FRAMEWORKS / GROWTH
LENS 02 · GROWTH · 3 FRAMEWORKS
Growth priced with discipline
Three ways to hold growth accountable: classify before comparing, insist the price stay proportionate to the growth rate, and require the leadership show up in the reported numbers.
Growth at a Reasonable Price
IN THE TRADITION OF PETER LYNCH'S CLASSIFICATION-FIRST APPROACH
Classification before comparison: a company is judged against its own category, and the price paid for growth is disciplined by the relationship between the multiple and the growth rate.
How Growth at a Reasonable Price reads the filings →Earnings growth with a price that's proportionate to it and balance-sheet sanity; the category is decided in the filing read.
Which classification the filings actually support, whether the growth story and the reported numbers agree, and what could end it.
Growth Leaders
IN THE TRADITION OF THE GROWTH-LEADERSHIP SIGNALS DOCUMENTED BY WILLIAM O'NEIL
Leadership as the filings report it: fast, durable sales growth, the balance between growth and profitability, and dilution kept in check — described plainly, without the trademarked packaging.
How Growth Leaders reads the filings →Multi-year sales growth, high gross margins, a cap on stock-based pay, and enough public history to judge.
Whether the growth is durable and soundly financed — what MD&A says drives it, how it balances against profitability, dilution from stock-based pay, competitive position, and cash runway.
Momentum Leaders
IN THE TRADITION OF THE ACADEMIC MOMENTUM LITERATURE
Relative price strength, the measure the academic momentum literature studies, applied as a screen.
How Momentum Leaders reads the filings →Relative-strength ranking across the universe with liquidity and listing guards.
Whether the filings corroborate or contradict the price signal — fundamentals that explain strength, and disclosed risks that undercut it.
Every framework on this page can be forked in the Strategy Lab — forking copies a built-in framework into your own editable version, so you can adjust its screening criteria without changing the original. Framework titles describe the method; practitioner names appear only as attribution — no methodology here is endorsed by or affiliated with the practitioners named. The glossary defines the filings and metrics these frameworks read.