It's one of the more interesting tests in value-investing: do Warren Buffett's own current holdings still pass his published framework rules today?
For the latest reported 13F filings, Berkshire Hathaway holds large positions in roughly 40 publicly-traded stocks. We ran the top 15 by position size through the same 7-framework consensus screen we use on every other stock. The results are not what you'd expect.
This post covers the top 10 Berkshire holdings, each annotated with: current price, current framework consensus (how many of 7 frameworks say Strong Fit), and the specific failure point if any framework says Weak Fit. The full list is updated every quarter at /institutional/brk.b/.
TL;DR - the headline result
Of Berkshire's top 10 holdings by position size:
- 3 currently score 7-of-7 Strong Fit across all seven frameworks
- 5 score 6-of-7 with one specific failure
- 2 score 5-of-7 or lower (the controversial ones)
Buffett built positions over decades, often when the stocks were cheaper than they are today. Several of his holdings now fail his own published valuation criteria because the price has appreciated faster than the underlying earnings. This is the cleanest demonstration of why the price you pay is half of value investing - the other half being the quality of the business.
The top 10 holdings, scored
1. Apple (AAPL) - 6 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Berkshire's largest single position, despite trimming.
Passes: Buffett, Fisher, Greenblatt, Munger, Smith, Lynch (partial)
Fails: Graham on P/E and P/B
Apple's quality is unmatched - ROIC 49%, gross margin 46%, balance sheet pristine, brand moat indisputable. Graham's defensive criteria from 1949 simply cannot accommodate a P/E of 33 regardless of business quality. Modern Buffett-Munger philosophy says paying up for this quality is fine; pure Graham says no.
Live page: /buffett/aapl/.
2. Bank of America (BAC) - 4 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Buffett bought BAC in 2011 during the post-crisis trough at roughly $7/share. At the current price near $40, the position is up 5-6x.
Passes: Graham (defensive), Greenblatt (top quintile), Lynch, partial Buffett
Fails: Smith (banks are excluded), Munger (ROIC too low at ~12%), Fisher (gross margin doesn't apply to banks)
The 4-of-7 here is fundamentally because BAC is a bank, and several modern frameworks (Smith, Fisher) exclude banks by design. The frameworks that include banks (Graham, Greenblatt, Lynch, classic Buffett) all pass.
If you exclude the no-bank frameworks: 4 of 4 applicable frameworks pass. Practical Strong Fit for bank-inclusive investors.
3. American Express (AXP) - 7 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Buffett's longest-held position. Bought in the 1960s after the Salad Oil scandal at a deeply discounted price. Still in the portfolio 60+ years later.
All 7 frameworks pass:
- Buffett: ROE 30%+, durable network effects
- Graham: passes the enterprising-investor variant on EPS growth
- Fisher: gross margin 64%, sustained R&D
- Lynch: PEG ≤ 1.0, GARP
- Greenblatt: top decile combined rank
- Munger: ROIC > 25% sustained
- Smith: closed-loop network, treated as toll-bridge not bank
This is one of the cleanest 7-of-7 holdings in the universe.
Live page: /buffett/axp/.
4. Coca-Cola (KO) - 6 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Bought in 1988. The textbook Buffett pick.
Passes: Buffett (the OG), Graham (passes defensive on dividend), Fisher (high margin), Greenblatt, Munger, Smith (consumer-staples carve)
Fails: Lynch marginally - EPS growth too slow for Lynch's 15% threshold
Lynch's framework specifically rewards faster-growing businesses; Coca-Cola is a mature compounder, not a growth name. So Lynch fails it. Every other framework passes.
This is the original "wonderful business at a fair price" that Buffett and Munger fought to redefine value investing around. 30+ years later, still passes the 6 frameworks that don't require explosive growth.
5. Chevron (CVX) - 5 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Bought in late 2020. The unusual Buffett position - energy / commodity.
Passes: Graham (defensive on dividend), Greenblatt (commodity earnings yield), Buffett (current oil cycle), Lynch (GARP relative to cycle), partial Munger
Fails: Smith (cyclical commodity exclusion), Fisher (gross margin too low for chemicals)
Cyclical commodities trip the modern frameworks (Smith, Fisher), but the price-focused ones (Graham, Greenblatt) pass easily.
6. Occidental Petroleum (OXY) - 4 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Bought aggressively 2022-2024. Buffett owns ~27% of the company.
Passes: Greenblatt (cyclical earnings yield), Lynch (GARP on the cycle), partial Buffett, partial Graham
Fails: Smith, Fisher, Munger (capital-intensive cyclical)
Similar story to Chevron - pure-cyclical commodity. The frameworks designed for capital-light compounders all fail. The frameworks designed around price reset opportunities all pass.
7. Kraft Heinz (KHC) - 3 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
The famously underperforming Berkshire position. Bought 2015, has been a drag since 2017.
Passes: Graham (defensive on dividend), partial Lynch (mature GARP), partial Buffett (consumer staples)
Fails: Smith (failed FCF/NI conversion), Fisher (gross margin compression), Munger (ROIC too low), Greenblatt (combined rank in middle of universe)
The 3-of-7 verdict here is informative: this is the Berkshire position that the frameworks would have warned against. Buffett has been candid in the letters about overpaying for KHC and the brands deteriorating. Live evidence that even the master makes mistakes - and a clean example of why the 7-of-7 consensus filter is useful.
8. Moody's (MCO) - 7 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
The credit-rating duopoly. One of the cleanest moats in the entire S&P 500.
All 7 frameworks pass. ROIC 60%+, gross margin 75%+, FCF / NI 95%+, the duopoly is regulator-protected, Smith's framework explicitly treats it as a non-bank financial.
This is one of three current 7-of-7 holdings in the Berkshire portfolio.
Live page: /buffett/mco/.
9. Visa (V) - 7 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Mentioned in the Best Buffett-Fit Stocks 2026 post separately. The payment network duopoly.
All 7 frameworks pass cleanly. Visa is also one of the three current 7-of-7 holdings.
10. Mastercard (MA) - 7 of 7 frameworks Strong Fit
Same thesis as Visa. The other duopolist.
All 7 frameworks pass. Three of the top 10 Berkshire positions (AXP, MCO, V, MA - actually 4) score 7-of-7. The clean conclusion: when Buffett gets a duopoly position right, he tends to score 7-of-7. When he gets a commodity / bank / consumer-staples position right, he tends to score 4-6 of 7 because the frameworks built later (Smith, Fisher) reject those categories by design.
What the divergence tells you
The most interesting take-away from this exercise isn't whether Buffett is right or wrong about his own holdings. It's that his portfolio scores higher on the frameworks built for capital-light compounders (Smith, Fisher) than on the framework he himself published.
In 2026, the seven framework consensus is roughly:
- Buffett-aligned positions (KO, AXP, MCO) score very high
- Pure-cyclical positions (CVX, OXY, KHC) score lower because the modern frameworks exclude cyclicals
- The 7-of-7 positions in Berkshire's portfolio (AXP, MCO, V, MA) are all toll-bridge / network businesses
If you wanted to "invest like Buffett today" using the seven-framework consensus, you'd probably get a more Smith-Munger-influenced portfolio than a classical-Buffett one - heavier on payment networks and pharma franchises, lighter on commodity cyclicals.
That isn't a criticism of Buffett. It's a recognition that the framework he started with in 1949 has continued to evolve, and his own portfolio reflects the evolved version more than the original.
Verify any of these scores yourself
Every Berkshire holding gets its own live page at /buffett/[ticker]/ on invest-like. Open any one - Apple, AmEx, Moody's, Coca-Cola, Bank of America, Chevron, Occidental, Visa, Mastercard, Kraft Heinz, or any of the smaller positions - and the page shows the current framework consensus with the underlying numbers.
If you're interested in tracking Berkshire's positions as they change, /institutional/brk.b/ shows the full 13F holdings updated as filings come in.
Disclosure
Educational tool. Berkshire's reported 13F holdings are public filings from the SEC. The framework scores are deterministic outputs of published rules applied to current fundamentals data. They are not investment advice, not a recommendation to buy any Berkshire holding, not a critique of Buffett's actual investment record (which has been spectacular over 60 years). This is a thought exercise in how published frameworks score actual real-world positions.
Author: Zaid Ghazal, indie founder of invest-like, Kiel, Germany.