We scored every S&P 500 stock — here's what the data reveals

Most analysis looks at one stock at a time. We score the whole index at once, every day — 540+ US large-caps through the same six-pillar lens. Seeing every name together surfaces patterns you can't spot one chart at a time.

The method, in one paragraph

Every stock gets an Alpha Score from 0–100, built from six research pillars — momentum, quality, growth, valuation, sentiment and risk — each normalised inside the stock's own peer group. Normalising within peers matters: a mega-cap chipmaker is graded against other chipmakers, not against a utility. The result is one number per stock, all measured on the same ruler, refreshed through US market hours.

1. The distribution has fat, interesting tails

Because each pillar is normalised, the bulk of the index clusters in the middle of the range — most large-caps are, by definition, average large-caps. The story is in the tails. The top decile is where momentum, quality and growth line up at the same time; the bottom decile is where two or more pillars are breaking down together. The middle is noise; the edges are signal. See the live distribution across every scored stock →

2. Leadership is concentrated — and it rotates

At any moment, the high scorers are not spread evenly across the market. They cluster — in whichever sectors the tape is re-rating right now. Six months later the cluster has often moved. Scoring the whole index makes that rotation visible in a way single-stock research never does: you can watch leadership migrate sector to sector. Browse the current sector leaderboard →

3. A high score is not the same as high upside

The most counter-intuitive finding: the highest-scoring stocks often have the least room left to run. A name can earn a 90 because momentum, quality and growth are all firing — but if it's already well above its analyst target and up triple digits in three months, the easy money is behind it. That's why our Breakout Picks lens ranks for headroom — strong score plus real upside to target plus momentum still building — rather than raw score. More on that here →

4. The pillars disagree more than you'd think

The single best use of scoring everything at once is spotting conflict: strong momentum but collapsing margins; a cheap valuation but deteriorating sentiment; great growth but an insider-selling spike. Averaged into one number, those tensions hide — so the model flags them separately. The disagreements are usually where the real research begins.

What this can't tell you

A quantitative score is a starting point, not a verdict. It can't price in a pending regulatory decision, an accounting irregularity, a key-person departure, or a shock that isn't in the public data yet. Treat the score as the question, not the answer.