The Ziggma Stock Score. Explained.

The Ziggma Stock Score is a proprietary 0–100 stock rating that evaluates publicly traded companies on fundamental quality across four pillars: growth, valuation, profitability, and financial health. It is designed to help long-term investors compare stocks based on data rather than analyst hype or broker incentives.

The score is peer-relative — a company is ranked against relevant industry peers, not a one-size-fits-all benchmark. A score of 83 means the company ranks in the upper tier of its peer group across all four pillars combined. It appears alongside every holding in the Portfolio Checkup and across the stock screener.

The score combines over 30 financial indicators across four pillars — growth, valuation, profitability, and financial health. Some indicators are industry-specific: leverage thresholds for a bank differ from those for a software company, so the model applies the right metrics for each sector.

The exact weighting of indicators is proprietary, but the framework is transparent: each pillar is scored separately, then combined into a single 0–100 number. Companies are benchmarked against true industry peers, so a score always reflects relative strength within a relevant competitive set — not a raw absolute number.

The score runs from 0 to 100 and maps to five bands:

0–20 Low Weak fundamentals relative to peers.
20–40 Below Average Stronger peers exist across most pillars.
40–60 Average Mixed profile with room for improvement.
60–80 Strong Above-average fundamentals, favorable peer ranking.
80–100 Excellent Top-tier quality signals across all four pillars.

A portfolio-level score is the weighted average of all holding scores. Ziggma's historical analysis shows portfolios with average scores above 70 have outperformed lower-scoring portfolios by a meaningful margin. See how to interpret and act on portfolio-level metrics for the full framework.

No. The Ziggma Stock Score is a research and portfolio-quality signal, not a price target, short-term trading signal, or buy/sell recommendation. A high score means a company has strong fundamentals relative to peers — it does not predict short-term price movement or guarantee future returns.

It is best used as a starting point for deeper research and as a portfolio quality layer: identifying which holdings are fundamentally strong and which are dragging the average down. The decision to buy, hold, or sell is always yours. Ziggma is not a broker and earns nothing from trades — see how the Portfolio Checkup surfaces score-based insights across your holdings.

Because raw financial metrics have no meaning without context. A P/E ratio of 20x is cheap for a software company, expensive for a bank, and roughly fair for a utility — the same number produces three different conclusions depending on the industry.

Peer-relative scoring means a company is always graded on the right curve for its sector. A retailer with a Ziggma Score of 74 ranks in the top quartile of retailers — not of all stocks globally. This makes the score genuinely comparable across different parts of a portfolio without penalizing capital-intensive businesses for being capital-intensive.

Growth — measures whether the company is expanding in a durable way, capturing revenue, earnings, and cash flow growth trends.

Valuation — assesses the company's price relative to peers using earnings yield, sales-to-market-cap, EV multiples, and operating metrics. A company can score well on growth but poorly on valuation if the market has already priced in all the upside.

Profitability — captures return on equity, return on assets, EBITDA margin, and other profitability metrics, including industry-specific ratios where relevant.

Financial Health — evaluates leverage, liquidity, and debt-servicing ratios that signal long-term resilience. A company growing fast but taking on unsustainable debt will score lower here regardless of its growth score.

The four pillars together prevent a single impressive number from hiding weakness elsewhere — see how to analyze a stock portfolio using multi-factor scoring.

Scores update daily as market data changes and quarterly as new earnings reports are incorporated. The daily update keeps valuation and momentum metrics current; the quarterly cycle refreshes the profitability and financial health pillars as companies report.

A meaningful score change — typically a shift of 10 or more points — usually signals a material change in a company's fundamentals or its peer group's performance relative to it. It is worth reviewing holdings that drop sharply in score, particularly if growth or financial health is the driver.

There are three main use cases:

Portfolio quality check — run a Portfolio Checkup to see the weighted average score across all holdings. A score below 50 typically means a handful of weak holdings are dragging the portfolio down. The checkup surfaces the lowest-scoring positions so you know exactly where to focus.

Screening for replacements — when a holding scores poorly, use the stock screener to find higher-scoring alternatives in the same sector. This keeps sector exposure stable while improving the portfolio's average quality.

Pre-trade modeling — before adding a new position, use the Portfolio Optimizer to see how the trade would affect the portfolio's overall score, beta, and diversification before it's placed.

Yes — and this is one of the more useful combinations for investors trying to align financial quality with values. The Ziggma Score surfaces fundamental quality; the Impact Score surfaces real-world alignment across climate action, fair labor, and accountability. The two are calculated independently, so a stock can score well on both, on neither, or on just one.

In practice, combining a minimum Ziggma Score filter (say, 60+) with a climate or impact filter in the screener surfaces companies that are both financially strong and values-aligned — without having to run two separate processes. See how climate impact is measured for how the impact side of that combination works.

The Ziggma Stock Score is designed for individual equities, where peer-relative fundamental analysis is most meaningful. ETFs are scored differently — using their own metrics such as expense ratio, yield, and underlying index characteristics — rather than via the four-pillar framework built for company fundamentals.

For a portfolio that mixes individual stocks and ETFs, the Portfolio Checkup surfaces scores for equity holdings alongside ETF-level data, so you can assess the quality of the stock sleeve specifically rather than averaging it with fund-level figures.

Broker analyst ratings — Buy, Hold, Sell — are produced by firms that also earn revenue from investment banking, trading commissions, and order flow. That creates a structural conflict: analysts at full-service brokers have historically issued far more Buy ratings than Sell ratings, regardless of underlying fundamentals.

The Ziggma Stock Score has no such conflict. Ziggma is not a broker, earns nothing from trades, and receives no placement fees. The score reflects what the fundamental data shows about a company relative to peers — nothing more. It is a starting point for research, not a conclusion shaped by who pays for it.

The score appears in four places across the platform:

Portfolio Checkup — shows a portfolio-level score (weighted average) and surfaces your lowest-scoring holdings by name. See Portfolio Checkup.

Stock Screener — filter and sort stocks by Ziggma Score, either standalone or combined with financial, climate, and impact filters. See free stock screener.

Portfolio Optimizer — shows how adding or removing a position would change the portfolio's average score before the trade is placed. See Portfolio Optimizer.

Individual stock pages — every stock analysis page shows the score alongside the four pillar breakdowns and the company's impact data. See how to analyze a stock portfolio for how to read these together.