About Wonderfolio

It's just me. One person builds the app, writes the guides, runs the data pipeline and answers the support email. There is no team. There is no analyst desk, and there is no outside funding. The app is faceless on purpose. What should persuade you is the method, not a photo of whoever wrote it. That shape has real consequences, and they are worth knowing before you subscribe. Replies to support usually come within one business day. But they come from one person, in one time zone. Features ship when one person can finish them. Nothing here is a committee's view of a company, because there is no committee. What you get instead is a method that is written down in public. It is applied the same way to every company in the universe. I never override it by hand for a business I happen to like.

Company fundamentals come from Financial Modeling Prep. It is a third-party market data provider that aggregates public filings. The figures trace back to the annual reports companies file with regulators. Wonderfolio pulls up to eleven years of balance sheets, income statements and cash-flow statements per company. That way a ten-year growth rate has a full base year behind it. Exchange rates come from the Bank of Canada. Those matter for any company whose filings and share price are in different currencies. None of this data is proprietary. None of it is estimated by me. If a number in the app looks wrong, it is either wrong in the underlying filing or wrong in how the pipeline normalized it. The support email is the right place to send it. Statement rows are never deleted, so a company's history stays intact in the database even after it delists.

Every company is scored on its own published ten-year record, not on today's snapshot. The scores combine return on invested capital, return on equity and return on assets. They also read growth in earnings, revenue, equity and free cash flow, and debt measured against earnings. Then they ask how steady each of those has been, year after year. Consistency carries the most weight. One spectacular year is evidence of luck. A decade of steady returns is evidence of a durable advantage. Clearing the full screen takes a strong score on the moat side and on the management side. A good half never carries a weak half. Long-term debt has to be small enough for a few years of earnings to clear. The company has to be big enough to trade properly, which rules out microcaps. The growth record has to be actually growing. Fewer than a hundred companies clear that bar at any moment. Most never will, and that is the point of having one.

Two independent methods estimate what a business is worth from its own fundamentals. Three further figures apply a margin of safety to that estimate, which produces conservative buy prices. The growth rate in the projection is capped at 15%. That cap is load-bearing, not a setting. The same growth rate also derives the exit multiple the model pays for. So an uncapped 35% growth assumption would imply a price-to-earnings ratio near 70. It would charge you for the same optimism twice. A conservative estimate that is roughly right beats a precise one that is confidently wrong. Every figure is an estimate, produced by a published formula from public data. It is a starting point for your own research, not a verdict. The inputs behind each estimate sit alongside it. You can disagree with one of them and see exactly what changes.

Banks, insurers, asset managers, mortgage companies and holding companies are excluded. On those balance sheets debt is the raw material of the business, so the same debt thresholds cannot judge them fairly. Biotechnology and drug manufacturers are excluded too. A pre-revenue company whose value rests on a trial outcome gives a ten-year quality screen nothing to read. Computer hardware and semiconductors are excluded because the cycles run deep enough that trailing figures actively mislead. Companies domiciled in China and Hong Kong are excluded, and so are ETFs. None of these are gaps in the data, and none of them are oversights. It is a circle of competence, drawn on purpose. The honest reason is the same in every case. It is better to skip a business the method cannot judge than to score it badly and let the score look authoritative.

Prices refresh every evening after the close. The price zones are re-derived from those prices on the same schedule, so an alert reaches you before the following market open. Financial statements refresh once a year. That means a company whose fiscal year has just closed can sit up to a full fiscal year behind its most recent annual report. This is a deliberate trade-off, not an oversight. The valuation method weights the most recent year lightly and targets a ten-year horizon. One missing year moves the estimate very little, and paying for monthly statement pulls is not justified at this stage. If a company has just filed and you need the newest figures, read the filing. The app is a screen, not a news feed. Exchange rates refresh ahead of the evening price run. A company that files in one currency and trades in another is never compared against a stale rate.

No, and the distinction is not a formality. Wonderfolio is an educational research tool. It applies publicly known value-investing formulas to public data and shows the result. It does not know your circumstances, your tax position, your time horizon or your other holdings. So it cannot make personalized recommendations, and it does not try. Nothing in it is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. The price zones are computed by the valuation engine from company financials. They are never set by hand, and you never configure them yourself. The app flags when a price crosses into a zone. What to do about that is entirely your decision. Financial data may be delayed or inaccurate. Investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. That disclaimer sits on every screen in the app. It is there because it is accurate, not because a lawyer asked for it.