agentsclimarketplace

Thematic investment research

Skill HHFinAi/claude-equity-research-skills/thematic-investment-research

Institutional-quality equity research skills for Claude AI — systematizing the fundamental analysis playbook from buy-side investing into reusable, AI-executable frameworks.

Install
npx -y skills add HHFinAi/claude-equity-research-skills --skill thematic-investment-research

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 6 stars6 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Comprehensive framework for conducting institutional-quality thematic investment research. Use when the user asks to: (1) Identify and validate investment themes, (2) Analyze thematic market opportunities and value chains, (3) Build a thematic stock universe and screen candidates, (4) Conduct company deep dives with thematic focus, (5) Value companies using theme-appropriate methodologies, (6) Assess theme-level and company-level risks, (7) Write thematic research reports, (8) Design portfolio implementation and monitoring frameworks. Triggers on phrases like thematic research, investment theme, secular trend analysis, theme validation, thematic universe, value chain mapping, or requests for structured investment research methodology.

SKILL.md

12.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Thematic Investment Research Framework

Overview

Thematic investing identifies structural, long-duration trends reshaping economies and captures value across industries united by common secular drivers. This skill provides an eight-phase methodology from theme identification through portfolio implementation.

Research Workflow

Execute phases sequentially, with gate reviews between major phases:

Phase I:   Theme Identification & Validation
Phase II:  Structural Analysis (TAM, Value Chain, Competition)
Phase III: Universe Construction & Screening
Phase IV:  Company Deep Dives
Phase V:   Valuation Architecture
Phase VI:  Risk Assessment
Phase VII: Report Construction
Phase VIII: Implementation & Monitoring

Phase I: Theme Identification & Validation

Theme Discovery Sources

Monitor systematically:

  • Primary: Academic journals, patent databases, regulatory filings, conference proceedings, expert networks
  • Secondary: Institutional research, consultancy reports, multilateral publications
  • Alternative: Search trends, VC flows, job postings, satellite data

DRIVER Validation Framework

Validate every theme against six criteria before proceeding:

CriterionQuestion
DurabilityIs this structural (demographics, physics, regulation) or temporary?
RelevanceDoes it drive revenue growth, margin expansion, or re-rating?
InvestabilityAre there listed equities with genuine, liquid exposure?
VerifiabilityCan thesis elements be empirically tested with leading indicators?
ExpansionIs TAM growing through new use cases or geographies?
RationalityIs opportunity not fully discounted in current valuations?

Theme Statement Construction

Structure: [DRIVER] is causing [STRUCTURAL CHANGE], benefiting [BENEFICIARIES] over [TIME HORIZON], measured by [KEY METRICS].

Deliverable: Initial Scoping Document (2-3 pages)

  • Theme statement and thesis points
  • DRIVER validation assessment
  • Hype cycle positioning
  • Initial value chain sketch
  • Key research questions and data sources
  • Preliminary risks and thesis killers

Gate Review: Obtain approval before committing to full research.

→ For detailed validation frameworks: See references/theme-validation.md

Phase II: Structural Analysis

Market Sizing

Apply both approaches and triangulate:

Top-Down: Macro data → penetration rates → growth assumptions → industry forecasts Bottom-Up: Customer segments → adoption curves → company validation → reconciliation

Value Chain Mapping

For each layer (Upstream → Midstream → Downstream → Adjacent), analyze:

  • Gross margin profile
  • Competitive intensity
  • Bargaining power
  • Scale economics
  • Capital intensity
  • Technology risk

Competitive Dynamics (Porter's Five Forces)

  • Industry rivalry: concentration, differentiation, growth vs. capacity
  • New entrants: capital, technology, regulatory barriers
  • Supplier power: concentration, substitutes, forward integration threat
  • Buyer power: concentration, price sensitivity, alternatives
  • Substitutes: alternative technologies, price-performance, switching costs

Regulatory Landscape

Document: current framework, pending legislation, subsidies/incentives, geographic variance, political durability

→ For detailed frameworks: See references/structural-analysis.md

Phase III: Universe Construction

Inclusion Criteria

CriterionPure-PlayDiversified
Revenue Exposure>75%>10%
Strategic CommitmentHighModerate
Growth Attribution>50%>30%
Daily Volume>$5M>$5M

Exposure Categories

  • Pure-Play (>75%): Highest beta, often premium valuation
  • Significant (25-75%): Meaningful leverage with diversification
  • Enabler (10-25%): Indirect beneficiary, downside protection
  • Optionality (<10%): Strategic upside, early-stage exposure

Screening Factors

Quantitative: Market cap, ADV, revenue CAGR, margins, ROIC, leverage, valuation, momentum Qualitative: Management quality, technology leadership, customer quality, IP strength, ESG, governance

Universe Documentation Fields

Company ID | Thematic Classification | Fundamental Snapshot | Thematic Thesis | Research Status | Catalysts & Risks

→ For detailed criteria: See references/universe-construction.md

Phase IV: Company Deep Dives

Selection Criteria (10-20 companies)

  • Highest thematic purity
  • Attractive fundamental profile
  • Strategic value chain importance
  • Differentiated insight potential
  • Sufficient liquidity

Business Quality Assessment

Competitive Moat: Network effects, switching costs, intangibles, cost advantages, efficient scale Management: Track record, incentive alignment, strategic vision, board composition

Financial Analysis Framework

AreaKey Metrics
RevenueSegment breakdown, volume/price/mix, recurring %, customer concentration
ProfitabilityGross margin drivers, operating leverage, R&D intensity, path to profit
Cash FlowOCF conversion, working capital, capex (maintenance vs. growth), FCF margin
Balance SheetLeverage, liquidity, asset quality, return capacity

Thematic Leverage Assessment

  • Revenue attribution (current % and projected trajectory)
  • Strategic positioning and share dynamics
  • Technology alignment and disruption risk
  • Customer relationship quality
  • Execution capability and track record

Financial Model Requirements

  • 5+ years historical, 5-10 years forecast
  • Bottom-up revenue by segment with theme drivers
  • Margin assumptions tied to scale/competition/mix
  • Capital requirements: capex, working capital, M&A

Scenario Framework

ScenarioTheme AssumptionProbability
BullAccelerates; company gains share20-25%
BaseDevelops as expected; executes to plan50-60%
BearDisappoints/delays; loses position20-25%
StressTheme fails or thesis breaks5-10%

→ For detailed templates: See references/company-analysis.md

Phase V: Valuation Architecture

Methodology Selection

MethodBest ForLimitations
DCF/FCFFProfitable, visible cash flowsTerminal value sensitivity
Reverse DCFExpectation gap identificationRequires assumed WACC/margins
EV/RevenueHigh-growth unprofitableIgnores profitability
EV/EBITDAProfitable comparisonsCapex/D&A differences
Sum-of-PartsDiversified theme exposureSegment data quality
rNPVPipeline/binary outcomesProbability subjectivity
LTV/CACSubscription modelsRequires cohort data

DCF Construction

Revenue: TAM trajectory → SAM → market share → pricing → cross-check Margins: Material costs (learning curves) → pricing power → mix → target vs. mature peers WACC: Beta (historical vs. implied), size premium, country risk, execution premium Terminal Value: Extended forecast (10+ years), conservative perpetual growth, exit multiple cross-check

Valuation Integration

  1. Scenario-weighted DCF (probability × value per scenario)
  2. Comparable multiples on forecast financials
  3. Sum-of-parts where applicable
  4. Triangulate to conviction range
  5. Set target at weighted average or conservative bound

→ For detailed methodologies: See references/valuation-methods.md

Phase VI: Risk Assessment

Theme-Level Risks

RiskDescriptionMonitoring
TimingLonger development than anticipatedAdoption curves, milestones
MagnitudeTAM overestimatedMarket size revisions, unit economics
DisplacementAlternative supersedes thesisPatents, VC activity, breakthroughs
RegulatoryPolicy undermines economicsLegislation, political shifts
CrowdingConsensus; valuations discount gainsFund flows, ETF assets, multiples

Company-Level Risks

  • Execution: Management track record, guidance accuracy
  • Competitive: Win/loss tracking, customer surveys
  • Financial: Cash runway, covenants, capital access
  • Key Person: Management depth, succession
  • Technology: Patent strength, R&D productivity
  • ESG/Reputation: Ratings, controversy tracking

Risk Scoring Matrix

Low Impact (1)Medium (2)High (3)
Low Prob (1)1: Monitor2: Monitor3: Plan
Med Prob (2)2: Monitor4: Plan6: Mitigate
High Prob (3)3: Plan6: Mitigate9: Critical

Thesis Killer Definition

Must be: Specific & measurable, Observable, Pre-committed, Action-triggering

Examples:

  • Theme: "EV battery costs rise for two consecutive quarters"
  • Company: "Market share falls below 15% in core segment"
  • Valuation: "Stock trades above 50x forward for 6+ months"

→ For detailed frameworks: See references/risk-assessment.md

Phase VII: Report Construction

Standard Structure

SectionLengthContent
Executive Summary1-2 ppThesis, findings, recommendations, risks, sizing
Theme Deep Dive5-10 ppDrivers, TAM, value chain, competition, regulation
Company Profiles3-5 pp eachOverview, positioning, financials, valuation, risks
Risk Assessment2-3 ppTheme/company risks, thesis killers, mitigants
Implementation1-2 ppPortfolio construction, timing, monitoring, exits
AppendicesVariableModels, universe, sources, glossary, disclosures

Quality Standards

  • All claims sourced or derived from explicit assumptions
  • Forecasts include sensitivity analysis
  • Competing hypotheses acknowledged
  • Logic chain explicit: drivers → recommendations
  • Executive summary enables standalone decision-making

→ For detailed templates: See references/report-structure.md

Phase VIII: Implementation & Monitoring

Position Sizing

ConvictionSizeCriteriaReview
High4-6%Deep dive complete; multiple valuation support; clear catalystsMonthly
Medium2-4%Fundamental work complete; timing/execution uncertaintyBi-weekly
Speculative1-2%High potential but significant risks; option-like payoffWeekly
Watch List0%Interesting but valuation/thesis not compellingQuarterly

Adjust for: volatility, correlation, downside scenario survival, portfolio constraints

Entry Execution

  • Timing: Catalyst proximity, technical context, liquidity, market regime
  • Staged Entry: Initial (40-50%) → Confirmation (30-40%) → Catalyst (10-30%)

Monitoring Framework

LevelIndicatorsFrequency
ThemeAdoption, pricing, competition, policy, sentimentMonthly-Quarterly
CompanyEarnings, KPIs, strategy, positioning, valuationPost-earnings minimum

Exit Criteria

TypeTriggerAction
Target AchievedPrice at target; thesis reflectedTrim 50-100%
Thesis BrokenAssumption invalidated; killer triggeredExit 100%
Better OpportunitySuperior risk/reward in themeRotate
Theme MaturationConsensus; crowding elevatedReduce systematically
Risk ManagementPosition exceeds limitsTrim to target

Review Cadence

  • Position: After earnings; monthly minimum
  • Theme: Quarterly
  • Universe Refresh: Semi-annually
  • Full Research Update: Annually

→ For detailed frameworks: See references/implementation.md

Quick Reference: Checklists

Use checklists in assets/ for standardized execution:

  • theme-validation-checklist.md: DRIVER framework validation
  • company-deep-dive-checklist.md: Fundamental analysis completion
  • risk-scoring-template.md: Probability/impact assessment

Research Sources Reference

Data: Bloomberg, FactSet, Capital IQ, Refinitiv, PitchBook Industry: Gartner, IDC, IHS Markit, Wood Mackenzie, IQVIA, BloombergNEF Alternative: Google Trends, SimilarWeb, Glassdoor, Orbital Insight, Thinknum

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.