invest-like.com builds it from five pillars. No prediction, no proprietary secret: the full breakdown is on this page.
Last reviewed:
invest-like.com's Buffett-Fit Score takes the five pillars Warren Buffett has discussed across 60+ years of Berkshire shareholder letters (economic moat, durability of demand, owner-friendly management, financial health, and valuation) and grades a stock on each one using current fundamentals. invest-like.com combines the five sub-scores into a single 0-100 number, shown as one number. invest-like.com publishes the score as an educational fit assessment, not a forecast, not a recommendation, and not a guarantee. The methodology, score ranges, and live verdict accuracy log are all open so you can audit invest-like.com's output yourself.
Every verdict on invest-like.com's /buffett/[ticker] pages renders all five pillars with the specific reasoning behind each. Below is invest-like.com's canonical definition: what the scoring engine looks for, and the signals invest-like.com weights most.
Whether the business has a structural advantage that lets it earn above-average returns over time without being competed away.
Whether the product or service is the kind of thing people will still want in 10 or 20 years: the heart of Buffett's 'invest in businesses any idiot could run because someday an idiot will' rule.
Whether the people running the business behave like long-term owners or like compensation-maximising agents. This pillar is qualitative by design.
Whether the balance sheet is strong enough that a bad year won't force the business to issue equity or sell assets at the wrong time.
Whether the current price gives a margin of safety relative to a defensible estimate of intrinsic value. Buffett's rule: a great business at a fair price beats a fair business at a great price, but you still need both to be in the ballpark.
Each pillar is graded on a 0 to 100 scale by the same large- language-model rubric, given the company's current fundamentals (Financial Modeling Prep data refreshed daily) and indexed passages from the Berkshire Hathaway shareholder-letter corpus spanning the last quarter-century. The pillar sub-scores are weighted about equally, so no single pillar can carry a stock past 70 on its own, and a strong moat does not erase a stretched valuation. The five sub-scores blend into the headline Buffett-Fit Score.
The exact LLM prompt and rubric version used to produce any given verdict are versioned and stored alongside the verdict in the database. A future regeneration with a different prompt produces a separately-stored row instead of overwriting the original. This is what lets us publish a real accuracy log - if we couldn't tell which rubric produced which verdict, the log would be meaningless.
What each range of the 0-100 score means. The same ranges apply across /buffett/[ticker], /track-record, the weekly newsletter, and any internal admin surface.
Excellent fit · 85-100
Textbook Buffett business. Strong moat, clean balance sheet, fair price, all five pillars passed convincingly.
Strong fit · 70-84
Multiple pillars pass, valuation either fair or only mildly stretched.
Partial fit · 55-69
The business is interesting; usually one pillar (often valuation or management) holds it back.
Weak fit · 40-54
Several pillars fail, but the failure is specific and worth understanding, not necessarily a sell signal.
Poor fit · 0-39
Not a Buffett-style business at this price. Pillar failures are systemic; the stock may still be a fine pick by another framework (Lynch, Fisher, Munger).
A methodology page that only says what a score is, and never says what it isn't, leaves room for over-interpretation. Three guardrails:
Not a forecast
A stock scoring 90 today can underperform; one scoring 30 can outperform. The score measures fit against a documented framework, not future returns.
Not a recommendation
invest-like.com is an educational tool. Nothing on this site is personalised investment advice. Always do your own research and consider your individual circumstances.
Not the only framework
A stock that scores poorly on Buffett may score well on Lynch (growth), Fisher (R&D-led quality), or Greenblatt (Magic Formula). We publish six other frameworks alongside Buffett.
Methodology only goes so far. The fastest way to see how the five pillars apply to a specific stock is to read one of the verdicts.
The Weekly Letter
The same five-pillar logic explained here, applied to a fresh ticker each week. One-click unsubscribe.