philip-fishergrowth-qualityvalue-investing2026
Philip Fisher's 1958 framework finds wonderful growth-quality businesses before the moat is obvious. invest-like applies the modernised version to today's universe. Here is the checklist, the math, and the current pass-through stocks.
Why stock prices fall without bad news: the 6 mechanical reasons that have nothing to do with the underlying business
A stock can drop 20 percent in a week with no fundamental change. Six structural reasons (sector rotation, index rebalancing, options flow, sentiment cascade, tax-loss harvesting, redemption pressure) that explain price moves the news doesn't.
Why the Magic Formula stopped working in 2024 (and what to do about it)
Joel Greenblatt's Magic Formula returned ~30% annualised in the 1988-2004 back-test. Over the rolling 5 years ending 2024 it underperformed the S&P 500 by ~6 percentage points. Here is why, and how the quality+value combination needs to evolve to keep beating the index in 2026.
Where Buffett would shop now: Q2 2026 edition — 10 stocks that pass every one of his published criteria
Quarterly contrarian column applying Warren Buffett's documented framework to the current US market. The 10 stocks that pass all five Buffett pillars and meet Berkshire's typical sizing constraints right now, with the financial case for each in 2-3 sentences.
Warren Buffett famously described himself as "85% Graham, 15% Fisher." Most retail value investors know the Graham part (margin of safety, defensive criteria) and ignore the Fisher 15%. That's a mistake — the Fisher framework is specifically what found Buffett positions like American Express, Coca-Cola, and Apple long before the wider market recognised the moat.
This post walks through Philip Fisher's 1958 Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits framework, the 15 specific questions he asked, how invest-like applies the modernised version to today's universe, and which stocks currently pass.
Fisher's framework is a 15-point checklist (the "15 things to look for in a common stock"). Heavily summarised:
Most of these are qualitative. The framework is harder to mechanise than Graham's defensive screens or Greenblatt's Magic Formula. But the underlying signal — finding businesses with sustained R&D + sales-organisation strength before the moat becomes obvious — is the most-rewarding signal in growth-quality value investing.
We've reduced Fisher's 15 qualitative questions to 5 measurable proxies, each grounded in the underlying questions Fisher actually asked:
Fisher's question 5 ("worthwhile profit margin") plus question 6 ("maintaining margins"). A gross margin above 50% sustained over 5 years is the cleanest signal of pricing power — meaning customers pay more than the marginal cost of production.
Fisher's question 3 ("effective R&D relative to size"). Companies in technology + medical devices + specialty chemicals + software typically need 5%+ of revenue going to R&D to maintain their moat. Below that level, the moat erodes over time.
Fisher's question 1 ("substantial growth for years"). A 10%+ revenue compound is the floor for "Fisher Strong Fit" — below that, the growth-quality math doesn't work.
Fisher's question 13 ("equity dilution"). If the share count grows faster than 1% per year (excluding buybacks), shareholders are being materially diluted. This is the cleanest "is management an integrity problem" signal we have without reading the proxy statement.
Fisher's question 10 ("cost analysis and accounting controls"). If reported earnings are materially higher than cash flow, accounting is more aggressive than substance. Combined with question 14 (does management hide bad news), low FCF conversion is a Fisher warning sign.
A stock that passes all 5 proxies is a Fisher Strong Fit. Roughly 80 stocks pass at any given quarter in our quality universe.
Top 8 stocks that currently pass the modernised Fisher framework:
The pattern: Fisher Strong Fits in 2026 are dominated by software + medical devices + specialty technology — exactly the modern echo of Fisher's 1958 universe (which was dominated by then-new technology companies like Texas Instruments and Motorola).
A stock that passes Fisher AND 4+ other frameworks is the highest-quality Fisher pick. Currently about 12 stocks meet this stricter bar:
These are essentially the modern Munger-Fisher overlap stocks — businesses Buffett's classical framework wouldn't fully accept on valuation, but the quality is so structural that Fisher and Munger both pass them.
For combined view, open /strategies/ and filter on "Fisher Strong + Munger Strong + Smith Strong" for the high-quality compounders cohort.
Three reasons:
Most "growth investors" use the wrong framework. Generic growth screens just rank on EPS growth. Fisher's framework requires quality of growth — R&D-fuelled, margin-stable, low-dilution. That's a much more selective filter.
Buffett's evolution toward modern compounders is essentially Fisher. When Buffett bought Apple in 2016, the criteria he applied were closer to Fisher's framework than to Graham's defensive screen. Modern Buffett is more Fisher than 1985 Buffett.
The Munger-Fisher overlap is where 2026's wonderful businesses live. Visa, Microsoft, Adobe, ASML — all pass both Fisher and Munger but fail strict Graham. The overlap is the modern value-investing sweet spot.
The honest workflow:
If all 5 pass → Fisher Strong Fit. If 3-4 pass → Partial Fit. Below that → Weak Fit, not a Fisher pick.
Or: open the stock on invest-like and let the scorer do it.
Educational tool. Philip Fisher's framework is documented in Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits (Fisher, 1958, revised 1996). Our modernised proxy implementation differs from the original 15-question qualitative version — the modern version is harder to game and easier to apply at scale, but it loses some of the qualitative texture Fisher emphasised. Past Fisher-framework verdicts do not predict future returns.
Author: Zaid Ghazal, founder of invest-like, indie SaaS, Kiel, Germany.